New Documents Show Obama Involved In The Flynn Scandal

[Levant]

Really? 126 million unique users in the United States? You should do like other leftists and just make false statements without links. When you post links, and those links prove you wrong and provide evidence that you knew you were wrong and were ignoring the facts, it just makes you look bad.

Just how much Kool-Aid do you have to drink to believe 126M Americans receiving Russian generated content..............

Facebook will inform lawmakers this week that roughly 126 million Americans may have been exposed to content generated on its platform by the Russian government-linked troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency between June 2015 and August 2017, CNN has learned.

...........should be shrugged off? Putting aside the magnitude of the impact, not having a problem voting for a man who encouraged and solicited Russian help puts you in an amorphous category somewhere between gullible and unpatriotic.

Not to mention that the release of illegally hacked material thru Wikileaks, which cost Putin next to nothing, had the most impact on the mind's of voters.

Thank you for proving my post to be 100% correct. I even posted the paragraph after your bolded (your emphasis) statement and here you are, once again and as predicted, distorting the truth, leaving out the next paragraph where Facebook said they have no knowledge how many people saw those ads and that if the people weren't online on Facebook when they went by they would never have been exposed to them. You ignored again, even though I quoted it from the article that you quoted, that these represent .004 percent of the total ads and the ads represent one out of 23000+ ads. Did you view 23000 ads during the election - and read them, and click them?

You're a dishonest, lying, hypocrite.

 

[CowboyTed]

1. It is always dangerous to point out that the idol, the worshiped one, the one they called god, Jesus and the messiah, had 'feet of clay.'
And, a head to match.

But....even worse, that he is an evil, malevolent, iniquitous individual deserving of contumely and jail time.
And....he is.



2. Now that the facts about the Flynn perjury trap are no longer deniable, let's get to the head of the problem.

"Uh Oh: New Texts Suggest Obama WH, CIA, FBI, And Harry Reid Colluded At Outset Of Russia Probe
There are new texts allegedly showing that the Obama White House, the CIA, the FBI, and top Democrats colluded at the outset of the Russia probe.

...coordination between former President Barack Obama’s Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, then-Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, and CIA Director John Brennan —which they say would “contradict” the Obama administration’s public stance about its hand in the process."
Uh Oh: New Texts Suggest Obama WH, CIA, FBI, And Harry Reid Colluded At Outset Of Russia Probe

and

"Clapper: Obama Ordered The Intelligence Assessment That Resulted In Mueller Investigation"
Clapper: Obama Ordered The Intelligence Assessment That Resulted In Mueller Investigation



3. When Hussein had his meeting with Trump, he warned him of two things.

One was North Korea.
The other was of Flynn

"Obama Warned Trump Against Hiring Flynn
In 2014, Mr. Obama, a Democrat, fired the then-lieutenant general from that senior Pentagon post. "

Obama Warned Trump Against Hiring Flynn

Former President Barack Obama warned then President-elect Donald Trump against hiring Mike Flynn as his national security adviser because of Mr. Flynn’s checkered service as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

www.wsj.com

4. Why the enmity?
One simple reason.....Flynn opposed Hussein Obama's signature foreign policy aim: to nuclear arm his co-religionists in the 7th century barbarian kingdom. Flynn saw through the absurd plan to arm the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism, and advance a deal that never had any inspections of the murderous blood-drenched savages.

"Obama Allies Torpedoed Flynn to Protect Iran Deal
...moving behind the scenes to kneecap someone they've long viewed as a threat to the future of their signature accord.
... include former Obama administration adviser Ben Rhodes—the architect of a separate White House effort to create what he described as a pro-Iran echo chamber—included a small task force of Obama loyalists who deluged media outlets with stories aimed at eroding Flynn's credibility, multiple sources revealed."

Report: Obama Allies Torpedoed Flynn to Protect Iran Deal

Subterfuge.

townhall.com

5. "Why would he be of anywhere near that importance to be put in the same conversation as the nuclear-armed dictator of North Korea?

The answer, I believe, is a four letter word: Iran.

The Iran Deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA) was, with the Affordable Care Act, one of the twin pillars of Obama’s presidency on which he wanted to base his legacy."

Why was Mike Flynn targeted by Obama and FBI?

Roger Simon: The more we learn about the evils done to Michael Flynn, and they increase day by day, the more the FBI comes to resemble the...

prairiepundit.blogspot.com

Arming the homicidal and pathological Iranian regime is a threat to America, and to Western Civilization.
And Flynn was simply collateral damage.

This post show the drangement as you go down...

Starts out using the WSJ and ended up with the prairiepundit...


The main thing is, Trumpster accuse Obama of doing something with no real evidence for what Trump does out in the open...

Lets look at it Flynn pleaded Guilty, the Judge (even after FBI said no sentence) said that Flynn's crimes were so bad he needed to serve time.

Now all those sides had access to documnets which have been heavilly redacted.
Can you tell me what was redacted and thus makes you an expert on this case?

Barr has shown that he doesn't consider the the AG or DOJ apolitical offices...

