Mueller Indicts 13 Russian Nationals For Election Meddling

[jon_berzerk]

But...but...but Russians
Hillary would have won otherwise(stunning how many are emotionally incapacitated unless they can sell this as true)

several of the sites mentioned had been pro hillary

 

[jon_berzerk]

Alcohol is a drug


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

You're very tiresome, even when you're being a pedant instead of a prig.

what is tiresome are people who lie for Russians.

Then you must be damn tired of Barry Obama and Hillary who bent over backwards to lie, help and forward their interests with everything from the Crimea, to uranium, backing away from the Middle East, aiding their Iranian buddies and removing an eastern missile shield that would have kept them in check.

yes

and it looks like the head of the fisa court

has agreed to release any and all court information that

the president wants released

yikes for the leftists --LOL

Did they issue a comment? I missed that..

yes two replies

i will look em up

and post them

 

[Cellblock2429]

This is why Trump is in complete denial! All this action going on, but in his mind; "there's no collusion!" Sick!

/——/ Who did the Ruskies collude with? BTW Rosenstein said there is no allegation in the indictment that any American was a knowing participant in the scheme — nor is there any allegation that the scheme affected the outcome of the election.

It's something totally separate obviously! Just keep living in denial babe! We all feel for ya; NOT!

/——/ So in desperation, Muller indicted 13 Russians not even in the country.... Bwhahahaha Bwhahahaha. No desperation here folks. Move along. Bwhahahaha Bwhahahaha

 

[WEATHER53]

In Facts land if you are defeated then it's up to you to regroup. In liberal feelings land it's up to someone else to make you feel better. So, the need Mueller to find some baddie baddies but after a year all he's got are a few sign making Russians

 

[Reasonable]

RE: 13 Russians Indicted By Mueller For Election Tampering
※→ Reasonable, et al,

I can agree that some of this speculation might be accurate. But, back, immediately after the election, there were some serious allegations made with no reason to believe that any of it was true.

Based on what we know now, it is just as likely that Americans, unhappy with the Presidential Election, created the allegations in order to damage the President and the White House ability to function. It is just as likely that the Special Prosecutor is an unwitting marionette to further damage the government.

There are basically three kinds of crimes Mueller’s team might uncover. The first is crimes directly related to the election — if the Trump team engaged in a criminal conspiracy to help hack Hillary Clinton’s email (stealing documents is illegal) or violated campaign finance laws by soliciting help from a foreign source, for example. The second kind is crimes committed during the investigation itself: witness intimidation, perjury, obstruction of justice, and the like. And the third is crimes committed by Trumpworld members even before they joined the campaign.

Trump could soon be forced into a terrible choice. Either he risks a close associate or family member going to jail — or potentially making a deal with federal prosecutors in return for testimony that could incriminate others — or he uses the presidential pardon power to shield them from federal charges.

It’s clear that Mueller has the legal authority to bring charges against any of Trump’s family members or associates. But there’s (yet another) legal debate as to whether it’s constitutional for prosecutors to indict the president himself on criminal charges. ( Ken Starr and many others have said yes he can that no person is above the law.) No president has ever been indicted on serious criminal charges by a state or federal attorney, so we have no Supreme Court precedent to answer the question — just legal theory.

Mueller would likely sidestep that whole minefield and do something that’s clearly within his powers: make a report to the House of Representatives that documents evidence of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the constitutional standard for impeachment. If the evidence in Mueller’s report really were damning, it would put a lot of pressure on the House to begin impeachment proceedings.

(COMMENT)

I think I all need to look at facts and not speculate beyond the actual facts and events.

I don't see a connection yet between the indited Russians and the Moscow Government (not an agent of a foreign power).

I don't see a conspiracy between the indited Russians and Americans to knowingly further or advance some evil agenda. What do the Russian get out of this? Usually (not always) a crime in cyberspace is committed for some sort of gain.

