Mueller hires ANOTHER Trump Hating prosecutor

[bodecea]

Robert Mueller just hired an Obama-era US prosecutor for Trump-Russia investigation

LOL dude isn't even hiding his hatred for President Trump and his FAKE investigation....NO ONE with more than 2 brain cells to rub together will believe a damn thing good or bad that comes from this witch hunt....so much for being NEUTRAL,impossible when you hire people the President personally fired. Its time to end this witch hunt once and for all.Let congress do their own goofy investigation.

I thought this was all over? No?

 

[radical right]

I thought this was all over? No?

Tell Karen Carpenter, we've only just begun.

 

[BULLDOG]

Trump likely didn't do it himself, but his campaign team might have broken some laws of the land...should they get a pass? NO, OF COURSE NOT...unless, it, whatever 'it' might be, was done unwittingly, then a PASS might be warranted.
Trump likely didn't do it himself, but his campaign team might have broken some laws of the land...should they get a pass? NO, OF COURSE NOT...unless, it, whatever 'it' might be, was done unwittingly, then a PASS might be warranted...

He's not hiring all of these expert prosecutors to lead various parts of the investigation, if there was NOTHING... These experts would not leave their regular jobs for a one week job with the govt.... there is a big job ahead of all of them....! I don't think this is going to be over, anytime soon...

President Trump truly needs to stay out of this, and let them do the job they were hired to do and stop interfering with this investigation....the sooner he does stop his interference, the sooner it will be over....the less that would be said about it in the media....

President Trump has been acting like he is guilty of something with all of his obstruction and wild goose chases he's sent the media on... he's just been crazy!

He needs to stop his antics...the sooner the better!

No one 'Colluded' with Russia on 'Hacking' our Election. It is a witch hunt. Were some connected with his Campaign in communication with Russia? Probably. But that's not uncommon. It certainly isn't an 'Impeachable' offense. It's gonna cost Taxpayers several $Millions to find out what it is already known. It's just a shameful Democrat Coup d'etat attempt. Manufactured B.S.

Russia as known to be releasing stolen information at the time. Trump's campaign as shown to be trying to gather more stolen information to go with it. Sounds like collusion to me.

Really? You mean a Campaign tried to dig up dirt on its opponent? Wow, that certainly is something new and unprecedented. What are you 12 years old or something? Politics is a blood sport. Both sides will do just about anything to win. But Donald Trump did not 'Collude' with Russia to 'Hack' our Election. That's absolute Democrat Bullshit.

Gathering opposition information isn't a crime. Working with a foreign enemy of the US who is involved in espionage to gather that opposition information is.

Uh huh, it's a 'crime' because you lost. Go figure? Hopefully your witch hunt will backfire on y'all. That would be real justice.

Well, no.
Fox News host wrong that no law bans Russia-Trump collusion

Nathaniel Persily at Stanford University Law School said one relevant statute is the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002.

"A foreign national spending money to influence a federal election can be a crime," Persily said. "And if a U.S. citizen coordinates, conspires or assists in that spending, then it could be a crime."

Persily pointed to a 2011 U.S. District Court ruling based on the 2002 law. The judges said that the law bans foreign nationals "from making expenditures to expressly advocate the election or defeat of a political candidate."

Another election law specialist, John Coates at Harvard University Law School, said if Russians aimed to shape the outcome of the presidential election, that would meet the definition of an expenditure.

"The related funds could also be viewed as an illegal contribution to any candidate who coordinates (colludes) with the foreign speaker," Coates said.

To be sure, no one is saying that coordination took place. What’s in doubt is whether the word "collusion" is as pivotal as Jarrett makes it out to be.

Coates said discussions between a campaign and a foreigner could violate the law against fraud.

"Under that statute, it is a federal crime to conspire with anyone, including a foreign government, to ‘deprive another of the intangible right of honest services,’ " Coates said. "That would include fixing a fraudulent election, in my view, within the plain meaning of the statute."

Josh Douglas at the University of Kentucky Law School offered two other possible relevant statutes.

"Collusion in a federal election with a foreign entity could potentially fall under other crimes, such as against public corruption," Douglas said. "There's also a general anti-coercion federal election law."

In sum, legal experts mentioned four criminal laws that might have been broken. The key is not whether those statutes use the word collusion, but whether the activities of the Russians and Trump associates went beyond permissible acts.

 

[JoeB131]

So let's have the police to a house to house search of your neighborhood.

What do you say, asshole?

Not even comparable.

So let's be honest, you are terrified of what Mueller is going to find on Cheeto Jesus, then.