So you are trying to accuse Obama of doing which Trump is doing in the open.

 

[Levant]

But I digress. Back to politicalshit's horse crap post about the Flynn case.

Skeptical judge could hold up Trump administration's bid to clear Flynn, legal experts say

The notoriously independent-minded federal judge who once said he was disgusted by the conduct of Michael Flynn could block the administration's bid to drop criminal charges against the former adviser to President Donald Trump, legal experts said.

www.reuters.com

The judge's comments against Flynn were before it was provable that his plea was coerced by extortion. There's a lot of new evidence now.

But, even so, what jury is going to convict when the prosecution's testimony is that they believe that the defendant is innocent - unless the judge blocks any such testimony.

 

[Bush92]

1. It is always dangerous to point out that the idol, the worshiped one, the one they called god, Jesus and the messiah, had 'feet of clay.'
And, a head to match.

But....even worse, that he is an evil, malevolent, iniquitous individual deserving of contumely and jail time.
And....he is.



2. Now that the facts about the Flynn perjury trap are no longer deniable, let's get to the head of the problem.

"Uh Oh: New Texts Suggest Obama WH, CIA, FBI, And Harry Reid Colluded At Outset Of Russia Probe
There are new texts allegedly showing that the Obama White House, the CIA, the FBI, and top Democrats colluded at the outset of the Russia probe.

...coordination between former President Barack Obama’s Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, then-Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, and CIA Director John Brennan —which they say would “contradict” the Obama administration’s public stance about its hand in the process."
Uh Oh: New Texts Suggest Obama WH, CIA, FBI, And Harry Reid Colluded At Outset Of Russia Probe

and

"Clapper: Obama Ordered The Intelligence Assessment That Resulted In Mueller Investigation"
Clapper: Obama Ordered The Intelligence Assessment That Resulted In Mueller Investigation



3. When Hussein had his meeting with Trump, he warned him of two things.

One was North Korea.
The other was of Flynn

"Obama Warned Trump Against Hiring Flynn
In 2014, Mr. Obama, a Democrat, fired the then-lieutenant general from that senior Pentagon post. "

Obama Warned Trump Against Hiring Flynn

Former President Barack Obama warned then President-elect Donald Trump against hiring Mike Flynn as his national security adviser because of Mr. Flynn’s checkered service as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

www.wsj.com

4. Why the enmity?
One simple reason.....Flynn opposed Hussein Obama's signature foreign policy aim: to nuclear arm his co-religionists in the 7th century barbarian kingdom. Flynn saw through the absurd plan to arm the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism, and advance a deal that never had any inspections of the murderous blood-drenched savages.

"Obama Allies Torpedoed Flynn to Protect Iran Deal
...moving behind the scenes to kneecap someone they've long viewed as a threat to the future of their signature accord.
... include former Obama administration adviser Ben Rhodes—the architect of a separate White House effort to create what he described as a pro-Iran echo chamber—included a small task force of Obama loyalists who deluged media outlets with stories aimed at eroding Flynn's credibility, multiple sources revealed."

Report: Obama Allies Torpedoed Flynn to Protect Iran Deal

Subterfuge.

townhall.com

5. "Why would he be of anywhere near that importance to be put in the same conversation as the nuclear-armed dictator of North Korea?

The answer, I believe, is a four letter word: Iran.

The Iran Deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA) was, with the Affordable Care Act, one of the twin pillars of Obama’s presidency on which he wanted to base his legacy."

Why was Mike Flynn targeted by Obama and FBI?

Roger Simon: The more we learn about the evils done to Michael Flynn, and they increase day by day, the more the FBI comes to resemble the...

prairiepundit.blogspot.com

Arming the homicidal and pathological Iranian regime is a threat to America, and to Western Civilization.
And Flynn was simply collateral damage.

Obama administration more corrupted that Lyndon Johnsons or Richard Nixon's.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. It is always dangerous to point out that the idol, the worshiped one, the one they called god, Jesus and the messiah, had 'feet of clay.'
And, a head to match.

But....even worse, that he is an evil, malevolent, iniquitous individual deserving of contumely and jail time.
And....he is.



2. Now that the facts about the Flynn perjury trap are no longer deniable, let's get to the head of the problem.

"Uh Oh: New Texts Suggest Obama WH, CIA, FBI, And Harry Reid Colluded At Outset Of Russia Probe
There are new texts allegedly showing that the Obama White House, the CIA, the FBI, and top Democrats colluded at the outset of the Russia probe.

