Let the equivocation, the whistling past the grave yard, and the "where's the proof after all this time" stuff … begin.

For the record … I was the first (possibly the only) NT member to call … CONSPIRACY & OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE REGARDING WHAT MAY YRT BE DEEMED … "A STOLEN ELECTION!"

In the words of Jess Willard Trump … "We'll see what happens."

Damn, i thought you had old pictures of Five Points or Pennypack Park............lol

Damn, i thought you had old pictures of Five Points or Pennypack Park............lol

I do have some Pennypack Park pix from c.1900! A topic for another day!

I do have some Pennypack Park pix from c.1900! A topic for another day!

Damn! 

Hey Donald, after your Putin meeting, bring home some Russians in handcuffs … and HAVE THE BALLS TO STAND UP FOR AMERICA!

So is Trump a Russian mole or just a garden variety traitor?    It seems that Putin really did respond directly to Trump's request to break into American computer networks and undermine American democracy.

thinkprogress

So is Trump a Russian mole or just a garden variety traitor?

No, I think Haden had it right, 

trump owes Russian banks boatloads of  money and now he is a Russian agent. That's how Putin turned him into an useful idiot

Underwhelming response may tell a tale.

In an article I posted yesterday (and locked after 320+ comments) below was my last comment.

The text in blue is a comment from another member to which I was responding.

As follows …

33.2.2     A. Macarthur     replied to    arkpdx   @ 33.2       yesterday

In case any of the boys stop in, the boys who ordinarily get in my face when I go after their Jess Willard, I pose the following question;

Which is worse, conspiring with a hostile adversary to undermine American democracy, or, taking a knee before a football game?

Who are the snowflakes now?

YEP, SHE SURE HAS. AND THE SHARING THE SPACE WITH HER WOULD BE THE LEFT WING CURRENT HERO AND REVERENT ALTAR BOY...THE ARROGANT AND SMIRK FACED PRICK POS CALLED PETER STRZOK

the heavy-handed, thug-loving and relentlessly deceitful grandstander that tragically has become our face!

 conspiring with a hostile adversary to undermine American democracy, or, taking a knee before a football game?

You know what's worse? Claiming someone conspired with a hostile adversary without any any evidence to support such a claim. 

I remember a poster who spent 2015 and 2016 claiming it was un-american to even hint that Hillary Clinton committed a crime until she was found guilty in a court of law. Remember that guy? Calling people traitors and America hater for even suggesting Clinton broke a law. Innocent until proven guilty was his mantra.

I wonder what that guy would say about someone accusing the President of conspiring with an enemy without any evidence, let alone a conviction.  

I wonder what that guy would say about someone accusing the President of conspiring with an enemy without any evidence, let alone a conviction.

Why do republicans keep expecting a conclusion before the investigation is complete?  After all that whining about Strzok doing something to 'stop Trump' with NO evidence,  they must be apoplectic after Trump asked for Russian help and they obliged hours later. 

Only a simpleton would have missed the obvious sarcasm in that comment. Why weren't the lefties a bit concerned about 30,000 missing government emails, or Hillary's illegal use of her home made server to put all her emails under her own control. That showed intent to deceive and hide things.

You know what's worse? Claiming someone conspired with a hostile adversary without any any evidence to support such a claim.

Maybe you should read the new indictment?    It shows that a number of Americans conspired with the Russians to subvert the election in Trump's favor.    Presumably the names and the specific charges will be in a separate indictment, but it seems that at least one Florida Republican was directly involved.

In announcing the indictments, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was very careful to say that the charges don’t include any allegation that an American knowingly participated in the conspiracy. However, that doesn’t mean they don’t show Americans were involved. In fact, the indictments show that multiple Republicans were involved in requesting documents, communicating with Russian operatives, identifying documents of value, and coordinating the release of stolen information.

thinkprogress

In fact, the indictments show that multiple Republicans were involved in requesting documents, communicating with Russian operatives, identifying documents of value, and coordinating the release of stolen information.

And yet, the damn gop continues to lie when saying that there is no indication of gop collusion in these new indictments...

You know what's worse? Claiming someone conspired with a hostile adversary without any any evidence to support such a claim. 

I remember a poster who spent 2015 and 2016 claiming it was un-american to even hint that Hillary Clinton committed a crime until she was found guilty in a court of law. Remember that guy? Calling people traitors and America hater for even suggesting Clinton broke a law. Innocent until proven guilty was his mantra.

I wonder what that guy would say about someone accusing the President of conspiring with an enemy without any evidence, let alone a conviction.  