 

[Billo_Really]

Robert Mueller just hired an Obama-era US prosecutor for Trump-Russia investigation

LOL dude isn't even hiding his hatred for President Trump and his FAKE investigation....NO ONE with more than 2 brain cells to rub together will believe a damn thing good or bad that comes from this witch hunt....so much for being NEUTRAL,impossible when you hire people the President personally fired. Its time to end this witch hunt once and for all.Let congress do their own goofy investigation.

Thank God there's not more people like you, or they'd still be wiretapping the Watergate hotel.

 

[JoeB131]

Bullshite! Many Campaigns have had communications with foreign Governments. It's never been an issue. It's only suddenly become an issue because y'all ran the most corrupt Presidential Candidate in history, and lost. It is a disgraceful witch hunt. Y'all thought you had the Election in the bag, but you lost. That's what this is all about. And hopefully it will backfire on y'all bigtime. I hope Trump wins reelection in a Landslide.

I hope Trump get frog-marched out of the white house.

So let's see where the investigation leads.

The reality is, Impeachment will not depend on how serious the crime is, but how much of a political liability Trump becomes. Nixon never would have resigned if we hadn't lost in Vietnam and had avoided gas lines. Clinton only survived Monica-gate because we were at 4% unemployment and had a roaring economy and he had a 67% approval rate.

It's not just that Trump broke the law (he did) but how much Republicans want to see him go. All the Republicans he accused of murdering JFK and having tiny dicks. All the Republicans who are thinking, "Man, life would be a lot easier if we had Mike Pence in there looking like a sensible president."

 

[bripat9643]

No criminal activity.
No crime.
No collusion.
No obstruction.
No evidence.
And Mueller is still hiring his Hate Squad....

Nice.


Are they ever going to actually investigate anything, or is Mueller just putting together a team to draft the indictment and Articles of Impeachment without ever having investigated?

He should be finishing up by now, not hiring more inquisitors.

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[bripat9643]

He's hired attorneys who specialize in several related areas, including one who is fluent in Russian. That info isn't available on the sites trumpkins frequent so they would have no way of knowing that.

I would think all you trumpkins would be very happy that the cheeto will, you know, have his day in court, so he can be cleared.

Right?




Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

He's hiring only attorneys who hate Trump., That much is obvious.

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock himLock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up Lock him up Lock him Up

 

[bripat9643]

Really? You mean a Campaign tried to dig up dirt on its opponent? Wow, that certainly is something new and unprecedented. What are you 12 years old or something? Politics is a blood sport. Both sides will do just about anything to win. But Donald Trump did not 'Collude' with Russia to 'Hack' our Election. That's absolute Democrat Bullshit.

Gathering opposition information isn't a crime. Working with a foreign enemy of the US who is involved in espionage to gather that opposition information is.

Uh huh, it's a 'crime' because you lost. Go figure? Hopefully your witch hunt will backfire on y'all. That would be real justice.

IT'S A CRIME, because it breaks the Law.

More on When Collusion with a Foreign Government Becomes a Crime
June 7, 2017
posted by Bob Bauer
This is a follow-up to a first posting on this issue, now up on Just Security.

The text is also reproduced below:

————-

As a potential crime under the campaign finance laws, the Trump campaign collusion with the Russians is well documented. As I contended in a recent essay, there is ample evidence in plain sight. The President applauded a foreign government for its interference in the election and suggested that he would be happy to see more of the same. Asked to disavow it, he declined to do so. Both the candidate and his campaign made extensive use of the material the Russians supplied via WikiLeaks on the campaign trail and in the presidential debates. The Russians had a willing partner in their design to influence the election and a clear signal that their intervention had value. There is more than enough in the public record to warrant inquiry into the Trump campaign’s “substantial assistance” to a foreign government in violation of the campaign finance laws.

Some analysts believe that this is evidence is insufficient. They insist that more is needed in the form of direct communication between the campaign and the foreign government. But they are mistakenly discounting the significance of the evidence in plain sight, and looking in the wrong direction for more proof, if in fact more is needed.


Weighing the Evidence in Plain Sight

It is important to acknowledge there is some skepticism whether any public appeal for support from a foreign power can support a violation of the campaign laws. The skeptic might assume that Trump or his associates could say whatever they said out in the open for anyone–the Russians included–to interpret and act upon as they wished. On this view, for the law to be broken, the understanding between the American campaign and Russian government would have to share some of the elements of a more explicit agreement forged through private channels of communication. After all, Trump might have meant his shout-out to the Russians half humorously. He might have intended to needle the Clinton campaign. And once this material appeared on WikiLeaks, it was fair game for political commentary and debate. The press after all was extensively covering the disclosures as well.

This line of analysis mistakenly assumes that provisions of campaign finance law that define “coordination” set forth the controlling body of rules here. Spending coordinated with a campaign is a contribution, and the coordination can be achieved in various ways–a direct request by the candidate, or the campaign and independent spenders’ use of conduits to arrive at an understanding. These coordination rules are invoked against candidates and groups purporting to make unlimited “independent expenditures” for their benefit. The claim of independence is defeated if the candidate is feeding information to the groups on this coordinated basis to facilitate and enhance the value of the expenditures.