...coordination between former President Barack Obama’s Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, then-Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, and CIA Director John Brennan —which they say would “contradict” the Obama administration’s public stance about its hand in the process."
Uh Oh: New Texts Suggest Obama WH, CIA, FBI, And Harry Reid Colluded At Outset Of Russia Probe

and

"Clapper: Obama Ordered The Intelligence Assessment That Resulted In Mueller Investigation"
Clapper: Obama Ordered The Intelligence Assessment That Resulted In Mueller Investigation



3. When Hussein had his meeting with Trump, he warned him of two things.

One was North Korea.
The other was of Flynn

"Obama Warned Trump Against Hiring Flynn
In 2014, Mr. Obama, a Democrat, fired the then-lieutenant general from that senior Pentagon post. "

Obama Warned Trump Against Hiring Flynn

Former President Barack Obama warned then President-elect Donald Trump against hiring Mike Flynn as his national security adviser because of Mr. Flynn’s checkered service as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

www.wsj.com

4. Why the enmity?
One simple reason.....Flynn opposed Hussein Obama's signature foreign policy aim: to nuclear arm his co-religionists in the 7th century barbarian kingdom. Flynn saw through the absurd plan to arm the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism, and advance a deal that never had any inspections of the murderous blood-drenched savages.

"Obama Allies Torpedoed Flynn to Protect Iran Deal
...moving behind the scenes to kneecap someone they've long viewed as a threat to the future of their signature accord.
... include former Obama administration adviser Ben Rhodes—the architect of a separate White House effort to create what he described as a pro-Iran echo chamber—included a small task force of Obama loyalists who deluged media outlets with stories aimed at eroding Flynn's credibility, multiple sources revealed."

Report: Obama Allies Torpedoed Flynn to Protect Iran Deal

Subterfuge.

townhall.com

5. "Why would he be of anywhere near that importance to be put in the same conversation as the nuclear-armed dictator of North Korea?

The answer, I believe, is a four letter word: Iran.

The Iran Deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA) was, with the Affordable Care Act, one of the twin pillars of Obama’s presidency on which he wanted to base his legacy."

Why was Mike Flynn targeted by Obama and FBI?

Roger Simon: The more we learn about the evils done to Michael Flynn, and they increase day by day, the more the FBI comes to resemble the...

prairiepundit.blogspot.com

Arming the homicidal and pathological Iranian regime is a threat to America, and to Western Civilization.
And Flynn was simply collateral damage.

This post show the drangement as you go down...

Starts out using the WSJ and ended up with the prairiepundit...


The main thing is, Trumpster accuse Obama of doing something with no real evidence for what Trump does out in the open...

Lets look at it Flynn pleaded Guilty, the Judge (even after FBI said no sentence) said that Flynn's crimes were so bad he needed to serve time.

Now all those sides had access to documnets which have been heavilly redacted.
Can you tell me what was redacted and thus makes you an expert on this case?

Barr has shown that he doesn't consider the the AG or DOJ apolitical offices...

So you are trying to accuse Obama of doing which Trump is doing in the open.

Don't your hands hurt from holding on by your fingernails for so long?


First collusion, collusion, collusion failed

Russia, Russia, Russia failed.

Obstruction, Obstruction, Obstruction failed.

Racist, Racist, Racist failed.

Impeach, Impeach, Impeach failed.

Recession, Recession, Recession failed.

Emoluments, 25th amendment, Stormy Daniels, lies about Charlottesville fine Nazis, Kurds, Ukraine, Quid Pro Quo, ‘lynching,’ the GAO charges, Lev Parnas, impeachment, coronavirus ‘hoax,’ General Flynn perjury trap, one after another lead balloons.

 

[Bush92]

1. It is always dangerous to point out that the idol, the worshiped one, the one they called god, Jesus and the messiah, had 'feet of clay.'
And, a head to match.

But....even worse, that he is an evil, malevolent, iniquitous individual deserving of contumely and jail time.
And....he is.



2. Now that the facts about the Flynn perjury trap are no longer deniable, let's get to the head of the problem.

"Uh Oh: New Texts Suggest Obama WH, CIA, FBI, And Harry Reid Colluded At Outset Of Russia Probe
There are new texts allegedly showing that the Obama White House, the CIA, the FBI, and top Democrats colluded at the outset of the Russia probe.

...coordination between former President Barack Obama’s Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, then-Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, and CIA Director John Brennan —which they say would “contradict” the Obama administration’s public stance about its hand in the process."
Uh Oh: New Texts Suggest Obama WH, CIA, FBI, And Harry Reid Colluded At Outset Of Russia Probe

and

"Clapper: Obama Ordered The Intelligence Assessment That Resulted In Mueller Investigation"
Clapper: Obama Ordered The Intelligence Assessment That Resulted In Mueller Investigation



3. When Hussein had his meeting with Trump, he warned him of two things.

One was North Korea.
The other was of Flynn

"Obama Warned Trump Against Hiring Flynn
In 2014, Mr. Obama, a Democrat, fired the then-lieutenant general from that senior Pentagon post. "

Obama Warned Trump Against Hiring Flynn

Former President Barack Obama warned then President-elect Donald Trump against hiring Mike Flynn as his national security adviser because of Mr. Flynn’s checkered service as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

www.wsj.com

4. Why the enmity?
One simple reason.....Flynn opposed Hussein Obama's signature foreign policy aim: to nuclear arm his co-religionists in the 7th century barbarian kingdom. Flynn saw through the absurd plan to arm the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism, and advance a deal that never had any inspections of the murderous blood-drenched savages.