You don't need to be cute about it, Sean … here's the difference between then and now;

35 Indictments, multiple confessions, validated hacking and interference in a POTUS election, more indictments to come, a POTUS planning to MEET ALONE WITH THE RUSSIAN WHO IS BEHIND ALL THAT LED TO THE INDICTMENTS AND CONFESSIONS!

If you're going to allude to me, make sure you remind everyone who called "Obstruction of Justice," "Conspiracy," predicted "flipping" of key Trump associates, etc. … and posited the possibility of members of Congress being involved (as possible reason for their silence) … and remind everyone that you mocked me regarding most or all of those call outs.

And, NO, Sean, I never called anyone a "traitor," stick to the realities.

That showed intent to deceive and hide things.

You may be correct, Greg … we will likely never know if she intended to be deceitful, or, if she was just incredibly careless and stupid.

However …

Many commentators have criticized Comey’s decision, arguing the statute Clinton was accused of violating,  18 U.S.C. § 793(f) , requires only “gross negligence,” not intent.  Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy  has gone so far as to say that replacing the words “gross negligence” with “intent” rewrites that statute to serve political ends .

McCarthy and others are mistaken. The issue of  mens rea , or intent, is not as simple as it seems on the surface, and intent is the correct standard.  Comey was right not to recommend filing charges and to base his decision on the absence of evidence that Clinton had the necessary intent.

Section 793(f) makes it a felony for any person “entrusted with… information relating to the national defense” to allow that information to be “removed from its proper place of custody” through “gross negligence.” On its face, the law does not appear to require intent, but it turns out the key phrase in 793(f) is not “gross negligence.”  The key phrase is “related to the national defense.”

deleted

You know what's worse? Claiming someone conspired with a hostile adversary without any any evidence to support such a claim.

nytimes

HELSINKI, Finland — President Trump stood next to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia on Monday and publicly challenged the conclusion of his own intelligence agencies that Moscow interfered in the 2016 presidential election, wrapping up what he called a “deeply productive” summit meeting with an extraordinary show of trust for a leader accused of attacking American democracy.

I wonder what you would say if this was Hillary Clinton or, Barack Obama who did this.

I wonder what that guy would say about someone accusing the President of conspiring with an enemy without any evidence, let alone a conviction.

There are way too many Russian connections to deny there wasn't a conspiracy to defraud the American public of a fair election.

Hillary still won by 3 million popular votes but I think Trump's son and son in law were more eager for the power and the win than Trump himself was. So his family did the dirty work.

Trump has said more than once he didn't know the job would be this hard and prefers his life before the election. It is going to come down to nailing his family who crossed the line and never notified law enforcement that they had contact with an offer of foreign help. Then it will be a blame game as to whether or not Trump knew about it, unless they can connect the money.

It was Obama that knew what the Russians were doing more than Trump because he was hacking into their computers. The truth is the US has been doing this kind of hacking and Obama was even spying on Merkel's phone. The USA is just as dirty as the Russians. 

telegraph.co.uk

“I’m not in any way justifying what the Russians did in 2016,” Mr. Levin said. “It was completely wrong of Vladimir Putin to intervene in this way. That said, the methods they used in this election were the digital version of methods used both by the United States and Russia for decades: breaking into party headquarters, recruiting secretaries, placing informants in a party, giving information or disinformation to newspapers.”

His findings underscore how routine election meddling by the United States — sometimes covert and sometimes quite open — has been.

The precedent was established in Italy with assistance to non-Communist candidates from the late 1940s to the 1960s. “We had bags of money that we delivered to selected politicians, to defray their expenses,” said F. Mark Wyatt, a former C.I.A. officer, in a 1996 interview .

nytimes

It was Obama that knew what the Russians were doing more than Trump because he was hacking into their computers. The truth is the US has been doing this kind of hacking and Obama was even spying on Merkel's phone. The USA is just as dirty as the Russians.

AND IT WAS MITCH McCONNELL WHO PREVENTED THE INFORMATION FROM BEING REVEALED TO THE PUBLIC!

So, Dean, are you justifying the interference by Russia and a plausible CONSPIRACY?

Joe Biden said Tuesday that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell stopped the Obama administration from speaking out about Russian interference in the 2016 campaign by refusing to sign on to a bipartisan statement of condemnation.

That moment, the former Democratic vice president said, made him think “the die had been cast ... this was all about the political play.”

