The Right Wing had better be right about this "Deep State" stuff.

[jc456]

I think thats all any of us want, full disclosure of what really happened during and after the 2016 election. We are entitled to know why Hillary destroyed 30,000 emails and what they contained, we are entitled to know the entire story behind the uranium one deal and the russian dossier. We are entitled to know what exactly Strzok, Page, Comey, Brennan, and Clapper did during the election and what influence they were trying to exert from their high level civil service positions and whether it was illegal.

We are entitled to know if factions within our government were trying to execute a coup to remove a duly elected president. Any american who does not want these answers is either stupid or a total partisan hack.

Sure, we need to get it all out. But by "it", I'm talking about proven, corroborated facts.

For now, I'll take what the Right is saying at face value and I think everything should be flushed out. I'm just not convinced that the story is true, since the people telling it are not honest in my book.

What concerns me is that we are now at a point at which the two ends can't even agree on FACTS. That makes this a bit tougher.
.

ultimately its not up to the "two ends" its up to the american people, and the vast majority of them are able to discern the difference between propaganda and facts. I think the Barr team will bring it all to light, then its up to us to decide.

Part of that process will be deciding if Barr is giving the American people the full story.

But yes, that will be up to the individual.
.

Why would he not give us the full story? He released the full Mueller report. why would you assume that he is as corrupt as Lynch, Holder, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Clapper, et. al?

I don't know. If Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch issued a report that exonerated Obama on something, would you believe it out of hand?

I doubt it.

My point is that, if it's political, it can simply not be believed right now. This is evidently what we want.
.

yeah, no report on fast and furious and no report on hitlery. how convenient eh?

But we have one for trump and it says nothing. So the AG wants to know, since there was nothing, why the investigation got started if there wasn't anything connecting dots. And the left have gone fking bonkers. I love the bias left, they always disrespect justice.

 

[Faun]

Steele included it in his dossier. His sources for his dossier were Russians.

And the douchebags in our government hired Steele and used the dossier to justify spying on the Trump campaign.

Fucking moron, the government did not spy on the trump campaign.

Sure they did they just use the word “investigated”. You’re one naive motherfucker.

Great, let's see your evidence that they wiretapped trump's campaign...

https://www.amazon.com/Russia-Hoax-Illicit-Hillary-Clinton/dp/0062872745&tag=ff0d01-20

The Obama DOJ applied for FISA warrants 4 times using the "Steele Dossier", and were granted.
A FISA warrant is used for what purpose?

Nevermind the fact that Trump’s phone conversations were being leaked to the press.

No, nobody spied on Trump.

To eavesdrop on folks who were not in the trump campaign.

Next...

 

[dudmuck]

Sure, we need to get it all out. But by "it", I'm talking about proven, corroborated facts.

For now, I'll take what the Right is saying at face value and I think everything should be flushed out. I'm just not convinced that the story is true, since the people telling it are not honest in my book.

What concerns me is that we are now at a point at which the two ends can't even agree on FACTS. That makes this a bit tougher.
.

ultimately its not up to the "two ends" its up to the american people, and the vast majority of them are able to discern the difference between propaganda and facts. I think the Barr team will bring it all to light, then its up to us to decide.

Part of that process will be deciding if Barr is giving the American people the full story.

But yes, that will be up to the individual.
.

Why would he not give us the full story? He released the full Mueller report. why would you assume that he is as corrupt as Lynch, Holder, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Clapper, et. al?

I don't know. If Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch issued a report that exonerated Obama on something, would you believe it out of hand?

I doubt it.

My point is that, if it's political, it can simply not be believed right now. This is evidently what we want.
.

yeah, no report on fast and furious and no report on hitlery. how convenient eh?

But we have one for trump and it says nothing. So the AG wants to know, since there was nothing, why the investigation got started if there wasn't anything connecting dots. And the left have gone fking bonkers. I love the bias left, they always disrespect justice.