"Obama Allies Torpedoed Flynn to Protect Iran Deal
...moving behind the scenes to kneecap someone they've long viewed as a threat to the future of their signature accord.
... include former Obama administration adviser Ben Rhodes—the architect of a separate White House effort to create what he described as a pro-Iran echo chamber—included a small task force of Obama loyalists who deluged media outlets with stories aimed at eroding Flynn's credibility, multiple sources revealed."

Report: Obama Allies Torpedoed Flynn to Protect Iran Deal

Subterfuge.

townhall.com

5. "Why would he be of anywhere near that importance to be put in the same conversation as the nuclear-armed dictator of North Korea?

The answer, I believe, is a four letter word: Iran.

The Iran Deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA) was, with the Affordable Care Act, one of the twin pillars of Obama’s presidency on which he wanted to base his legacy."

Why was Mike Flynn targeted by Obama and FBI?

Roger Simon: The more we learn about the evils done to Michael Flynn, and they increase day by day, the more the FBI comes to resemble the...

prairiepundit.blogspot.com

Arming the homicidal and pathological Iranian regime is a threat to America, and to Western Civilization.
And Flynn was simply collateral damage.

This post show the drangement as you go down...

Starts out using the WSJ and ended up with the prairiepundit...


The main thing is, Trumpster accuse Obama of doing something with no real evidence for what Trump does out in the open...

Lets look at it Flynn pleaded Guilty, the Judge (even after FBI said no sentence) said that Flynn's crimes were so bad he needed to serve time.

Now all those sides had access to documnets which have been heavilly redacted.
Can you tell me what was redacted and thus makes you an expert on this case?

Barr has shown that he doesn't consider the the AG or DOJ apolitical offices...

So you are trying to accuse Obama of doing which Trump is doing in the open.

Charges against Fynn were dropped because they were bullshit. His lawyers forced him in to a piss poor plea agreement.

 

[berg80]

A Thank you from Sane Americans to John Soloman, Sara Carter, Catherine Herridge, Greg Jarrett, Mollie Hemingway, Lee Smith, Byron York, and Kimberly Strassel

Yikes. What a pack of liars!!!!!!!

The gist of the Department of Justice’s seemingly unprecedented motion to dismiss charges against Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn is that Flynn’s admitted lies to FBI agents could not have been “material”, because there was no predication for an investigation at the time of his interview by the FBI. (The department also apparently feels it necessary to half-heartedly argue that Flynn’s statements might not have been false, a tellingly silly argument in light of Flynn’s multiple admissions that they were.) As the motion says, “the evidence shows his statements were not ‘material’ to any viable counterintelligence investigation—or any investigation for that matter—initiated by the FBI.” The department notes that agents had recommended that an existing counterintelligence investigation into Flynn be closed for lack of evidence, and opines that Flynn’s conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak, and his false statements about them, provided no basis for continuing or reopening the investigation.

To understand why this is wrong, imagine the following: Someone who holds a grudge against you calls an FBI office and says that you are a Russian agent, providing fictitious details of invented meetings you have had with FSB agents. Before that call, the FBI had no information at all about you—let alone an open predicated investigation—but follows up with a public records search and an interview of you, and determines that there is no basis to the claim.

The Justice Department’s Faulty Arguments in the Flynn Case

Under the logic of the government’s motion to dismiss the charges against Michael Flynn, the FBI can’t investigate whether someone is a Russian agent unless it already has evidence that the person is a Russian agent.

www.lawfareblog.com

 

[OldLady]

So Obama chased out Flynn because he opposed the Iran deal. That makes Obama a criminal. Yet it was perfectly alright for Trump to fire how many people, like Sessions, Tillerson, et al. for not going along with Trump's agenda.

Maybe that is what Presidents do? Seems to be.

And as far as the Russia probe, are you seriously criticizing Obama and the Intelligence Agencies and the FBI from looking into the widespread Russian interference in the election they had uncovered? Would you have ignored it? Both the articles you supplied were from 2018 AFTER the infamous Trump Tower meeting with that Russian lawyer. Do you see no possible tie to the Trump campaign when the emails SAID the Russian government was assisting the Trump campaign?

"So Obama chased out Flynn because he opposed the Iran deal. That makes Obama a criminal. Yet it was perfectly alright for Trump to fire how many people, like Sessions, Tillerson, et al. for not going along with Trump's agenda."

You're confusing two separate issues.

But....confusion seems to be your mode and madness.

I never said Obama couldn't fire any who didn't fit in his vision, did I.



"And as far as the Russia probe, are you seriously criticizing Obama and the Intelligence Agencies and the FBI from looking into the widespread Russian interference in the election they had uncovered? "

There was no such interference, so there was nothing to uncover, you dolt.



Now....for any others who suffer from the same short-term memory loss that clearly interferes with any learning on your part:
Trump and Clinton spent $81M on US election Facebook ads, Russian agency $46K
Facebook had previously announced that $100,000 was spent on Facebook ads from June 2015 to May 2017 by Russian-linked disinformation sources, while an additional $50,000 was spent by Russians that signals indicate weren’t or were only weakly connected to an organized disinformation campaign.

