'It was a coup': Mueller critics demand 'deep state' investigation, Obama testimony

  
Via:  tessylo  •  2 weeks ago  •  47 comments

'It was a coup': Mueller critics demand 'deep state' investigation, Obama testimony

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


'It was a coup': Mueller critics demand 'deep state' investigation, Obama testimony









9197dca0-94e1-11e6-9718-4d4a4a2e45f0_US- Alexander Nazaryan 14 hours ago 























Mueller makes first public statement about investigation into Russian interference








WASHINGTON — An hour before Robert Mueller prepared to give his one — and apparently only — public statement on the findings of his investigation into Russian electoral interference, calls for a very different sort of probe were taking place at an event organized by a conservative organization closely aligned with President Trump.

There were calls for President Obama to testify before Congress, as well as suspicions about FBI Director Christopher Wray. Trump, meanwhile, was a “crime victim,” while alleged spying on the Trump campaign by law enforcement entities in the Obama administration was nothing short of “terrorism.”

These were some of the assertions made during a panel hosted on Wednesday morning by Judicial Watch titled “Investigating the Investigators,” an evident reference to Mueller, who was appointed by the Department of Justice to investigate allegations that the Trump presidential campaign may have worked with Russia to defeat Hillary Clinton in 2016.

“It is time to look into the politicization of the DOJ and the intelligence community in their effort to undermine the president,” said a press release for the event, which took place at the studio of One America News, a conservative media outlet.

With the Mueller report now a public document — and a highly contentious one at that — the event was a window into how Trump’s supporters plan to reframe the debate over the president’s possible wrongdoing into an attack on the origins of the investigation. That approach appears to be directed by the White House, with Trump last week authorizing Attorney General William Barr to declassify documents related to potential surveillance on the Trump campaign. Barr has previously expressed concerns that the FBI may have conducted unauthorized “spying” during the 2016 election.


“Something very horrible went terribly wrong,” said another of the panelists, Christopher J. Farrell, also of Judicial Watch. “A hoax has been perpetrated upon” the American people, Farrell said, speaking of the Mueller report.

“It was a coup,” Farrell went on to say, albeit one without tanks in the streets. “It was an effort to unseat or destabilize the Trump administration.”

He said that that effort — much of it overseen by Trump’s own Department of Justice — was a worse abuse of power than Watergate or any other presidential scandal.

5ceeea9e2400003100855a12.jpeg
Carter Page, a foreign policy adviser to Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. (Photo: J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

Victoria Toensing, a conservative lawyer, meanwhile accused FBI Director Wray of “stonewalling.” Wray was virtually the only Trump administration official to be criticized by the Judicial Watch panelists, who charged that he was more interested in protecting the FBI’s credibility than he was in letting Barr conduct a full investigation into “spying” by the bureau into the Trump campaign.

The most notable of the panelists was Carter Page, a foreign policy expert with the Trump campaign who authorities believed was trying to make contacts with Russia during the 2016 campaign. The FBI in 2016 obtained a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to surveil Page, who has been largely unrepentant about his role in the Trump campaign. On Wednesday, he said he was the victim of “civil rights abuses.”

Sitting before a poster board that listed the priorities of the FBI, Page said he was less concerned with issues of spying — on him and the Trump campaign — than with “literally the terrorism associated with this.” He then proceeded to argue that what he called “false reports” and “attacks” against him and the Trump campaign met the definition of terrorism.

“We’re really all victims in this,” Page said, seeming to refer to the broader Trump movement and its affiliates.

Tom Fitton, the Judicial Watch head, who regularly defends Trump on Fox News, blasted the “dishonesty of the Mueller report.” A press release sent ahead of the panel said that same report “has exonerated President Trump of the false accusations of collusion and obstruction.”

Trump himself has claimed such exoneration, an apparent reference to a lack of new indictments stemming from Mueller’s findings. The Mueller report did not find evidence the Trump campaign conspired with Russia, and did not draw conclusions about whether the president should be charged with obstruction of justice.

Whatever the interpretation of the Mueller report, the panelists focused on attacking the investigation itself, and suggested that former Democratic officials need to now be investigated, some three years after the activity in question may have taken place.

Trump’s foe in the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton, remained a primary target. At one point, Fitton said that she was “working directly with Russian intelligence,” referring to the dossier compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele.