The report gave us alot of value, unconvered crimes. 448 pages arent required to just say "no collusion. no obstruction". Now we know:
* Trump can be guilty of obstruction even if there was no underlying crime
* Trump pressured witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation
* Trump asked senior officials to lie or mislead the public
* Trump tried to fire the special counsel
* Trump’s attempts to thwart the investigation were unsuccessful — because his aides didn’t follow through

Although "success" is relative, considering the obstruction was sufficient to prevent the special investigators from reaching the legal threshold required for conspiracy.

How much more could we know from the redacted portions, or if Mueller were to testify.

 

[SAYIT]

ultimately its not up to the "two ends" its up to the american people, and the vast majority of them are able to discern the difference between propaganda and facts. I think the Barr team will bring it all to light, then its up to us to decide.

Part of that process will be deciding if Barr is giving the American people the full story.

But yes, that will be up to the individual.
.

Why would he not give us the full story? He released the full Mueller report. why would you assume that he is as corrupt as Lynch, Holder, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Clapper, et. al?

I don't know. If Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch issued a report that exonerated Obama on something, would you believe it out of hand?

I doubt it.

My point is that, if it's political, it can simply not be believed right now. This is evidently what we want.
.

yeah, no report on fast and furious and no report on hitlery. how convenient eh?

But we have one for trump and it says nothing. So the AG wants to know, since there was nothing, why the investigation got started if there wasn't anything connecting dots. And the left have gone fking bonkers. I love the bias left, they always disrespect justice.

The report gave us alot of value, unconvered crimes. 448 pages arent required to just say "no collusion. no obstruction". Now we know:
* Trump can be guilty of obstruction even if there was no underlying crime
* Trump pressured witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation
* Trump asked senior officials to lie or mislead the public
* Trump tried to fire the special counsel
* Trump’s attempts to thwart the investigation were unsuccessful — because his aides didn’t follow through

How much more could we know from the redacted portions, or if Mueller were to testify.

Would you ask him why he included the following in his report:

"...this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime..."

We do not prosecute nor should congress persecute any American who has not committed a crime. Agreed?

 

[WillPower]

Part of that process will be deciding if Barr is giving the American people the full story.

But yes, that will be up to the individual.
.

Oh? and Barr is going to "lie" to the American people to protect a man he barely knows? Nah, you're not a leftist toad.....you just play one on USMB.

 

[jc456]

ultimately its not up to the "two ends" its up to the american people, and the vast majority of them are able to discern the difference between propaganda and facts. I think the Barr team will bring it all to light, then its up to us to decide.

Part of that process will be deciding if Barr is giving the American people the full story.

But yes, that will be up to the individual.
.

Why would he not give us the full story? He released the full Mueller report. why would you assume that he is as corrupt as Lynch, Holder, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Clapper, et. al?

I don't know. If Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch issued a report that exonerated Obama on something, would you believe it out of hand?

I doubt it.

My point is that, if it's political, it can simply not be believed right now. This is evidently what we want.
.

yeah, no report on fast and furious and no report on hitlery. how convenient eh?

But we have one for trump and it says nothing. So the AG wants to know, since there was nothing, why the investigation got started if there wasn't anything connecting dots. And the left have gone fking bonkers. I love the bias left, they always disrespect justice.

The report gave us alot of value, unconvered crimes. 448 pages arent required to just say "no collusion. no obstruction". Now we know:
* Trump can be guilty of obstruction even if there was no underlying crime
* Trump pressured witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation
* Trump asked senior officials to lie or mislead the public
* Trump tried to fire the special counsel
* Trump’s attempts to thwart the investigation were unsuccessful — because his aides didn’t follow through

Although "success" is relative, considering the obstruction was sufficient to prevent the special investigators from reaching the legal threshold required for conspiracy.

How much more could we know from the redacted portions, or if Mueller were to testify.

sad!!!

 

[jc456]

Part of that process will be deciding if Barr is giving the American people the full story.

But yes, that will be up to the individual.
.

Why would he not give us the full story? He released the full Mueller report. why would you assume that he is as corrupt as Lynch, Holder, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Clapper, et. al?

I don't know. If Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch issued a report that exonerated Obama on something, would you believe it out of hand?

I doubt it.

My point is that, if it's political, it can simply not be believed right now. This is evidently what we want.
.

yeah, no report on fast and furious and no report on hitlery. how convenient eh?

