Dossier, Dossier, Dossier

[DGS49]

For those who are interested in the reality of this whole caper, I suggest reading Andrew McCarthy's opinion pieces (National Review on line) on the subject over the past year.

If push comes to shove, and Mueller purports to indict one or more of the inner circle (ignoring the fact that such an indictment will have nothing to do with the elusive conspiracy charge - "collusion" is not a crime), the APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR itself, will be the main issue that comes to the USSC, and the appointment of Mueller will be found to be illegal and void. Knowledgeable Democrats know this, so they are quite content to have the investigation go on "forever" so that they can continue to mine the nonsense fake-news that it spawns.

The appointment of a Special Prosecutor requires the knowledge that a crime has been committed AND some overt, serious conflict of interest for the Justice Department that prevents it from pursuing prosecution of the aforesaid crime in the normal course of its business.

In this case, no crime has even been articulated, and more importantly, there is no apparent conflict of interest that would prevent the Justice Department from pursuing the matter. That is to say, no one in the Justice Department is compromised or conflicted on this matter.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Real Clear Politics reports:

"In an interview with Hugh Hewitt on Friday, Bob Woodward said that in his two years of investigating for his new book, ‘Fear,’ he found no evidence of collusion or espionage between Trump and Russia. Woodward said he looked for it “hard” and yet turned up nothing.



“So let’s set aside the Comey firing, which as a Constitutional law professor, no one will ever persuade me can be obstruction. And Rod Rosenstein has laid out reasons why even if those weren’t the president’s reasons. Set aside the Comey firing. Did you, Bob Woodward, hear anything in your research in your interviews that sounded like espionage or collusion?” Hugh Hewitt asked Woodward.

“I did not, and of course, I looked for it, looked for it hard,” Woodward answered. “And so you know, there we are. We’re going to see what Mueller has, and Dowd may be right. He has something that Dowd and the president don’t know about, a secret witness or somebody who has changed their testimony. As you know, that often happens, and that can break open or turn a case.”

“But you’ve seen no collusion?” Hewitt asked again to confirm.

“I have not,” Woodward affirmed."

 

[candycorn]

"Rudy, you're a baby. you forget to put your diaper on...you cant defend me" - President Trump to Giuliani after Rudy's interview with CNN

Source?

Bob Woodward's book

You forgot to mention that it is a work of fiction.

You've read the book?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

"Rudy, you're a baby. you forget to put your diaper on...you cant defend me" - President Trump to Giuliani after Rudy's interview with CNN

Source?

Bob Woodward's book

You forgot to mention that it is a work of fiction.

it is, except for the part i mentioned

So Trump has verified that statement?

 

[basquebromance]

"Rudy, you're a baby. you forget to put your diaper on...you cant defend me" - President Trump to Giuliani after Rudy's interview with CNN

Source?

Bob Woodward's book

You forgot to mention that it is a work of fiction.

it is, except for the part i mentioned

So Trump has verified that statement?

yes

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Source?

Bob Woodward's book

You forgot to mention that it is a work of fiction.

it is, except for the part i mentioned

So Trump has verified that statement?

yes

Link?

 

[skews13]

Does any one on the right understand how an investigation works?

If something can already be proven it doesn't need to be investigated.

Also... the Mueller investigation is not exclusively about collusion. The main focus is on Russian interference in the election. If collusion is a part of that, then it will be investigated.

so, Woodward is simultaneously a slanderous liar and a reliable source at the same time? Woodward wasnt in a position to see that.
Woodward isn't a prosecutor, and doesn't have subpoena power, search warrants, or the ability to extract plea deals.

legal insurrection is far right with mixed record on factual reporting.
Manafort is going to squeal.

Manafort has already cooperated. As usual the trumpkins are a day late and a dollar short.

So who does this leave?

don jr

Ivanka

Jared

dotard

 

[rightwinger]

Trump doens't need to testify. He's innocent until PROVEN guilty. Look what Flynn and Papadopulus got for testifying. Perjury traps.

A better question is why didn't the FBI make Hillary testify for her illegal server, her destroying evidence, her paying for the Trump dossier, and the UraniumOne scam?