I'm not a Sherlock Holmes. I wish someone would fit the pieces together for me and explain who did what to whom? Why they did it? What damage did they cause? Who was injured? Who profited and how?

I want to know how these indictments uncovered a threat to national security?

The Allegation was:

• U.S. Intelligence Community was confident that the Russian Government directed recent hacking of e-mails with the intention of interfering with the U.S. election process.

• It was claimed that Russian leadership favored presidential candidate Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, and that Russian president Vladimir Putin personally ordered an "influence campaign" to harm Clinton's electoral chances and "undermine public faith in the US democratic process.​

I don't want to hear about some scam that a Russian mini-cyber mafia is doing. I want to feel confident that the resources that America layed down on this investigation either "proves" or "disproves" that there is cause to believe that the Allegations were true.

I did not know that it was illegal to lie on the internet and social media. We better be careful about that, because once we make it a crime, we'll have to live with it.

Most Respectfully,
R

The crux of the matter is that the Russians didn't really support Trump. What they were involved is was more of a "fuck you" to Hillary Clinton, than support for Trump. It's no secret that Putin had no respect for Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, and he viewed them both as bumbling meddling fools. The Russians were however, pro Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein, as they though that they could convince enough people to vote for them, that Hillary would lose the election.

Your first sentence is directly from bizarro land and something your liar in chief would say.
It's directly the opposite of what all our intelligence agencies say.

 

[bripat9643]

Indictment Of 13 Russians May Shed Light On Why Trump Might Have Tried To Obstruct Justice

Indictment Of 13 Russians May Shed Light On Why Trump Might Have Tried To Obstruct Justice

When you add up the countless times Trump tried to obstruct the investigation and fire or threaten to fire the people investigating him.., it clearly shows he acts like a guilty man.

DEPLORABLES: I don’t see anything.

When did Trump try to obstruct the investigation?

Harry Litman said...
"Trump’s obstruction was light-years more extensive, crass and hands-on [than Nixon's]. He allegedly tried to extract a pledge of loyalty from FBI Director James B. Comey and pressured him to drop the Michael Flynn case, then fired Comey when he didn’t. He also waged a public smear campaign against Mueller and the FBI — reportedly even attempting to fire Mueller before his White House counsel threatened to resign."

None of that constitutes obstruction of justice, moron. Furthermore, your hero Clinton did all of that and more.

 

[Reasonable]

This is why Trump is in complete denial! All this action going on, but in his mind; "there's no collusion!" Sick!

/——/ Who did the Ruskies collude with? BTW Rosenstein said there is no allegation in the indictment that any American was a knowing participant in the scheme — nor is there any allegation that the scheme affected the outcome of the election.

It's something totally separate obviously! Just keep living in denial babe! We all feel for ya; NOT!

/——/ So in desperation, Muller indicted 13 Russians not even in the country.... Bwhahahaha Bwhahahaha. No desperation here folks. Move along. Bwhahahaha Bwhahahaha

As this genius ignores the other two indictments and two guilty pleas of 4 of the serial sex offender's top people.

 

[Doc1]

RE: 13 Russians Indicted By Mueller For Election Tampering
※→ Reasonable, et al,

I can agree that some of this speculation might be accurate. But, back, immediately after the election, there were some serious allegations made with no reason to believe that any of it was true.

Based on what we know now, it is just as likely that Americans, unhappy with the Presidential Election, created the allegations in order to damage the President and the White House ability to function. It is just as likely that the Special Prosecutor is an unwitting marionette to further damage the government.

There are basically three kinds of crimes Mueller’s team might uncover. The first is crimes directly related to the election — if the Trump team engaged in a criminal conspiracy to help hack Hillary Clinton’s email (stealing documents is illegal) or violated campaign finance laws by soliciting help from a foreign source, for example. The second kind is crimes committed during the investigation itself: witness intimidation, perjury, obstruction of justice, and the like. And the third is crimes committed by Trumpworld members even before they joined the campaign.