But we have one for trump and it says nothing. So the AG wants to know, since there was nothing, why the investigation got started if there wasn't anything connecting dots. And the left have gone fking bonkers. I love the bias left, they always disrespect justice.

The report gave us alot of value, unconvered crimes. 448 pages arent required to just say "no collusion. no obstruction". Now we know:
* Trump can be guilty of obstruction even if there was no underlying crime
* Trump pressured witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation
* Trump asked senior officials to lie or mislead the public
* Trump tried to fire the special counsel
* Trump’s attempts to thwart the investigation were unsuccessful — because his aides didn’t follow through

How much more could we know from the redacted portions, or if Mueller were to testify.

Would you ask him why he included the following in his report:

"...this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime..."

We do not prosecute nor should congress persecute any American who has not committed a crime. Agreed?

well you do if you're not happy with the results of an election. yep, tell 63 million people that their votes didn't count because we lost. yeppers, class act demolosers. the only honesty in a leftist is that there is no honesty in a leftist.

 

[Mac1958]

Part of that process will be deciding if Barr is giving the American people the full story.

But yes, that will be up to the individual.
.

Oh? and Barr is going to "lie" to the American people to protect a man he barely knows? Nah, you're not a leftist toad.....you just play one on USMB.

You're certainly free to obediently swallow what you're instructed to swallow.

Me, I don't believe anything that wingers on either end claim, until it is corroborated and verified to my satisfaction.

But if being a sheep is the best you can do, it's the best you can do.
.

 

[jc456]

Part of that process will be deciding if Barr is giving the American people the full story.

But yes, that will be up to the individual.
.

Oh? and Barr is going to "lie" to the American people to protect a man he barely knows? Nah, you're not a leftist toad.....you just play one on USMB.

You're certainly free to obediently swallow what you're instructed to swallow.

Me, I don't believe anything that wingers on either end claim, until it is corroborated and verified to my satisfaction.

But if being a sheep is the best you can do, it's the best you can do.
.

so curious, do you believe the dossier was verified?

 

[Mac1958]

Part of that process will be deciding if Barr is giving the American people the full story.

But yes, that will be up to the individual.
.

Oh? and Barr is going to "lie" to the American people to protect a man he barely knows? Nah, you're not a leftist toad.....you just play one on USMB.

You're certainly free to obediently swallow what you're instructed to swallow.

Me, I don't believe anything that wingers on either end claim, until it is corroborated and verified to my satisfaction.

But if being a sheep is the best you can do, it's the best you can do.
.

so curious, do you believe the dossier was verified?

Not that I'm aware of.
.

 

[SAYIT]

Oh? and Barr is going to "lie" to the American people to protect a man he barely knows? Nah, you're not a leftist toad.....you just play one on USMB.

You're certainly free to obediently swallow what you're instructed to swallow. Me, I don't believe anything that wingers on either end claim, until it is corroborated and verified to my satisfaction...

Tell me, Mac … do you believe Mueller? Would you ask him why he included the following in his report:

"...this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime..."

 

[Mac1958]

"...this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime..."

Regarding that specific line, I would ask him the following:

"Does that mean the report has specifically concluded that President did not commit a crime, or that the report is not concluding anything one way or the other?"

That seems like the glaring question, and it seems like a reasonable question.
.

 

[dudmuck]

Part of that process will be deciding if Barr is giving the American people the full story.

But yes, that will be up to the individual.
.

Why would he not give us the full story? He released the full Mueller report. why would you assume that he is as corrupt as Lynch, Holder, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Clapper, et. al?

I don't know. If Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch issued a report that exonerated Obama on something, would you believe it out of hand?

I doubt it.

My point is that, if it's political, it can simply not be believed right now. This is evidently what we want.
.

yeah, no report on fast and furious and no report on hitlery. how convenient eh?

But we have one for trump and it says nothing. So the AG wants to know, since there was nothing, why the investigation got started if there wasn't anything connecting dots. And the left have gone fking bonkers. I love the bias left, they always disrespect justice.