Reagan testified, Bill Clinton testified

Why won’t Trump?
If he has nothing to hide, it will help clarify things

 

[Timmy]

The FISA warrant consisted of more evidence than the dossier .

Have Trump release the whole thing if it’s all just lies !

Was there any FISA warrant without the dossier?

No?


Exactly.

Quit bitching about the fisa process that conservatives have defended/ expanded since 911.

Y’all didn’t mind the rubber stamp warrants when it was targeting brown people .

Got you to change the subject that fast.....

But....you've never been much of a challenge.

You never answer a question!

And you falsely state there is no fisa warrant without the dossier .

 

[Timmy]

The Steele Dossier claims Putin has compromising information on Trump


Seems right to me

...and still no Russian connection

What? How about that rusisian meeting . You know “about adoption”.

I see your point ....that lawyer lady went door to door and had folks change their votes....

Good thinking, you dunce.

Now who’s changing the subject ?

You righties just scream out lies . “There’s no Russian connection “ . That’s a lie! Team trump even admitted they liesd about meeting wh Russians , then lied about what the netting was about/.

 

[rightwinger]

For those who are interested in the reality of this whole caper, I suggest reading Andrew McCarthy's opinion pieces (National Review on line) on the subject over the past year.

If push comes to shove, and Mueller purports to indict one or more of the inner circle (ignoring the fact that such an indictment will have nothing to do with the elusive conspiracy charge - "collusion" is not a crime), the APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR itself, will be the main issue that comes to the USSC, and the appointment of Mueller will be found to be illegal and void. Knowledgeable Democrats know this, so they are quite content to have the investigation go on "forever" so that they can continue to mine the nonsense fake-news that it spawns.

The appointment of a Special Prosecutor requires the knowledge that a crime has been committed AND some overt, serious conflict of interest for the Justice Department that prevents it from pursuing prosecution of the aforesaid crime in the normal course of its business.

In this case, no crime has even been articulated, and more importantly, there is no apparent conflict of interest that would prevent the Justice Department from pursuing the matter. That is to say, no one in the Justice Department is compromised or conflicted on this matter.

Why do you guys keep saying that?

Yes, a crime was committed.
DNC servers were hacked and the information was provided on Wikileaks
THAT is a crime

Trump benefitted from that informationand used it in his campaign. His campaign also met with the Russians about obtaining that information

That warrants an investigation

The investigation would have been conducted by Comey, but Trump fired him. That action warranted a special prosecutor

 

[basquebromance]

if the dossier is true, it would make me like trump even more. i would advocate abolishing presidential term limits.

 

[easyt65]

For those who are interested in the reality of this whole caper, I suggest reading Andrew McCarthy's opinion pieces (National Review on line) on the subject over the past year.

If push comes to shove, and Mueller purports to indict one or more of the inner circle (ignoring the fact that such an indictment will have nothing to do with the elusive conspiracy charge - "collusion" is not a crime), the APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR itself, will be the main issue that comes to the USSC, and the appointment of Mueller will be found to be illegal and void. Knowledgeable Democrats know this, so they are quite content to have the investigation go on "forever" so that they can continue to mine the nonsense fake-news that it spawns.

The appointment of a Special Prosecutor requires the knowledge that a crime has been committed AND some overt, serious conflict of interest for the Justice Department that prevents it from pursuing prosecution of the aforesaid crime in the normal course of its business.

In this case, no crime has even been articulated, and more importantly, there is no apparent conflict of interest that would prevent the Justice Department from pursuing the matter. That is to say, no one in the Justice Department is compromised or conflicted on this matter.

Instead of OPINION PIECES, I suggest people actually read the evidence that has been presented thus far.

 

[basquebromance]

Bob Woodward's book

You forgot to mention that it is a work of fiction.

it is, except for the part i mentioned

So Trump has verified that statement?

yes

Link?

 

[iceberg]

For those who are interested in the reality of this whole caper, I suggest reading Andrew McCarthy's opinion pieces (National Review on line) on the subject over the past year.