Biden was speaking at an event hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations, a block from his old office at the Old Executive Office Building, to discuss his new article in the latest issue of Foreign Affairs, “How to Stand Up to the Kremlin.”

politico

___________________________________________________________

Dean,

I GREATLY RESPECT YOU FOR SHOWING UP IN MY DISCUSSION … our political disagreements aside.

I can see why McConnell wouldn't want to get involved when he knew the USA was just as dirty and had been for years before this election. How can he criticize others when his own government is doing the same? Spying and interfering in elections and spreading information and fake news to the press through the CIA is no different than what the Russians did. 

So, Dean, are you justifying the interference by Russia and a plausible CONSPIRACY?

Nobody is justifying any interference, but as Rosenstein said, none of this "meddling" has any affect on the voting or final outcome, and no "Americans" were involved. No evidence has come forth to date that says collusion was even likely, let alone plausible.

Nobody is justifying any interference, but as Rosenstein said, none of this "meddling" has any affect on the voting or final outcome, and no "Americans" were involved. No evidence has come forth to date that says collusion was even likely, let alone plausible.

YET!

So, Dean, you seem to be saying that "two wrongs make a right."

Then to make things right I guess foreign governments should start indicting USA spies for hacking into their computers. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama was just as guilty as the Russians that Mueller is indicting. The real question is not what Trump knew but what did Obama know because he was the one with the spies and access to their information. 

Then to make things right I guess foreign governments should start indicting USA spies for hacking into their computers. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama was just as guilty as the Russians that Mueller is indicting. The real question is not what Trump knew but what did Obama know because he was the one with the spies and access to their information.

So, what you are saying here is that it is ok for the Russians to subvert our elections because we might have done it in theirs? And, to install someone who might wish to destroy our government simply because Obama might have done something similar? WOW.

The real question is not what Trump knew but what did Obama know because he was the one with the spies and access to their information.

Obama stated that he did not want to be the one informing the public because he did not want to appear to be pushing the POTUS election towards Clinton … HOW FUCKING IRONIC WHEN RUSSIA, AND POSSIBLY IN CONSPIRACY WITH TRUMP, TRUMP MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN ILLEGALLY PUSHING THE ELECTION TO HIMSELF!

The Obama administration faced pressure from lawmakers and some intelligence officials to speak out about Russian interference. Without consensus across the intelligence community on Russia’s role and motivations, and facing opposition from key Republicans, and because of concern about appearing to be trying to influence the election, the White House did not act publicly.

washingtonpost

I suspect the real reason Obama didn’t want to speak out was because he was just as guilty as they were. The reason he had information was because his spies were doing the same thing. For him to claim they were in the wrong he would have opened himself up to the same criticism. It would have been nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black. After Snowden blew the whistle on Obama’s illegal spying he didn’t want to draw anymore attention to his covert operations. 

Obama ordered the Russian hackers to be left alone. 

yahoo

I suspect the real reason Obama didn’t want to speak out was because he was just as guilty as they were. The reason he had information was because his spies were doing the same thing. For him to claim they were in the wrong he would have opened himself up to the same criticism. It would have been nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black. After Snowden blew the whistle on Obama’s illegal spying he didn’t want to draw anymore attention to his covert operations.

So, it's ok in your opinion for Putin or, any other foreign leader to pick our government for us and, to tear down our democracy. Got it.

Obama ordered the Russian hackers to be left alone.

I agree that it would have been far better if Obama had simply announced that Russia was conspiring with Trump to pervert US elections.

Obama ordered the Russian hackers to be left alone.

Obama ordered the Russian hackers to be left alone.

No, he kicked them out of the country. 

Obama expels 35 Russian diplomats in retaliation for US election hacking

theguardian

nbut as Rosenstein said, none of this "meddling" has any affect on the voting or final outcome, and no "Americans" were involved.

Your comment is both false and misleading.

Rosenstein did not say "none of meddling" has any affect on the voting".

That's an out and out misrepresentation on your part of what he said-- and an obvious (& very sleazy) attempt on your part to try to mislead us. Rather, what he did say was that so far there's been no evidence of that uncovered. Which doesn't prove it didn't happen.....

Shame on you!

Nobody is justifying any interference, but as Rosenstein said, none of this "meddling" has any affect on the voting or final outcome, and no "Americans" were involved.

Where did he say "no Americans were involved"?

The ONLY way that Trump can be removed from office is by impeachment in the House, and then be found guilty by at least 67 votes in the Senate. I don't see that happening, especially after the midterms. Impeachment was not taken as lightly by the Founders as it seems to be by the left.