The coordination standard would apply to any spending by foreign nationals that results from these forms of collaboration of a candidate with the spender. If, for example, the Russians placed paid advertising on an Internet platform on a suggestion, direct or indirect, from Trump campaign associates, then the coordination rules would require that the spending be treated as an illegal contribution to the Trump campaign.

But the coordination rules do not apply to communications between a campaign and an “independent” supporter if the strategically useful information that the supporter uses to shape expenditure is publicly available. The rules distinguish, for liability purposes, the public from the more private means through which an independent supporter may obtain the information. Say, for example, that a candidate posts to her website a statement that her campaign wishes to emphasize tax reform in the closing weeks of the campaign. A group that picks up on this suggestion and runs ads praising the candidate’s position on tax reform has not illegally coordinated with the candidate. It is free to use the candidate’s public statement of her needs, interests or strategies.

This exception is not applicable in the case of the separate set of rules in election law: the foreign national spending ban. Such an exception does not appear in the relevant regulation. What appears there instead, without any such escape hatch, is the prohibition on providing the foreign national with “substantial assistance” in contributing any “thing of value” to influence an election. The ban applies to both “direct” and “indirect” support from the foreign national for the benefit of the campaign.

The application of the foreign national rules to reach even the public sharing of information is consistent with its broad purposes as a national security measure. It is built to different specifications than the ordinary contribution limits in accommodating free speech concerns. It necessarily assigns these concerns less weight in cases presenting this high-order government interest–an interest which the court in Bluman v. FEC called “fundamental to the definition of our national political community.” A case brought under this provision may rest in part on open, indirect. “wink-and-nod” collusion in way that one involving only US nationals simply may not. And this application would have special force where it is the candidate or his campaign soliciting a foreign government’s support.

How this provision should be read to constrain the conduct of a candidate seeking foreign support is not just one more esoteric question emerging from the surprising and unconventional 2016 Trump campaign. The reality is that foreign government interventions are not unusual. As one commentator has noted, referring to a major study of this topic, many of the means governments employ to influence elections in other countries are not “as crude as bags of cash,” but include “training locals of the preferred side in campaign techniques, covertly disseminating damaging information or disinformation about the other side, or providing or withdrawing foreign aid to influence the vote.” In other words, these are “things of value,” and we can expect more of the same.

It seems odd, and in the end fatal to the utility of the law, to allow a candidate to openly court these things of value. The Trump campaign did just that. It also spared no effort in hailing the importance it assigned to what the Russians were doing to help it, or to harm the Clinton campaign, or both. This was done in full public view and the story it tells is fairly complete; and yet we may still learn more through the investigation now in progress.

Evidence Supporting a Finding of “Substantial Assistance”

It follows that the evidence in support of the “substantial assistance” would be different in quantity and nature from what is needed for a “coordination” claim. The evidence on the public record shows the Trump campaign encouraging the Russian activities and making active use of the hacked results. If there is a doubt that this is enough, the answer is not to return to the coordination rules, devised mostly for other cases: This only confuses the issue. Rather than only look “externally” for direct communications between campaign and foreign government, the investigation would focus its efforts more “internally,” on the campaign’s intent to build this de facto political alliance with Russia.

Some of the questions would be:

–What do the records of the campaign–and the sworn testimony of campaign aides–establish about the strategic importance to the campaign of these Russian activities?
–Did the campaign decide that it would not denounce the Russians, either on its own initiative or in response to press queries, because it did not wish to discourage them from continuing on their course?
–Was the message intended for Russia discussed during preparations for the presidential debate, which would explain Mr. Trump’s special care in refusing to assign direct blame for the hacking to the government or to reject any assistance from the hackers?
–What were the specific plans for active messaging around the hacked emails–in the press, in the preparation of surrogates for media appearances, and in the remarks prepared for or by the candidate for rallies and his own press interviews?

If there is evidence of this kind, it would match up with the known campaign and Trump handling of the Russia issue and answer any question of intent. The president’s open praise for the hacking, his stated “love” of Wikileaks, his refusal to condemn any state interference in the elections, could not be passed off as “Trump being Trump,” as the candidate just playing with the issue and relishing the coverage that came with it. Instead these actions, together with other evidence of intent that may still come to light, would represent the execution of a very specific campaign strategy to provide substantial assistance to the Putin regime’s program of intervention in an American presidential election.