The report gave us alot of value, unconvered crimes. 448 pages arent required to just say "no collusion. no obstruction". Now we know:
* Trump can be guilty of obstruction even if there was no underlying crime
* Trump pressured witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation
* Trump asked senior officials to lie or mislead the public
* Trump tried to fire the special counsel
* Trump’s attempts to thwart the investigation were unsuccessful — because his aides didn’t follow through

How much more could we know from the redacted portions, or if Mueller were to testify.

Would you ask him why he included the following in his report:

"...this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime..."

We do not prosecute nor should congress persecute any American who has not committed a crime. Agreed?

Because Mueller was following the OLC opinion. Mueller leaves it to congress and other jurisdictions with currently on-going investigations.

 

[The Original Tree]

So here we go, I guess.

This is no longer going to be some fevered conspiracy story born of one of Mark Levin's fevered hyper-partisan conspiracy books. It's no longer going to be the foundation of President Hannity's hyper-partisan radio and teevee shows, buttressed by the manic "reporting" of his small band of like-minded "investigative reporters" (Out-of-Control Sean Hannity Thumbs His Nose at Fox News Bosses).

It's no longer going to be this alternate-universe "blockbuster" narrative that a relatively small group of people know like the back of their hand, as if they're convinced that "Breaking Bad" or "Game of Thrones" are documentaries.

You're accusing the American government, all the way to the top, of conspiring to spy on and bring down a presidential candidate and an American President. Key players in this accusation include a Special Counsel, a former Director of National Intelligence, a former FBI Director, former Secretary of State and a former President. Not to mention any number of lower-level government conspirators. The Deep State.

Bottom line: If you folks are right about this whole thing, it's a huge, historic story and must be addressed with historic attention, seriousness and care. If it's just a product of your fevered alternate universe, you deserve whatever you get.

Hopefully we'll soon know, once and for all, what actually happened. If anything.
.

Prove we are wrong. All the evidence points to the fact there was a COUP against The President and an effort to affect and interfere in our elections by our own State Actors loyal not to our own Country, but to Obama & Clinton, using Russian Propaganda, and then a cover up afterwards.

 

[mudwhistle]

And the douchebags in our government hired Steele and used the dossier to justify spying on the Trump campaign.

Fucking moron, the government did not spy on the trump campaign.

Sure they did they just use the word “investigated”. You’re one naive motherfucker.

Great, let's see your evidence that they wiretapped trump's campaign...

https://www.amazon.com/Russia-Hoax-Illicit-Hillary-Clinton/dp/0062872745&tag=ff0d01-20

The Obama DOJ applied for FISA warrants 4 times using the "Steele Dossier", and were granted.
A FISA warrant is used for what purpose?

Nevermind the fact that Trump’s phone conversations were being leaked to the press.

No, nobody spied on Trump.

To eavesdrop on folks who were not in the trump campaign.

Next...

Liar.
Carter Page Had a More Important Use Beyond a FISA Warrant….
After carefully negotiating issues with the Clinton email scandal, the FBI small group has successfully announced Hillary Clinton was ‘extremely careless’ but not ‘intentionally grossly negligent’. The team timed the whitewash to conclude prior to the conventions.

Now it’s July 21st, 2016, and candidate Donald Trump has made his acceptance speech at the GOP convention in Columbus, Ohio. In ten days Operation Crossfire Hurricane will officially begin after CIA Director John Brennan gives FBI Director James Comey a two-page “electronic communication” memo to kick things off. Things are going according to plan.

In the background CIA Director Brennan was running an international operation against peripheral figures within the Trump campaign since March. The goal was to create the appearances needed to generate surveillance, and launch the FBI counterintelligence operation.

Through the use of Five-Eyes allies in Australia and the U.K, by July 31st the Brennan op had successfully created suspicious appearances for Paul Manafort, George Papadopolous, Michael Flynn and Carter Page; Brennan turns the “EC” over to James Comey and Andrew McCabe. Crossfire Hurricane, led by FBI Agent Peter Strzok is off and running. Things are going according to plan.

 

[The Original Tree]

"...this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime..."

Regarding that specific line, I would ask him the following:

"Does that mean the report has specifically concluded that President did not commit a crime, or that the report is not concluding anything one way or the other?"