It is unsettled law as to whether or not a sitting President can be indicted … and Trump's nomination of Kavanaugh implies his fear that he may be indicted.

But I offer you the opportunity to directly answer the question posed in the comment below.

Trump nominee to fill the current Supreme Court vacancy, Matt Kavanaugh, of late, hypocritically objects to any investigations, indictments, etc., civil or criminal, regarding a sitting President of the United States: yet, Kavanaugh relentlessly and zealously participated in the Ken Starr investigation of the then, sitting President, Bill Clinton … Democrat … Bill Clinton.

However, with a Republican President in the Oval Office, Kavanaugh states that a President’s "busy schedule and responsibilities” should not be impeded by any such investigations, etc. .

In that case, I vehemently hope that even just one U.S. Senator, while interviewing Kavanaugh during his nomination hearing, asks the following question, and, insists on a DIRECT, “YES" OR “NO" ANSWER!

"Nominee Kavanaugh, if a sitting POTUS were to commit, i.e., murder, order genocide, commit rape, etc., assuming conclusive video, live, and/or on-camera, etc. evidence, possibly with credible witness testimony, would you, as a Justice of the Court, cast a vote, PROHIBITING A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AND INDICTMENT (because a "sitting President's schedule is too busy”)?

“Please respond, “Yes” or “No”.

______________________________________________________

And this has nothing to do with Strzok or Waters so; unless you can make a connection without unrelated cartoons stay on topic.

Those would indeed be considered as  "high crimes and misdemeanors". A president would still have to be impeached first, thrown out of office, and then charged and tried as any other citizen would be. All Kavanaugh was saying is that a sitting president should not and cannot be charged with a crime and perp walked out of WH. The legal impeachment process has to be followed. While it's fun to speculate, or even hope that Trump will be tossed, it's not gonna happen. It would make more sense to go knocking on doors, getting that lethargic Democrat vote out.

It doesn't get any lighter than impeaching someone for getting a blowjob.

Again, Greg, it is not settled in law.

But I'll take it a step further … using the hypothetical of a POTUS ORDERING GENOCIDE … would you hold to your position if a genocide was underway … absent of impeachment, to allow the genocide to continue and not indict  the POTUS until the end of his term(s)?

NOTE: We are now involved in a decent debate … I appreciate it and I thank you.

How would it be "settled", and by whom? 

It doesn't get any lighter than impeaching someone for getting a blowjob.

I agree, but lying to Congress is impeachable.

How would it be "settled", and by whom?

In law, a settlement is a resolution between disputing parties about a legal case, reached either before or after court action begins. 

There has never been a formal case nor decision regarding whether or not a sitting POTUS can be indicted without first being impeached and removed from office.

Nixon resigned in fear of being indicted.

I agree, but lying to Congress is impeachable.

But it did not lead to removal from office.

We must remember that the SCOTUS agreed that a sitting president could be subpoenaed.

TWICE!

Ya, lying about the blowjob.  Like I said, it doesn't get any lighter.  There are only three people in the world who have any right to take any interest in the incident at all; Bill, Monica, and Hillary.

I've promised someone that I wouldn't respond to his comments so, I have to go around that promise here, sorry.

It must be remembered that in spite of Nixons resignation he couldn't be indicted because Ford pardoned him.

Gee, you didn't seem to think the same about Trump and Daniels!

Your lack of understanding the significance is galactic! The Trump/Daniels/Cohen issue is ultimate one of Campaign Finance violations …

Using campaign funds could have been a violation of federal law.

While Trump's supporters have largely ignored the story, along with  allegations of sexual assault  and  the infamous Access Hollywood tape , the Stormy Daniels case could see the president testify in court - with 2018 mid-term elections just around the corner.

Resignation does NOT mean that he could not have been indicted.

Nixon made a deal with Gerald Ford who subsequently pardoned Nixon; when an individual accepts a POTUS pardon, he often is ADMITTING GUILT for that which he was pardoned.

1. In 1915, the Supreme Court indeed said, of pardons, that “acceptance” carries “a confession of” guilt.  Burdick v. United States  (1915) . Other courts have echoed that since.

2. On the other hand, a pardon has historically been seen as serving several different functions, one of which is protecting people who were convicted even though they were legally innocent. In   the words of Justice Joseph Story , the most respected early commentator on the Constitution (writing in 1833),

yes, I am aware that a pardon makes indictment impossible. But there was plenty of time and plenty of evidence for Nixon to be indicted BEFORE he got pardoned,

And given the current 35 INDICTMENTS AND A NUMBER OF CONFESSIONS … likely with more to come … there is a great deal more plausibly facing Trump.