If push comes to shove, and Mueller purports to indict one or more of the inner circle (ignoring the fact that such an indictment will have nothing to do with the elusive conspiracy charge - "collusion" is not a crime), the APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR itself, will be the main issue that comes to the USSC, and the appointment of Mueller will be found to be illegal and void. Knowledgeable Democrats know this, so they are quite content to have the investigation go on "forever" so that they can continue to mine the nonsense fake-news that it spawns.

The appointment of a Special Prosecutor requires the knowledge that a crime has been committed AND some overt, serious conflict of interest for the Justice Department that prevents it from pursuing prosecution of the aforesaid crime in the normal course of its business.

In this case, no crime has even been articulated, and more importantly, there is no apparent conflict of interest that would prevent the Justice Department from pursuing the matter. That is to say, no one in the Justice Department is compromised or conflicted on this matter.

Why do you guys keep saying that?

Yes, a crime was committed.
DNC servers were hacked and the information was provided on Wikileaks
THAT is a crime

Trump benefitted from that informationand used it in his campaign. His campaign also met with the Russians about obtaining that information

That warrants an investigation

The investigation would have been conducted by Comey, but Trump fired him. That action warranted a special prosecutor

nobody really gave a damn about what was found on this hacked leaks. there were a LOT of crimes uncovered by the DNC that are glossed over in an effort to play the victim. i'm all for going after those who commit crimes, and that would include the DNC.

 

[easyt65]

You forgot to mention that it is a work of fiction.

it is, except for the part i mentioned

So Trump has verified that statement?

yes

Link?

Are you saying Rudy has not seriously F*ed UP at times?

He has. I am sorry if you are so tender and fragile, your ego so easily / feelings so easily bruised. Trump is in a fight of his life against conspiratorial traitors and every move, every statement in his defense must be spot-on because they spin and twist and flat-out lie about everything the man does in the 'court of public opinion'.

Trump is not one to 'baby' anyone, to coddle them. He considers people at 'this level - where Rudy is - to be a professional who can take criticism.

Not your style? Great...ummm, but who the hell cares?! You're not Trump.

You don't like the man? Again, tough shit! The election was held, and Hillary lost. Get over it....and instead of treasonously attempting to stage a coup Democrats and Liberals...and snowflakes...should be concentrating on themselves, about getting a message, about finding a candidate who is not a felon who has compromised national security and was given the party's nomination after failing to steal it by rigging primaries and cheating in debates.

Do what Obama SAID, not what he DID:

As Obama SAID himself, 'Want things to change? Win some elections!' Instead, however, what he did was organize and run an Obstruction Campaign to protect Hillary and a coup to prevent Trump from winning and to take him down if he won.

 

[Skylar]

1. Central to the Mueller Farrago is the 'dossier.'

Without it, no FISA warrants to surveil Trump, et al......

No Comey leaks

No special prosecutor

Soooo....the dossier cannot be ignored.

And here's what it implies:

Russia is a dictatorship.
Nothing emanates from Moscow without Putin's imprimatur....
The 'information' in the infamous 'dossier' came from Russia.

Now.....if Putin wanted Trump to win.......would there have ever.......ever.....been a dossier?????

QED......the candidate of Vladimir Putin was Hillary Clinton and the Democrats.



If any collusion occurred, it was through Democrats, the only folks for whom we have actual evidence of collusion.



2. As of this moment:
"FBI Couldn’t Find Trump-Russia Collusion, and Neither Could Bob Woodward
Justice turned on its head: “imposing the presumption of guilt upon a probe whose own originators had reason to doubt the strength of their evidence”

3. Buried amid all the anti-Trump “Russia, Russia, Russia” derangement are a couple of potentially explosive revelations.

Lisa Page, former FBI lawyer and mistress of former FBI agent Peter Strzok, admitted that the FBI couldn’t prove collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia at the time Robert Mueller took over the investigation, and Bob Woodward admits that after searching “hard” for two years, he found no evidence of collusion, either.