Trump and Clinton spent $81M on US election Facebook ads, Russian agency $46K | TechCrunch

Russian information troll farm the Internert Research Agency spent just 0.05 percent as much on Facebook ads as Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump's campaigns combined in the run-up to the 2016 U.S. presidential election. While there might have been other Russian disinformation groups, the IRA...

techcrunch.com

There were 100 thousand Facebook adds by Russian sources……out of billions of ads….

What's the percentage?



"We know, for example, that some institution linked to the Russian government — likely the infamous Internet Research Agency — bought ads on Facebook between 2015 and 2017, with the assumed intent of stoking anger and partisanship. We know that the ads concerned wedge issues like immigration, the Second Amendment, and police brutality; we even know what some of the Russian pages and accounts were. And we know that around 3,000 ads were purchased at a cost of around $100,000.

… the $100,000 spent by the Russian government is laughably small, no matter how precisely targeted. In contrast, the official Trump campaign spent $90 million on digital ads — and, unlike the Russians, had assistance from Facebook employees to target and deploy them effectively. “There’s no way $100,000 in ad budget impacted the election. It’s ridiculous,” García Martínez said."

Did Russia’s Facebook Ads Actually Swing the Election?

If you’re most worried about ads, you’re missing the bigger picture.

nymag.com

Buying ads is one thing. Having posters posing on FaceBook and no doubt here as well arguing in ways to either divide us OR champion Trump cost how much? That's not added into the equation, yet they had an entire building full of people dedicated to it. That had a lot more impact. How many people pay attention to ads? Some maybe, but the constant claims made by Russian posers to poison social media? THAT is what had real influence.

So it happened. The next logical step is figuring out if the candidate being favored --or anyone else-- was "in on it." That is what the Mueller report did. It made perfect sense to look at his campaign. He was not found guilty of anything. A few of his campaign people were caught in shady deals, but not in relation to the Russian influence. So it has been over and done with for quite some time.

I still don't see why you are bringing it up again.

This is the only actual evidence of the Kremlin's plans and desires:


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.

My understanding is that Steele, who is an ex-spy, used his old contacts in Moscow to get the information. They were intelligence contacts willing to talk to a foreign agent (Steele). You think they cleared that with Putin? lol

That is why Steele put up the clear disclaimer when the dossier went to the FBI that IT HAD NOT BEEN CORROBORATED.

Sure the Democrats would find those rumors useful, you would think, but they never released it, did they? Was any of the dossier used during the campaign? NO.

 

[berg80]

First collusion, collusion, collusion failed

Liar.

As a shorthand, we may use the term “collusion” to refer to these kinds of activities, which would be implicated in a counterintelligence analysis—though, as Asha Rangappa and I have written, the more analytically precise issues to consider are whether Trump Campaign associates “coordinated with, cooperated with, encouraged, or gave support” to the Russia/WikiLeaks election interference activities. Those are important questions regardless of whether such activities amounted to crimes, regardless of whether individuals’ actions and intentions can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, regardless of whether Americans acted as unwitting Kremlin assets in support of Russian operations, and regardless of whether individuals and organizations can be prosecuted without endangering First Amendment interests.

Although the Mueller Report does not squarely address these questions of “collusion” that fall outside the scope of potential criminal liability, it can be mined for substantive information that provides some meaningful answers.

What follows is a detailed guide to the Mueller Report’s evidence on collusion. The analysis discusses affirmative evidence and countervailing evidence in the Report, references the Special Counsel’s court filings and reliable news reports that help shed additional light on information in the Report, and identifies significant loose ends that the investigation was unable to answer.

I. Summary of Major Findings

Guide to the Mueller Report’s Findings on “Collusion”

Essential reading on the Mueller Report: an annotation plus key findings, drawing on investigative reports and Special Counsel court filings.

www.justsecurity.org

 

[percysunshine]

Four year slow motion train wreck.

 

[berg80]

My understanding is that Steele, who is an ex-spy, used his old contacts in Moscow to get the information. They were intelligence contacts willing to talk to a foreign agent (Steele). You think they cleared that with Putin? lol

That is why Steele put up the clear disclaimer when the dossier went to the FBI that IT HAD NOT BEEN CORROBORATED.

Sure the Democrats would find those rumors useful, you would think, but they never released it, did they? Was any of the dossier used during the campaign? NO.

Thank you so much for succinctly helping me to explain why the bullshit about Steele being slung around is so fundamentally misguided.

 

[Bush92]

So Obama chased out Flynn because he opposed the Iran deal. That makes Obama a criminal. Yet it was perfectly alright for Trump to fire how many people, like Sessions, Tillerson, et al. for not going along with Trump's agenda.

Maybe that is what Presidents do? Seems to be.