NOTE: And I thank you for engaging in actual debate … it makes the thread more interesting.

How would it be "settled", and by whom?

The Nuremberg Trials. It is illegal to effect illegal orders. Just knowing of crimes and not reporting is a crime.

Anyone who knew of Russian hacking and did not report it to the FBI is guilty of obstruction of justice IMO...

Well, you are going to need to tie Trump directly to someone convicted of something. Meaning he ordered it or knew of it.

We don't do guilty by association in America.

We (that being those of us not having inside information regarding Mueller's investigation) don't know all of the evidence that exists beyond what's already been revealed. So, of course, whomsoever is charged with whatever, depending on the particular charge … the following obtains:

Legal   Definition of   preponderance of the evidence

the standard of proof in most civil cases in which the party bearing the burden of proof must present evidence which is more credible and convincing than that presented by the other party or which shows that the fact to be proven is more probable than not; also : the evidence meeting this standard 

• plaintiffs must show by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant's negligence proximately caused the injuries

  — compare   clear and convincing ,   reasonable doubt  

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

The standard that must be met by the prosecution's evidence in a  criminal  prosecution: that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

If the jurors or judge have no doubt as to the defendant's guilt, or if their only doubts are unreasonable doubts, thenthe prosecutor has proven the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the defendant should be pronounced guilty.

I tried to give you the respect of a direct and specific answer ... but you just can’t help being what you are.

Troll somewhere else.

You think some will be CIVIL cases?

There's already two active civil suits now.

You think some will be CIVIL cases?

There's already two active civil suits now.

How about that!

Donald Trump's pending lawsuits and his presidency

bbc

do you have any links to civil suits that we were talking about?

Here's the perspective; civil penalties are not pardonable … but, I'm not sure what you're looking for … guessing … civil litigation that may result from Mueller?

I tried to respond to a comment you made about tying Trump to actionable offenses … I thought I was being thorough.

I was initially responding to your comment …

8.2.21    Texan1211    replied to    A. Macarthur  @ 8.2.19      yesterday

I was not implying that a lost civil suit could generate impeachment; I was just giving parameters to be met in various litigations.

Civil suits would not result in impeachment.

And this is where the ignorance of the right comes to light...The payoff of Stormy Daniels is a violation of campaign finance laws.

The paying off of settlements from Trump's foundations is also illegal....

Both grounds for impeachment and conviction....

Gee, you didn't seem to think the same about Trump and Daniels!

Trump and, Daniels is a different case, in that case it is possible that the "hush payment" made to Daniels was made with campaign funds and, was meant to keep it from being revealed during the campaign, in fact close to November. 

Rosenstein:  “There is no allegation in this indictment that any American citizen committed a crime . There is no allegation that the conspiracy changed the vote count or affected any election result.”

DONE and DONE ! 

Rosenstein: “There is no allegation in this indictment that any American citizen committed a crime. There is no allegation that the conspiracy changed the vote count or affected any election result.”YET!

Yet!

It's coming, my friend. Smart investigators will put "handwriting on the wall" to generate fear and anxiety for those who may resultantly rush to make a deal in order to mitigate the imminent consequences.

There may even be a culpable Republican member of Congress (or an individual who ran for Congress in 2016).

I never just idly speculate.

Smart investigators will put "handwriting on the wall" to generate fear and anxiety for those who may resultantly rush to make a deal in order to mitigate the imminent consequences.

Hell, Liberals have been doing that since this.....Hunt....started, with no evidence either.

Hell, Liberals have been doing that since this.....Hunt....started, with no evidence either.

I challenge you to provide specifics … not one-line pronouncements.

Adam Schiff says "the Democrats have 'ample evidence' of collusion between Trump and Russia. Schiff said the Democrats would continue their own investigation and this week “received new documents from another important witness.” 

California Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the panel, said Tuesday that he believes there is “significant evidence” of collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia, though he couldn’t say if there was criminal wrongdoing.

That wasn't hard !

Adam Schiff says "the Democrats have 'ample evidence' of collusion between Trump and Russia. Schiff said the Democrats would continue their own investigation and this week “received new documents from another important witness.” 

California Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the panel, said Tuesday that he believes there is “significant evidence” of collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia, though he couldn’t say if there was criminal wrongdoing.

That wasn't hard !

It wasn't viable either!