Trump could soon be forced into a terrible choice. Either he risks a close associate or family member going to jail — or potentially making a deal with federal prosecutors in return for testimony that could incriminate others — or he uses the presidential pardon power to shield them from federal charges.

It’s clear that Mueller has the legal authority to bring charges against any of Trump’s family members or associates. But there’s (yet another) legal debate as to whether it’s constitutional for prosecutors to indict the president himself on criminal charges. ( Ken Starr and many others have said yes he can that no person is above the law.) No president has ever been indicted on serious criminal charges by a state or federal attorney, so we have no Supreme Court precedent to answer the question — just legal theory.

Mueller would likely sidestep that whole minefield and do something that’s clearly within his powers: make a report to the House of Representatives that documents evidence of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the constitutional standard for impeachment. If the evidence in Mueller’s report really were damning, it would put a lot of pressure on the House to begin impeachment proceedings.

(COMMENT)

I think I all need to look at facts and not speculate beyond the actual facts and events.

I don't see a connection yet between the indited Russians and the Moscow Government (not an agent of a foreign power).

I don't see a conspiracy between the indited Russians and Americans to knowingly further or advance some evil agenda. What do the Russian get out of this? Usually (not always) a crime in cyberspace is committed for some sort of gain.

I'm not a Sherlock Holmes. I wish someone would fit the pieces together for me and explain who did what to whom? Why they did it? What damage did they cause? Who was injured? Who profited and how?

I want to know how these indictments uncovered a threat to national security?

The Allegation was:

• U.S. Intelligence Community was confident that the Russian Government directed recent hacking of e-mails with the intention of interfering with the U.S. election process.

• It was claimed that Russian leadership favored presidential candidate Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, and that Russian president Vladimir Putin personally ordered an "influence campaign" to harm Clinton's electoral chances and "undermine public faith in the US democratic process.​

I don't want to hear about some scam that a Russian mini-cyber mafia is doing. I want to feel confident that the resources that America layed down on this investigation either "proves" or "disproves" that there is cause to believe that the Allegations were true.

I did not know that it was illegal to lie on the internet and social media. We better be careful about that, because once we make it a crime, we'll have to live with it.

Most Respectfully,
R

The crux of the matter is that the Russians didn't really support Trump. What they were involved is was more of a "fuck you" to Hillary Clinton, than support for Trump. It's no secret that Putin had no respect for Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, and he viewed them both as bumbling meddling fools. The Russians were however, pro Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein, as they though that they could convince enough people to vote for them, that Hillary would lose the election.

Your first sentence is directly from bizarro land and something your liar in chief would say.
It's directly the opposite of what all our intelligence agencies say.

Really? This again? You do know that Clapper testified under oath that only THREE agencies were used, right?

 

[jon_berzerk]

You're very tiresome, even when you're being a pedant instead of a prig.

what is tiresome are people who lie for Russians.

Then you must be damn tired of Barry Obama and Hillary who bent over backwards to lie, help and forward their interests with everything from the Crimea, to uranium, backing away from the Middle East, aiding their Iranian buddies and removing an eastern missile shield that would have kept them in check.

yes

and it looks like the head of the fisa court

has agreed to release any and all court information that

the president wants released

yikes for the leftists --LOL

Did they issue a comment? I missed that..