And as far as the Russia probe, are you seriously criticizing Obama and the Intelligence Agencies and the FBI from looking into the widespread Russian interference in the election they had uncovered? Would you have ignored it? Both the articles you supplied were from 2018 AFTER the infamous Trump Tower meeting with that Russian lawyer. Do you see no possible tie to the Trump campaign when the emails SAID the Russian government was assisting the Trump campaign?

"So Obama chased out Flynn because he opposed the Iran deal. That makes Obama a criminal. Yet it was perfectly alright for Trump to fire how many people, like Sessions, Tillerson, et al. for not going along with Trump's agenda."

You're confusing two separate issues.

But....confusion seems to be your mode and madness.

I never said Obama couldn't fire any who didn't fit in his vision, did I.



"And as far as the Russia probe, are you seriously criticizing Obama and the Intelligence Agencies and the FBI from looking into the widespread Russian interference in the election they had uncovered? "

There was no such interference, so there was nothing to uncover, you dolt.



Now....for any others who suffer from the same short-term memory loss that clearly interferes with any learning on your part:
Trump and Clinton spent $81M on US election Facebook ads, Russian agency $46K
Facebook had previously announced that $100,000 was spent on Facebook ads from June 2015 to May 2017 by Russian-linked disinformation sources, while an additional $50,000 was spent by Russians that signals indicate weren’t or were only weakly connected to an organized disinformation campaign.

Trump and Clinton spent $81M on US election Facebook ads, Russian agency $46K | TechCrunch

Russian information troll farm the Internert Research Agency spent just 0.05 percent as much on Facebook ads as Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump's campaigns combined in the run-up to the 2016 U.S. presidential election. While there might have been other Russian disinformation groups, the IRA...

techcrunch.com

There were 100 thousand Facebook adds by Russian sources……out of billions of ads….

What's the percentage?



"We know, for example, that some institution linked to the Russian government — likely the infamous Internet Research Agency — bought ads on Facebook between 2015 and 2017, with the assumed intent of stoking anger and partisanship. We know that the ads concerned wedge issues like immigration, the Second Amendment, and police brutality; we even know what some of the Russian pages and accounts were. And we know that around 3,000 ads were purchased at a cost of around $100,000.

… the $100,000 spent by the Russian government is laughably small, no matter how precisely targeted. In contrast, the official Trump campaign spent $90 million on digital ads — and, unlike the Russians, had assistance from Facebook employees to target and deploy them effectively. “There’s no way $100,000 in ad budget impacted the election. It’s ridiculous,” García Martínez said."

Did Russia’s Facebook Ads Actually Swing the Election?

If you’re most worried about ads, you’re missing the bigger picture.

nymag.com

Buying ads is one thing. Having posters posing on FaceBook and no doubt here as well arguing in ways to either divide us OR champion Trump cost how much? That's not added into the equation, yet they had an entire building full of people dedicated to it. That had a lot more impact. How many people pay attention to ads? Some maybe, but the constant claims made by Russian posers to poison social media? THAT is what had real influence.

So it happened. The next logical step is figuring out if the candidate being favored --or anyone else-- was "in on it." That is what the Mueller report did. It made perfect sense to look at his campaign. He was not found guilty of anything. A few of his campaign people were caught in shady deals, but not in relation to the Russian influence. So it has been over and done with for quite some time.

I still don't see why you are bringing it up again.

Facebook estimates 126 million people were served content from Russia-linked pages

Facebook will inform lawmakers this week that roughly 126 million Americans may have been exposed to content generated on its platform by the Russian government-linked troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency between June 2015 and August 2017, CNN has learned.

money.cnn.com

Orwell warned us about far left ideology and totalitarianism. Communism, socialism, Democratic Party.

 

[OldLady]

You're confusing two separate issues.

How so?

There was no such interference, so there was nothing to uncover, you dolt.

Of course there was interference. A foreign government incognito influencing our voters on social media and hacking into the DNC and then releasing it to the world is unacceptable.

With all due respect, Old Lady...Russia interfering in our elections isn't something new. They've attempted to do so for decades now. What's amusing however is that the very same Obama who assured us that we nothing to worry about when it came to Russian interference BEFORE the election when the experts were predicting a Clinton landslide...suddenly becomes deeply concerned about it when Trump upsets Clinton! Let's be honest here for once! Russian "interference" is simply the excuse that the progressive wing of the Democratic Party used to explain why the American people wouldn't vote for their candidate!

I don't agree with you on that.

The fact that they've attempted interference before doesn't mean they should have, and once they hacked the DNC and sold it to Wikileaks, they were caught red handed. That was illegal. And an organized, official effort of "posers?" That's okay with you? It's not with me.

The Mueller investigation was not the Democrats' attempt to "blame" the Russians for Trump's win. It was to figure out the extent of what happened and if any American citizens were involved. The report did that.

 

[Oldestyle]

The "fact" of the matter is when Steele was put under oath...he claimed the dossiers were never supposed to be taken as f

So Obama chased out Flynn because he opposed the Iran deal. That makes Obama a criminal. Yet it was perfectly alright for Trump to fire how many people, like Sessions, Tillerson, et al. for not going along with Trump's agenda.