How the White House and Republicans Blew Up the House Russia Investigation

Devin Nunes Seems to Have Paralyzed the House Intelligence Committee

More …

Devin Nunes Is Criticized for Keeping Subpoena Power in Russia Inquiry

It wasn't viable either!

Maybe not according to you....but it sure did answer your challenge.

Presenting a partial account that fails to explain why it is only partial …  is disingenuous … in this case, because leaves a false impression that implies an investigation ended conclusively with no cited culpabilities!

But, in reality … in one of many such Republican efforts to undermine the investigation …

Schiff: GOP 'refused' to issue subpoena for mystery

Trump Jr. call

Rep.  Adam Schiff  (D-Calif.) criticized Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee on Friday for refusing to issue a subpoena for  Donald Trump Jr. 's phone records to determine whether he received permission from his father to meet with a Russian lawyer at Trump Tower.

Schiff told  The Washington Post  that a blocked number in Trump Jr.'s phone records, recorded right after he set up the specifics of the Trump Tower meeting, could belong to  President Trump . But he said that Republicans on the committee refused to issue a subpoena to determine the identity of the blocked caller.

thehill

Perhaps Trump supporters believe that no one understands why the would march into hell for an incompetent liar, not qualified for office, and, a clear danger, ultimately even to themselves in terms of what constitute ultimately, their own utilitarian interests.

_________________________________________________

Our usual lively debate!

“There is no allegation in this indictment that any American citizen committed a crime. There is no allegation that the conspiracy changed the vote count or affected any election result.”

Other key words in the statement that you over looked, IN THIS INDICTMENT, which means that there are other indictments coming that may have those allegations in them, we will have to wait and, see so, don't break out the champagne yet.

Man...Is that wishful thinking. Still grasping for something....anything, I see. 

You can whistle past the graveyard until you orgasm … but what's "CUMMING" are more indictments.

Man...Is that wishful thinking. Still grasping for something....anything, I see.

Not wishful thinking, 

politico

cnn

The full list of known indictments and plea deals in Mueller’s probe
1) George Papadopoulos, former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, pleaded guilty in October to making false statements to the FBI.
2) Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, pleaded guilty in December to making false statements to the FBI.

3) Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chair, was indicted in October in Washington, DC on charges of conspiracy, money laundering, and false statements — all related to his work for Ukrainian politicians before he joined the Trump campaign. He’s pleaded not guilty on all counts. Then, in February, Mueller filed a new case against him in Virginia, with tax, financial, and bank fraud charges.
4) Rick Gates, a former Trump campaign aide and Manafort’s longtime junior business partner, was indicted on similar charges to Manafort. But in February he agreed to a plea deal with Mueller’s team, pleading guilty to just one false statements charge and one conspiracy charge.

5-20) 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies were indicted on conspiracy charges, with some also being accused of identity theft. The charges related to a Russian propaganda effort designed to interfere with the 2016 campaign. The companies involved are the Internet Research Agency, often described as a “Russian troll farm,” and two other companies that helped finance it. The Russian nationals indicted include 12 of the agency’s employees and its alleged financier, Yevgeny Prigozhin.

21) Richard Pinedo: This California man pleaded guilty to an identity theft charge in connection with the Russian indictments, and has agreed to cooperate with Mueller.
22) Alex van der Zwaan: This London lawyer pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI about his contacts with Rick Gates and another unnamed person based in Ukraine.
23) Konstantin Kilimnik: This longtime business associate of Manafort and Gates, who’s currently based in Russia, was charged alongside Manafort with attempting to obstruct justice by tampering with witnesses in Manafort’s pending case this year.
24-35) 12 Russian GRU officers: These officers of Russia’s military intelligence service were charged with crimes related to the hacking and leaking of leading Democrats’ emails in 2016.
Two ex-Trump advisers lied to the FBI about their contacts with Russians

vox

And, a Partridge in a Pear tree.

“There is no allegation in this indictment that any American citizen committed a crime.

Your assumption that because an investigation (that is far from complete) has not found evidence that it happened yet is proof that they never will find evidence as the investigation progresses is just plain stupid!

Of course the other possibility is that your statement is not indicative of stupidity, but rather that you deliberately trying to mislead us with that obvious nonsense....

(I'm willing to gove you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are not deliberately trying to mislead us....)

“There is no allegation in this indictment that any American citizen committed a crime.

Is that so?