In response to questioning during a congressional interview, Page told Representative John Ratcliffe (R-TX) that as of May, 2017, the FBI had found no connection between Trump and Russia that pointed to collusion."
FBI Couldn't Find Trump-Russia Collusion, and Neither Could Bob Woodward



4. "To date, Lisa Page’s infamy has been driven mostly by the anti-Donald Trump text messages she exchanged with fellow FBI agent Peter Strzok as the two engaged in an affair while investigating the president for alleged election collusion with Russia.

Yet, when history judges the former FBI lawyer years from now, her most consequential pronouncement may not have been typed on her bureau-issued Samsung smartphone to her colleague and lover.

Rather, it might be eight simple words she uttered behind closed doors during a congressional interview a few weeks ago.

“It’s a reflection of us still not knowing,” Page told Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) when questioned about texts she and Strzok exchanged in May 2017 as Robert Mueller was being named a special prosecutor to take over the Russia investigation.

With that statement, Page acknowledged a momentous fact: After nine months of using some of the most awesome surveillance powers afforded to U.S. intelligence, the FBI still had not made a case connecting Trump or his campaign to Russia’s election meddling.

Page opined further, acknowledging “it still existed in the scope of possibility that there would be literally nothing” to connect Trump and Russia, no matter what Mueller or the FBI did.

“As far as May of 2017, we still couldn’t answer the question,” she said at another point." Lisa Page bombshell: FBI couldn’t prove Trump-Russia collusion before Mueller appointment




5. Everything the Democrats/Liberals touch turns to ....mud.

They have altered the reputation of a once great institution, the FBI, to political backstabbers, no more than 'the gang that couldn't shoot straight,' and treacherous goons.

No more than handmaidens of the Democrats.

Nope. Central to Mueller's investigation is Comey's testimony before Congress. Which had little to nothing to do with the Dossier. In fact, the only time Comey mentions the Dossier is to confirm that he's not talking about the Dossier.

As usual, your entire argument is predicated on nonsense.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You forgot to mention that it is a work of fiction.

it is, except for the part i mentioned

So Trump has verified that statement?

yes

Link?

So you have nothing, so you repeat the lie. Typical.

Has you doctor got that bipolar medication figured out yet?

 

[Skylar]

it is, except for the part i mentioned

So Trump has verified that statement?

yes

Link?

Are you saying Rudy has not seriously F*ed UP at times?

He has. I am sorry if you are so tender and fragile, your ego so easily / feelings so easily bruised. Trump is in a fight of his life against conspiratorial traitors and every move, every statement in his defense must be spot-on because they spin and twist and flat-out lie about everything the man does in the 'court of public opinion'.

Trump is not one to 'baby' anyone, to coddle them. He considers people at 'this level - where Rudy is - to be a professional who can take criticism.

Not your style? Great...ummm, but who the hell cares?! You're not Trump.

You don't like the man? Again, tough shit! The election was held, and Hillary lost. Get over it....and instead of treasonously attempting to stage a coup Democrats and Liberals...and snowflakes...should be concentrating on themselves, about getting a message, about finding a candidate who is not a felon who has compromised national security and was given the party's nomination after failing to steal it by rigging primaries and cheating in debates.

Do what Obama SAID, not what he DID:

As Obama SAID himself, 'Want things to change? Win some elections!' Instead, however, what he did was organize and run an Obstruction Campaign to protect Hillary and a coup to prevent Trump from winning and to take him down if he won.

And your evidence that Obama organized an 'obstruction campaign' is......your imagination. Just as your hapless hysterics about Mueller and Comey trying to MURDER a man cited in the Papodapolous case were based on your imagination.

The processes that are occurring now are completely constitutional. Mueller was seated by the acting AG in the matter, in explicit accordance with our laws.

Just because you don't like the outcome of the investigation doesn't mean that it magically becomes part of your elaborate network of conspiracy batshit.

 

[basquebromance]

it is, except for the part i mentioned

So Trump has verified that statement?

yes

Link?

So you have nothing, so you repeat the lie. Typical.

Has you doctor got that bipolar medication figured out yet?

your problem is with Woodward, not with me. dont shoot the messenger