Maybe that is what Presidents do? Seems to be.

And as far as the Russia probe, are you seriously criticizing Obama and the Intelligence Agencies and the FBI from looking into the widespread Russian interference in the election they had uncovered? Would you have ignored it? Both the articles you supplied were from 2018 AFTER the infamous Trump Tower meeting with that Russian lawyer. Do you see no possible tie to the Trump campaign when the emails SAID the Russian government was assisting the Trump campaign?

"So Obama chased out Flynn because he opposed the Iran deal. That makes Obama a criminal. Yet it was perfectly alright for Trump to fire how many people, like Sessions, Tillerson, et al. for not going along with Trump's agenda."

You're confusing two separate issues.

But....confusion seems to be your mode and madness.

I never said Obama couldn't fire any who didn't fit in his vision, did I.



"And as far as the Russia probe, are you seriously criticizing Obama and the Intelligence Agencies and the FBI from looking into the widespread Russian interference in the election they had uncovered? "

There was no such interference, so there was nothing to uncover, you dolt.



Now....for any others who suffer from the same short-term memory loss that clearly interferes with any learning on your part:
Trump and Clinton spent $81M on US election Facebook ads, Russian agency $46K
Facebook had previously announced that $100,000 was spent on Facebook ads from June 2015 to May 2017 by Russian-linked disinformation sources, while an additional $50,000 was spent by Russians that signals indicate weren’t or were only weakly connected to an organized disinformation campaign.

Trump and Clinton spent $81M on US election Facebook ads, Russian agency $46K | TechCrunch

Russian information troll farm the Internert Research Agency spent just 0.05 percent as much on Facebook ads as Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump's campaigns combined in the run-up to the 2016 U.S. presidential election. While there might have been other Russian disinformation groups, the IRA...

techcrunch.com

There were 100 thousand Facebook adds by Russian sources……out of billions of ads….

What's the percentage?



"We know, for example, that some institution linked to the Russian government — likely the infamous Internet Research Agency — bought ads on Facebook between 2015 and 2017, with the assumed intent of stoking anger and partisanship. We know that the ads concerned wedge issues like immigration, the Second Amendment, and police brutality; we even know what some of the Russian pages and accounts were. And we know that around 3,000 ads were purchased at a cost of around $100,000.

… the $100,000 spent by the Russian government is laughably small, no matter how precisely targeted. In contrast, the official Trump campaign spent $90 million on digital ads — and, unlike the Russians, had assistance from Facebook employees to target and deploy them effectively. “There’s no way $100,000 in ad budget impacted the election. It’s ridiculous,” García Martínez said."

Did Russia’s Facebook Ads Actually Swing the Election?

If you’re most worried about ads, you’re missing the bigger picture.

nymag.com

Buying ads is one thing. Having posters posing on FaceBook and no doubt here as well arguing in ways to either divide us OR champion Trump cost how much? That's not added into the equation, yet they had an entire building full of people dedicated to it. That had a lot more impact. How many people pay attention to ads? Some maybe, but the constant claims made by Russian posers to poison social media? THAT is what had real influence.

So it happened. The next logical step is figuring out if the candidate being favored --or anyone else-- was "in on it." That is what the Mueller report did. It made perfect sense to look at his campaign. He was not found guilty of anything. A few of his campaign people were caught in shady deals, but not in relation to the Russian influence. So it has been over and done with for quite some time.

I still don't see why you are bringing it up again.

This is the only actual evidence of the Kremlin's plans and desires:


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.

My understanding is that Steele, who is an ex-spy, used his old contacts in Moscow to get the information. They were intelligence contacts willing to talk to a foreign agent (Steele). You think they cleared that with Putin? lol

That is why Steele put up the clear disclaimer when the dossier went to the FBI that IT HAD NOT BEEN CORROBORATED.

Sure the Democrats would find those rumors useful, you would think, but they never released it, did they? Was any of the dossier used during the campaign? NO.

For God's sake, Old Lady...the Clinton Campaign made sure salacious details from the dossiers were leaked to the public in the weeks leading up to the election! They did it late enough that the Trump campaign wouldn't be able to expose it for the crap that it was but early enough that a compliant main stream media would go with the story right before people went to the polls!

 

[Bush92]

So Obama chased out Flynn because he opposed the Iran deal. That makes Obama a criminal. Yet it was perfectly alright for Trump to fire how many people, like Sessions, Tillerson, et al. for not going along with Trump's agenda.

Maybe that is what Presidents do? Seems to be.

And as far as the Russia probe, are you seriously criticizing Obama and the Intelligence Agencies and the FBI from looking into the widespread Russian interference in the election they had uncovered? Would you have ignored it? Both the articles you supplied were from 2018 AFTER the infamous Trump Tower meeting with that Russian lawyer. Do you see no possible tie to the Trump campaign when the emails SAID the Russian government was assisting the Trump campaign?