Mueller: Congressional candidate sought stolen emails from Russian spies in 2016

An unnamed congressional candidate sought hacked documents about his or her opponent in the 2016 election from Russian intelligence officers who were posing as an online activist, prosecutors working for special counsel Robert Mueller charged Friday.

The allegation is spelled out in a single paragraph of a 29-page   indictment   released Friday that accuses 12 Russian intelligence officers with   conducting a hacking campaign that targeted Democratic political organizations   to attempt to influence the 2016 election. Prosecutors charged that the hackers breached the computers of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, then stole troves of emails and other records that the Russian government later made public. 

usatoday

For Mueller, pushing to finish parts of Russia probe, question of American involvement remains

washingtonpost

Keep something going LONG ENOUGH, you probably can find a tidbit that can be blown out of proportion.

Is that so?

According to the Head of ALL the "Secret Police" Rosenstein. 

Hyperbole is not rebuttal.

It is usually dismissive.

You mean that republican appointed by Trump himself? 

Trump requests that Russia find Hillary's missing emails. 

Shortly afterward the Russians attempt to hack into Hillary Clinton emails. 

DUH. 

Rosenstein: “There is no allegation in this indictment that any American citizen committed a crime. There is no allegation that the conspiracy changed the vote count or affected any election result.”

I take it the "Russians" actually found ALL of Hillary's erased emails, and that's why your upset ?

Not true, the dates and times don't correlate.

Not true, the dates and times don't correlate.

Wrong, Greg … the dates and times do, in fact, correlate.

As it turns out, that same day, the Russians — whether they had tuned in or not — made their first effort to break into the servers used by Mrs. Clinton’s personal office, according to a sweeping 29-page indictment unsealed Friday by the special counsel’s office that  charged 12 Russians with election hacking .

Remember This?

All too well, perhaps now it will come back and take a huuuuuuuuuuuuge bite out of His fat arse. But we will have to wait and see.

WHO THE FUCK CHANGED THE ARTICLE IMAGE?

I’m thinking it was an inside job. Possibly a moderator gone rogue. There might be a clue in the image itself as it is not a very flattering picture. This could indicate the culprit could have a left leaning bias. 

I’m thinking it was an inside job. Possibly a moderator gone rogue. There might be a clue in the image itself as it is not a very flattering picture. This could indicate the culprit could have a left leaning bias.

Doubtful a left-leaning bias would manifest itself by replacing my avatar photo with a photo of Trump.

Otherwise, I am hoping Perrie can trace it back.

This is how tyrannical dictators deal with the MEDIA that doesn't run their propaganda … Fox is TRUMP's MINISTRY OF PROPAGANDA!

It's your country … 

In  1984 ,  there  are  four  government  ministries  which Winston mentions in the opening paragraph: The  Ministry  of Truth which is concerned with "news, entertainment, education and the fine arts." The  Ministry  of Peace which deals with matters relating to war. The  Ministry  of Love which maintains law and order in Oceania.

George Orwell 1984, The Propaganda Ministries of the Nazis.

George Orwell 1984, The Propaganda Ministries Of The Nazis.

George Orwell? Who is that dude.? (The name sounds vaguely familiar....)

George Orwell? Who is that dude.? (The name sounds vaguely familiar....)

As it turns out, A PROPHET!

• Propaganda must facilitate the displacement of aggression

  by specifying the targets for hatred.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Hatred ,  Target ,  Propaganda

• This is the secret of propaganda: Those who are to be persuaded by it should be completely immersed in the ideas of the propaganda, without ever noticing that they are being immersed in it.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Ideas ,  Secret ,  Propaganda

• The truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Enemy ,  German History ,  Nazism

• ...the rank and file are usually much more primitive than we imagine. Propaganda must therefore always be essentially simple and repetitious.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Gun ,  Simple ,  Notable

• Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Peace ,  War ,  Thinking

• The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Truth ,  Yield ,  Media Control

• There will come a day, when all the lies will collapse under their own weight, and truth will again triumph.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Lying ,  Triumph ,  Weight

• Not every item of news should be published. Rather must those who control news policies endeavor to make every item of news serve a certain purpose.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Purpose ,  News ,  Propaganda

• We enter parliament in order to supply ourselves, in the arsenal of democracy, with its own weapons. If democracy is so stupid as to give us free tickets and salaries for this bear's work, that is its affair. We do not come as friends, nor even as neutrals. We come as enemies. As the wolf bursts into the flock, so we come.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Stupid ,  Order ,  Giving

• It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion.