That seems like the glaring question, and it seems like a reasonable question.
.

The Conclusion is that Mueller stole $30 Million Dollars and knew for 18 Months of his so called Investigation that there was No Russian Collusion, but he continued with The Fake Investigation anyways.

 

[WillPower]

You're certainly free to obediently swallow what you're instructed to swallow.

Me, I don't believe anything that wingers on either end claim, until it is corroborated and verified to my satisfaction.

But if being a sheep is the best you can do, it's the best you can do.
.

Right......a combo plate of projection and virtue-signalling from a leftist dork pretending to be "middle of the road".....hilarious!

 

[mudwhistle]

ultimately its not up to the "two ends" its up to the american people, and the vast majority of them are able to discern the difference between propaganda and facts. I think the Barr team will bring it all to light, then its up to us to decide.

Part of that process will be deciding if Barr is giving the American people the full story.

But yes, that will be up to the individual.
.

Why would he not give us the full story? He released the full Mueller report. why would you assume that he is as corrupt as Lynch, Holder, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Clapper, et. al?

I don't know. If Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch issued a report that exonerated Obama on something, would you believe it out of hand?

I doubt it.

My point is that, if it's political, it can simply not be believed right now. This is evidently what we want.
.

yeah, no report on fast and furious and no report on hitlery. how convenient eh?

But we have one for trump and it says nothing. So the AG wants to know, since there was nothing, why the investigation got started if there wasn't anything connecting dots. And the left have gone fking bonkers. I love the bias left, they always disrespect justice.

The report gave us alot of value, unconvered crimes. 448 pages arent required to just say "no collusion. no obstruction". Now we know:
* Trump can be guilty of obstruction even if there was no underlying crime
* Trump pressured witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation
* Trump asked senior officials to lie or mislead the public
* Trump tried to fire the special counsel
* Trump’s attempts to thwart the investigation were unsuccessful — because his aides didn’t follow through

Although "success" is relative, considering the obstruction was sufficient to prevent the special investigators from reaching the legal threshold required for conspiracy.

How much more could we know from the redacted portions, or if Mueller were to testify.

First time in history that a president is considered guilty of obstruction for discussing options on how to deal with an investigation.


I. E. CLAIMS IN THE REPORT THAT TRUMP WANTED TO FIRE MUELLER BUT MADE NO ATTEMPTS TO DO SO.

 

[Mac1958]

Right......a combo plate of projection and virtue-signalling from a leftist dork pretending to be "middle of the road".....hilarious!

That lie is addressed in the second line of my sig.

Always nice to see wingers resort to lies and insults.

You're consistent, I'll give you that.
.

 

[Mac1958]

So here we go, I guess.

This is no longer going to be some fevered conspiracy story born of one of Mark Levin's fevered hyper-partisan conspiracy books. It's no longer going to be the foundation of President Hannity's hyper-partisan radio and teevee shows, buttressed by the manic "reporting" of his small band of like-minded "investigative reporters" (Out-of-Control Sean Hannity Thumbs His Nose at Fox News Bosses).

It's no longer going to be this alternate-universe "blockbuster" narrative that a relatively small group of people know like the back of their hand, as if they're convinced that "Breaking Bad" or "Game of Thrones" are documentaries.

You're accusing the American government, all the way to the top, of conspiring to spy on and bring down a presidential candidate and an American President. Key players in this accusation include a Special Counsel, a former Director of National Intelligence, a former FBI Director, former Secretary of State and a former President. Not to mention any number of lower-level government conspirators. The Deep State.

Bottom line: If you folks are right about this whole thing, it's a huge, historic story and must be addressed with historic attention, seriousness and care. If it's just a product of your fevered alternate universe, you deserve whatever you get.

Hopefully we'll soon know, once and for all, what actually happened. If anything.
.

Prove we are wrong. All the evidence points to the fact there was a COUP against The President and an effort to affect and interfere in our elections by our own State Actors loyal not to our own Country, but to Obama & Clinton, using Russian Propaganda, and then a cover up afterwards.

I'm not trying to "prove you wrong". We'll see how it goes.
.