Campaign Finance Law: When “Collusion” Becomes a Crime: Part II

and here is part1 of the article

Campaign Finance Law: When “Collusion” with a Foreign Government Becomes a Crime

Bullshite! Many Campaigns have had communications with foreign Governments. It's never been an issue. It's only suddenly become an issue because y'all ran the most corrupt Presidential Candidate in history, and lost. It is a disgraceful witch hunt. Y'all thought you had the Election in the bag, but you lost. That's what this is all about. And hopefully it will backfire on y'all bigtime. I hope Trump wins reelection in a Landslide.

Communications is one thing, coordinating with a benefit, a quid pro quo, is against the law....AS IT SHOULD BE!

So I guess we will see....once they finish their investigations...

There was no cooedination, dingbat.

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Hey oldlady, how about Hillary's illegal server and mishandling classified info? How did Comey know her "intent"? That was disgraceful, disgusting, and a sham.

Except her server wasn't illegal. Condi Rice and Colin Powell used private email as well on PUBLIC servers.

You guys tried to make up a crime where none existed.

still pretending you dont know the difference between emails account and a server.

 

[bripat9643]

So let's have the police to a house to house search of your neighborhood.

What do you say, asshole?

Not even comparable.

So let's be honest, you are terrified of what Mueller is going to find on Cheeto Jesus, then.

It's exactly comparable, asshole. That"s why deating douche bags like you is a waste of time. Gas lighting is your favorite tactic.

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[JoeB131]

He should be finishing up by now, not hiring more inquisitors.

Oh, I know you are wetting yourself over the thought of what he'll find.

He's hiring only attorneys who hate Trump., That much is obvious.

everyone hates Trump, even a lot of Republicans.

 

[JoeB131]

It's exactly comparable, asshole. That"s why deating douche bags like you is a waste of time. Gas lighting is your favorite tactic.

guy, you knew what Trump was when you picked him up.

 

[JoeB131]

still pretending you dont know the difference between emails account and a server.

There's no signifigant difference. If anything, Condi and Powell using private emails on a public server would be worse, as anyone could hack into them when they figure out whose account was running through there.

Of course, we'll never know, because Powell scrubbed his internet account when he left office, and people asked to see them, he couldn't produce them.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

still pretending you dont know the difference between emails account and a server.

There's no signifigant difference. If anything, Condi and Powell using private emails on a public server would be worse, as anyone could hack into them when they figure out whose account was running through there.

Of course, we'll never know, because Powell scrubbed his internet account when he left office, and people asked to see them, he couldn't produce them.

Hillary probably wanted to cover up her order to whack Seth Rich for ratting her out. What else explains both the need for a private server AND for BleachBit; its a textbook "consciousness of guilt" move on her part

 

[Preacher]

Robert Mueller just hired an Obama-era US prosecutor for Trump-Russia investigation

LOL dude isn't even hiding his hatred for President Trump and his FAKE investigation....NO ONE with more than 2 brain cells to rub together will believe a damn thing good or bad that comes from this witch hunt....so much for being NEUTRAL,impossible when you hire people the President personally fired. Its time to end this witch hunt once and for all.Let congress do their own goofy investigation.

Thank God there's not more people like you, or they'd still be wiretapping the Watergate hotel.

I know! Seriously who the fuck would want someone who wants a TRULY neutral investigation if there is one at all....just horrible!

 

[busybee01]

Robert Mueller just hired an Obama-era US prosecutor for Trump-Russia investigation

LOL dude isn't even hiding his hatred for President Trump and his FAKE investigation....NO ONE with more than 2 brain cells to rub together will believe a damn thing good or bad that comes from this witch hunt....so much for being NEUTRAL,impossible when you hire people the President personally fired. Its time to end this witch hunt once and for all.Let congress do their own goofy investigation.

You must really be worried they are going to find something. No matter what their political affiliation, if there is nothing there then there is nothing there. Also the fact is that several of them donated to Republicans as well. I do not consider anyone who gave to Clinton a Democrat. It was a lesser of 2 evils.

 

[bendog]

Robert Mueller just hired an Obama-era US prosecutor for Trump-Russia investigation

LOL dude isn't even hiding his hatred for President Trump and his FAKE investigation....NO ONE with more than 2 brain cells to rub together will believe a damn thing good or bad that comes from this witch hunt....so much for being NEUTRAL,impossible when you hire people the President personally fired. Its time to end this witch hunt once and for all.Let congress do their own goofy investigation.

I don't think you can find many prosecutors who "like" Trump. LOL

 

[g5000]

Robert Mueller just hired an Obama-era US prosecutor for Trump-Russia investigation

LOL dude isn't even hiding his hatred for President Trump and his FAKE investigation....NO ONE with more than 2 brain cells to rub together will believe a damn thing good or bad that comes from this witch hunt....so much for being NEUTRAL,impossible when you hire people the President personally fired. Its time to end this witch hunt once and for all.Let congress do their own goofy investigation.

You scared bro?