  Joseph Goebbels

  School ,  Political ,  Public Opinion

• It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Circles ,  Ideas ,  Squares

• The bigger the lie, the more it will be believed.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Lying ,  Bigger

• We shall reach our goal, when we have the power to laugh as we destroy, as we smash, whatever was sacred to us as tradition, as education, and as human affection.

  Joseph Goebbels
  Goal ,  Laughing ,  Sacred
  The essence of propaganda consists in winning people over to an idea so sincerely, so vitally, that in the end they succumb to it utterly and can never escape from it.
  Joseph Goebbels
  Winning ,  Essence ,  Ideas

• If you tell a lie long enough, it becomes the truth.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Lying ,  Long ,  Interesting

• A Jew is for me an object of disgust. I feel like vomiting when I see one. Christ could not possibly have been a Jew. It is not necessary to prove that scientifically - it is a fact. I do not need to prove this with science or scholarship. It is so!

  Joseph Goebbels

  Holocaust ,  Needs ,  Vomiting

• The masses need something that will give them a thrill of horror.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Giving ,  Needs ,  Thrill

• There is no need for propaganda to be rich in intellectual content.

  Joseph Goebbels

  War ,  Drug ,  Intellectual

• Whoever can conquer the street will one day conquer the state, for every form of power politics and any dictatorship-run state has its roots in the street.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Running ,  Roots ,  History

• It is not propaganda’s task to be intelligent, its task is to lead to success.

  Joseph Goebbels

  Intelligent ,  Tasks ,  Propaganda

• A media system wants ostensible diversity that conceals an actual uniformity

  Joseph Goebbels

NOTE: The article image was changed via a glitch … no problem. 

I understand that many Trump supporters are thrilled that media other than Fox are under attack by Trump … to which I say …

"Do you not understand what happens in countries where authoritarian heads-of-state control all "news" except that which favors them and denigrates their opposition?"

If you don't, you'd better read the history because, if you think your Great White Hope will make America Great Again … in the image you envision and desire …

You will be fucked along with the people you hate.

You won't have to worry about "redistribution of wealth" because the authoritarian and his oligarchy (like in Putin's Russia), will suck all the resources from the citizenry, and, unless you're on the inside, you'll be among those sucked …

… and fucked!

Wise the hell up and don't allow your bigotry and resentments to do what has been done historically and presently in other countries.

Yes we understand that's why we are opposed to the liberal bias in MSM that is an arm of the Democratic party. We've been saying this for years and when they praised everything Obama did we were criticized for pointing it out. 

Yes we understand that's why we are opposed to the liberal bias in MSM that is an arm of the Democratic party. We've been saying this for years and when they praised everything Obama did we were criticized for pointing it out. 

No, you don't understand, Dean … when the media, the courts and law enforcement are controlled by those who feed you the naive bullshit you just spouted … then you'll begin to get it.

The first or second time you discover that there's no more government of, for and or by the people … that things really ARE RIGGED IN FAVOR OF A CORRUPT, CRIMINAL OLIGARCHY … that you're pissing into the wind if you try to invoke your first, fifth, fourteenth and other Amendments … you'll experience the creeping, and, ultimately galloping reality, that, to the Great White Hope you so willingly believed … you were just suckered victim of your own myopic delusions, just another grunt whose whiteness doesn't mean shit!

Oh! Don't get me wrong, Dean; your whiteness will find favor with "Big Brother," although he who will no longer be your Jess Willard; your whiteness will be pandered to, that in order for your long-lost Willard to continuously pummel you with the hate screed that "things are the way they are because of those no good fuckin' dark people! And you'll buy it until you or a family member or a friend who dared to speak truth to power … ain't around any more.

Go ahead, Dean, let Trump reinforce your beliefs about those who you think are "the problem." 

But in reality, individuals who march into hell with the hater-in-chief … they are the problem … and they will be among the victims … because …

"Whoever troubles his own household will inherit the wind, and the fool will be servant to the wise of heart."

THIS IS A DANGER TO DEMOCRACY!

It appears that Trump's people are beginning to figure out the inherent dangers to democracy generated by his statement in the now removed (from YouTube) video I posted yesterday; possibly, someone with an upper level double-digit IQ in Trump World, has finally heard the political footsteps that come behind such statements, in this instance …

"THE PRESS/MEDIA IS THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE!"

Trump's Attack on Media as 'Enemy of the People' Has Historic Echoes

" There is no evidence that Trump was aware of the historic connotations of the phrase when he wrote his tweet  … one would hope "American presidents would be educated enough to know something like that."

voanews