yes two replies

i will look em up

and post them

here they are

Honorable Devin NunesChairman
UNITED STATES FOREIGNINTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE COURT
Washington
D C
February 15, 2018Permanent Select Committee on IntelligenceUnited States House
of
RepresentativesWashington,
D.C.
20515Dear Chairman Nunes:I write in response
to
your letter
of
February
7
2018, in which you request that theForeign Intelligence Surveillance Court confirm whether transcripts
of
relevant
FISC
hearingsassociated
with
matters described in the letter exist and,
if
so
provide copies
to
the Committee.
As
you know, any
such
transcripts would
be
classified. It may also
be
helpful
for
me
to
observethat, in a typical process
of
considering
an
application, we make no systematic record
of
questions we
ask
or
responses the government gives.
The
Court appreciates the interest
of
the House Intelligence Committee in its operations
and
public confidence therein. Before 2018, the Court had never received a request from
Congress
for documents related
to
any specific
FISA
application. Thus, your
requests-
and othersI
have
recently received from Congress -present novel and significant questions.
The
considerations involve
not
only prerogatives
of
the Legislative Branch, but also interests
of
theExecutive Branch, including its responsibility for national security and its need
to
maintain theintegrity
of
any ongoing law enforcement investigations.While this analysis
is
underway, you may note that the Department
of
Justice
possesses
(or
can
easily obtain) the same responsive information the Court might
possess
and because
of
separation
of
powers considerations,
is
better positioned than the Court
to
respond quickly. (We
have
previously made clear
to
the Department, both formally and informally, that we do notobject
to
any decision by the Executive Branch
to
convey
to
Congress any
such
information.)

FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary M Collyer Response to Chairman Nunes | United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court | Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act

 

[westwall]

Alcohol or drugs?

Alcohol is a drug


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

You're very tiresome, even when you're being a pedant instead of a prig.

what is tiresome are people who lie for Russians.

Or democrats that enable the Russians.

Part of the charges are that the Russians were trying to sow discord
in American politics.

Well...Clinton, Schiff, Warner have all contributed to that, and have colluded
with the Russians.

no. but thanks for the lying talking points. vlad would be so proud

Interesting. The rooskis were demonstrating both for AND against trump. Hmmm, kind of blows your collusion nonsense out of the water....Don't ya think?

 

[jon_berzerk]

what is tiresome are people who lie for Russians.

Then you must be damn tired of Barry Obama and Hillary who bent over backwards to lie, help and forward their interests with everything from the Crimea, to uranium, backing away from the Middle East, aiding their Iranian buddies and removing an eastern missile shield that would have kept them in check.

yes

and it looks like the head of the fisa court

has agreed to release any and all court information that

the president wants released

yikes for the leftists --LOL

Did they issue a comment? I missed that..

yes two replies

i will look em up

and post them

here they are

Honorable Devin NunesChairman
UNITED STATES FOREIGNINTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE COURT
Washington
D C
February 15, 2018Permanent Select Committee on IntelligenceUnited States House
of
RepresentativesWashington,
D.C.
20515Dear Chairman Nunes:I write in response
to
your letter
of
February
7
2018, in which you request that theForeign Intelligence Surveillance Court confirm whether transcripts
of
relevant
FISC
hearingsassociated
with
matters described in the letter exist and,
if
so
provide copies
to
the Committee.
As
you know, any
such
transcripts would
be
classified. It may also
be
helpful
for
me
to
observethat, in a typical process
of
considering
an
application, we make no systematic record
of
questions we
ask
or
responses the government gives.
The
Court appreciates the interest
of
the House Intelligence Committee in its operations
and
public confidence therein. Before 2018, the Court had never received a request from
Congress
for documents related
to
any specific
FISA
application. Thus, your
requests-
and othersI
have
recently received from Congress -present novel and significant questions.
The
considerations involve
not
only prerogatives
of
the Legislative Branch, but also interests
of
theExecutive Branch, including its responsibility for national security and its need
to
maintain theintegrity
of
any ongoing law enforcement investigations.While this analysis
is
underway, you may note that the Department
of
Justice
possesses
(or
can
easily obtain) the same responsive information the Court might
possess
and because
of
separation
of
powers considerations,
is
better positioned than the Court
to
respond quickly. (We
have
previously made clear
to
the Department, both formally and informally, that we do notobject
to
any decision by the Executive Branch
to
convey
to
Congress any
such
information.)

FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary M Collyer Response to Chairman Nunes | United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court | Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act

ops i see the first one did not paste right

so the other is just the link

response addressed to Bob Goodlatte

FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary M Collyer Response to Chairman Goodlatte | Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act | United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court

 

[Baz Ares]

Fake Russian Instagram accounts encouraged voters in 2016 to vote for third party candidates like Jill Stein, new indictments in the Mueller investigation show.

Here's what Stein says went down during a visit to Putin's dinner table in Moscow in 2015: Jill Stein says nothing happened at her dinner with Vladimir Putin

Mueller's latest indictment shows Trump has helped Putin cover up a crime Mueller's latest indictment shows Trump has helped Putin cover up a crime

It shows nothing of the sort, dumbass.

I how do you know? You admit to getting your information from bloggers and propaganda sites.
Dunce.

No, little man, the question is HOW do YOU know? You have refused to prove even one of your assertions.

I read, I learn, I absorb the information.
Any more questions, putz?

The DOPers are feeding. Getting new ALT-FACTS. Please Hold!

 

[Reasonable]

Indictment Of 13 Russians May Shed Light On Why Trump Might Have Tried To Obstruct Justice

Indictment Of 13 Russians May Shed Light On Why Trump Might Have Tried To Obstruct Justice

When you add up the countless times Trump tried to obstruct the investigation and fire or threaten to fire the people investigating him.., it clearly shows he acts like a guilty man.

DEPLORABLES: I don’t see anything.

When did Trump try to obstruct the investigation?

Harry Litman said...
"Trump’s obstruction was light-years more extensive, crass and hands-on [than Nixon's]. He allegedly tried to extract a pledge of loyalty from FBI Director James B. Comey and pressured him to drop the Michael Flynn case, then fired Comey when he didn’t. He also waged a public smear campaign against Mueller and the FBI — reportedly even attempting to fire Mueller before his White House counsel threatened to resign."

None of that constitutes obstruction of justice, moron. Furthermore, your hero Clinton did all of that and more.

Our village idiot keeps proving how he got that name.

A Complete Timeline of the Obstruction of Justice Case Against Donald Trump

 

[bripat9643]

"Indeed. With Bannon giving up Kushner and Ivanka in countless hours of testimony he had this week in front of Mueller"

Prove it secret squirrel.

Lol. I see you’re real proud of not knowing anything that has gone down in the White House this past year. Bannon hasn’t concealed his contempt for Jarvanka, and how he feels they are a detriment with their lack of experience and political knowledge.
Are you really also questioning Bannon didn’t spend many hours testifying in front of Mueller this week?
There is film with him going into Mueller’s chambers and him leaving.
It’s funny Trump whores always know so little about what the hell is going on.

You just keep digging a deeper hole. Proud? No, unlike you I'm not a partisan and I don't speculate and pretend I'm right. I don't care what Bannon did, but you have NO idea what he did or didn't say. You strut around here pounding your chest but never, and I mean NEVER can prove anything. That truly makes you look stupid.

Thanks for proving once again how uninformed you are and take offense to those who are informed.
It’s no secret Bannon hated Jarvanka and even wanted them out of the White House.
He’s done interviews explaining his distaste of them.
Do you really think he wouldn’t dish all the dirt he has on them to Mueller?
You are an incredibly uninformed stupid man but the amusing thing is you appear proud of it.

You just keep digging a deeper hole. Proud? No, unlike you I'm not a partisan and I don't speculate and pretend I'm right. I don't care what Bannon did, but you have NO idea what he did or didn't say. You strut around here pounding your chest but never, and I mean NEVER can prove anything. That truly makes you look stupid.

Idiot writes the same exact post twice and wants to be taken seriously.
And funnier, his butt buddy JGalt gives him a " winner" rating for his redundancy.
At least they'll all be able to cry on each other's shoulders when more indictments come forth and make them all look like fools.