They weren't going after "widespread Russian interference" in the election. They were targeting Trump and trying to help Hillary. He wanted to preserve his so-called legacy. But Obamanism was crushed and rejected by the American people on election night 2016.

 

[Oldestyle]

You're confusing two separate issues.

How so?

There was no such interference, so there was nothing to uncover, you dolt.

Of course there was interference. A foreign government incognito influencing our voters on social media and hacking into the DNC and then releasing it to the world is unacceptable.

With all due respect, Old Lady...Russia interfering in our elections isn't something new. They've attempted to do so for decades now. What's amusing however is that the very same Obama who assured us that we nothing to worry about when it came to Russian interference BEFORE the election when the experts were predicting a Clinton landslide...suddenly becomes deeply concerned about it when Trump upsets Clinton! Let's be honest here for once! Russian "interference" is simply the excuse that the progressive wing of the Democratic Party used to explain why the American people wouldn't vote for their candidate!

I don't agree with you on that.

The fact that they've attempted interference before doesn't mean they should have, and once they hacked the DNC and sold it to Wikileaks, they were caught red handed. That was illegal. And an organized, official effort of "posers?" That's okay with you? It's not with me.

The Mueller investigation was not the Democrats' attempt to "blame" the Russians for Trump's win. It was to figure out the extent of what happened and if any American citizens were involved. The report did that.

How have you determined that it was Russia that hacked the DNC and sold it to Wikileaks, Old Lady? What do you base that on? The DNC refused to allow it's computers to be examined to make that determination which I find highly suspicious since one of the other explanations for how Wikileaks got the DNC emails is that they were leaked by a DNC insider unhappy with how Bernie Sanders had been treated by the Clinton minions in the DNC! I find it very plausible that people inside of the DNC were the ones who "hacked" the DNC computers. It's what the founder of Wikileaks himself has claimed all along.

 

[the other mike]

I'm not, but you'd be proud to be as patriotic an American as Strzok is, unfortunately you're a traitor.

Stzrok will be watching Trump's inauguration speech from prison next year.

 

[Bush92]

You're confusing two separate issues.

How so?

There was no such interference, so there was nothing to uncover, you dolt.

Of course there was interference. A foreign government incognito influencing our voters on social media and hacking into the DNC and then releasing it to the world is unacceptable.

With all due respect, Old Lady...Russia interfering in our elections isn't something new. They've attempted to do so for decades now. What's amusing however is that the very same Obama who assured us that we nothing to worry about when it came to Russian interference BEFORE the election when the experts were predicting a Clinton landslide...suddenly becomes deeply concerned about it when Trump upsets Clinton! Let's be honest here for once! Russian "interference" is simply the excuse that the progressive wing of the Democratic Party used to explain why the American people wouldn't vote for their candidate!

I don't agree with you on that.

The fact that they've attempted interference before doesn't mean they should have, and once they hacked the DNC and sold it to Wikileaks, they were caught red handed. That was illegal. And an organized, official effort of "posers?" That's okay with you? It's not with me.

The Mueller investigation was not the Democrats' attempt to "blame" the Russians for Trump's win. It was to figure out the extent of what happened and if any American citizens were involved. The report did that.

They hacked the DNC because Podesta's brother had business dealings in Russia and Hillary, Huma, and Wasserman-Schultz had not followed security measures.

 

[berg80]

“…a guilty plea is supposed to be knowing and voluntary….we have evidence that it was coerced….”

Sorry, but you don't.

But this really isn't a matter for which the facts make a difference for Trump and Barr's purposes. Because their's is a PR battle. The final outcome of the Flynn case is immaterial. They have already gotten out of it what they wanted.

1. Muddy the waters.
2. Perpetuate the fundamentally dishonest claim that the FBI is corrupted.
3. Use the DOJ to keep deceitfully undermining Mueller's work.
4. Throw red meat to The Following.
5. Promote the image of criminals as victims.

 

[Bush92]

You're confusing two separate issues.

How so?

There was no such interference, so there was nothing to uncover, you dolt.

Of course there was interference. A foreign government incognito influencing our voters on social media and hacking into the DNC and then releasing it to the world is unacceptable.

With all due respect, Old Lady...Russia interfering in our elections isn't something new. They've attempted to do so for decades now. What's amusing however is that the very same Obama who assured us that we nothing to worry about when it came to Russian interference BEFORE the election when the experts were predicting a Clinton landslide...suddenly becomes deeply concerned about it when Trump upsets Clinton! Let's be honest here for once! Russian "interference" is simply the excuse that the progressive wing of the Democratic Party used to explain why the American people wouldn't vote for their candidate!

I don't agree with you on that.

The fact that they've attempted interference before doesn't mean they should have, and once they hacked the DNC and sold it to Wikileaks, they were caught red handed. That was illegal. And an organized, official effort of "posers?" That's okay with you? It's not with me.

The Mueller investigation was not the Democrats' attempt to "blame" the Russians for Trump's win. It was to figure out the extent of what happened and if any American citizens were involved. The report did that.

What campaign approached Russia for a fake dossier?