The indictments are getting more absurd and irrelevant as this farce drags on. You and the rest of the snowflakes are the ones who will be crying, just as you did on election night.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Alcohol is a drug


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

You're very tiresome, even when you're being a pedant instead of a prig.

what is tiresome are people who lie for Russians.

Or democrats that enable the Russians.

Part of the charges are that the Russians were trying to sow discord
in American politics.

Well...Clinton, Schiff, Warner have all contributed to that, and have colluded
with the Russians.

no. but thanks for the lying talking points. vlad would be so proud

Interesting. The rooskis were demonstrating both for AND against trump. Hmmm, kind of blows your collusion nonsense out of the water....Don't ya think?

and that NO AMERICAN ( that would include Trump) had any thing to do with it

 

[The Original Tree]

Does everyone here understand that there is no US Code for “Information Warfare?”

That fucking cracks me up!

How desperate do you have to be to invent a crime for people you are never going to be able to bring to trial?

Facebook and Twitter are going to be indicted any moment now for conspiracy to commit “Information Warefare!”

WTF does Mueller think the Fake Russian Fusion GPS Dossier was If not “Information Warefare?”

LMFAO!

 

[jon_berzerk]

Breaking just now, more will surly follow.

Eat that Orange Turd!

the complaint says not ONE AMERICAN was involved

EAT that hater

And you're fool enough to believe that a decent prosecutor is going to put all of his/her cards on the table on day ONE? I see that critical thinking isn't one of your strengths! Laughable logic!

BTW, I have great reason to dislike the Orange One. Now it's your turn for your routine nourishment! EAT shit and die you ignorant fuck!

you are the fool pal

 

[Reasonable]

Fake Russian Instagram accounts encouraged voters in 2016 to vote for third party candidates like Jill Stein, new indictments in the Mueller investigation show.

Here's what Stein says went down during a visit to Putin's dinner table in Moscow in 2015: Jill Stein says nothing happened at her dinner with Vladimir Putin

Mueller's latest indictment shows Trump has helped Putin cover up a crime Mueller's latest indictment shows Trump has helped Putin cover up a crime

It shows nothing of the sort, dumbass.

I how do you know? You admit to getting your information from bloggers and propaganda sites.
Dunce.

No, little man, the question is HOW do YOU know? You have refused to prove even one of your assertions.

I read, I learn, I absorb the information.
Any more questions, putz?

The DOPer are feeding. Getting new ALT-FACTS. Please Hold.

They're waiting patiently to what Hannity will tell them what to say tomorrow morning.

 

[bripat9643]

Indictment Of 13 Russians May Shed Light On Why Trump Might Have Tried To Obstruct Justice

Indictment Of 13 Russians May Shed Light On Why Trump Might Have Tried To Obstruct Justice

When you add up the countless times Trump tried to obstruct the investigation and fire or threaten to fire the people investigating him.., it clearly shows he acts like a guilty man.

DEPLORABLES: I don’t see anything.

When did Trump try to obstruct the investigation?

Harry Litman said...
"Trump’s obstruction was light-years more extensive, crass and hands-on [than Nixon's]. He allegedly tried to extract a pledge of loyalty from FBI Director James B. Comey and pressured him to drop the Michael Flynn case, then fired Comey when he didn’t. He also waged a public smear campaign against Mueller and the FBI — reportedly even attempting to fire Mueller before his White House counsel threatened to resign."

None of that constitutes obstruction of justice, moron. Furthermore, your hero Clinton did all of that and more.

Our village idiot keeps proving how he got that name.

A Complete Timeline of the Obstruction of Justice Case Against Donald Trump

You believe that if you can put all your non-obstuction events on a timeline that it means they are actually prosecutable?

You are a special kind of dumbass.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Does everyone here understand that there is no US Code for “Inflrmstion Warfare”?

That ducking cracks me up! How desperate do you have to be to invent a crime for people you are never going to be able to bring to trial?

what is Inflrmstion?