Though the Steele dossier was commissioned by the Democratic National Committee, the initial investigation into Trump's business dealings was paid for by a Republican publisher and donor, Paul Singer.

And while Democrats in the House of Representatives would like Mueller to testify, the Judicial Watch panelists wanted to see another former public servant troop up Capitol Hill.

“I want to know: What did Obama know? What did he approve? What did he tacitly nod his head for? What did he explicitly authorize?” Farrell wondered. “Let’s get Mr. Obama under oath.”

Correction [5:50 pm, May 29, 2019]: The original text has been corrected to identify the Democratic National Committee as the funder of the Steele dossier.









Article is Locked

Find text within the comments Find 
 
Tessylo
1  seeder  Tessylo    2 weeks ago

'It was a coup': Mueller critics demand 'deep state' investigation, Obama testimony

jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_44_smiley_image.gif

They're playing to the whackjobs and the conspiracy theorists and all the Rump supporters.  

They hit all the dog whistles nicely.  

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Tessylo @1    2 weeks ago

There is no conspiracy theory here. The left wing never Trumpers actually did commit some illegal acts and need to be investigated, no matter where the breadcrumbs lead.

After all, don't the American people have a right to know real truth?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1    2 weeks ago
The left wing never Trumpers actually did commit some illegal acts and need to be investigated

Sure they did....jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

You do remember that the House already investigated the FISA warrants, don't you?

You do remember that they were found to be legal and proper, don't you?

You do remember that after the warrant was released for viewing that it contradicted what Nunes claimed about it, don't you?

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.2  Greg Jones  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.1    2 weeks ago

The warrants were issued for fraudulent reasons.

No crimes by Trump and his associates and family concerning collusion or obstruction were ever charged.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.3  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.2    2 weeks ago

Nope.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.3    2 weeks ago

Prove it then.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.5  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.2    2 weeks ago
The warrants were issued for fraudulent reasons.

The warrant was used for investigating someone who was not even a part of the Trump campaign.  No fraud there.

No crimes by Trump and his associates and family concerning collusion or obstruction were ever charged.

Meaningless, and there have been plenty of charges against Trump's associates.  And as Mueller recently stated, he was not even allowed to consider charging Trump.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.1.6  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.4    2 weeks ago

She can't and she knows it.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.1.6    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.1.8  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.7    2 weeks ago

[deletd]

 
 
 
lib50
1.1.9  lib50  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.2    2 weeks ago
No crimes by Trump and his associates and family concerning collusion or obstruction were ever charged.

Yet.  Don't worry, eventually he won't be able to hold back the law.  You think hes innocent, more of us think hes hiding all sorts of malfeasance.  The guys a lying shyster,  so have fun.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.10  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.1.8    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
1.1.11  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1    2 weeks ago

The problem with the statement you made on this site is that it's correct.  Now given that many on this sight, were screaming "you must accept the results of the investigation" then went into absolute hysterics when it didn't go their way, aren't going to take the time to think.  The hysterics have been going for over 2 years now.  You stand a better chance of baptizing a rabid cat than getting any kind of meaningful response.

 
 
 
bbl-1
1.1.12  bbl-1  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.4    2 weeks ago

Actually, it is time for the Trumpers to put the cards on the table.  Show the hand.  What do you have.  We anxiously await the paperwork, voice conversations, emails and whatever else you have.  The incessant accusations are---------boring.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @1.1.12    2 weeks ago

You do realize my post simply said "Prove it then.", don't you?

Really not sure what the heck you are talking about, or why you directed it to me.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.14  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.13    2 weeks ago

No need to prove the truth 

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.14    2 weeks ago
No need to prove the truth

Typical answer when one can't do it, of couse.

 
 
 
lib50
1.1.16  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.15    2 weeks ago

You come in asking for proof when you don't seem to feel the same need to provide it.  From tariffs to Trump.  Congress can open hearings to see the extent of Trump's cooperation with Russia and his obstruction after (still ongoing).  The public can make a determination because the actions will speak for themselves, and Americans can judge just who Trump is trying to protect.  And we know is ain't the country.  Sometimes its necessary to make an overall judgement from all of Trump's words and actions from the start, and that is what hearings will do, bring it out and let the people decide.  Not that many base Trumpers.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.1.17  Sean Treacy  replied to  lib50 @1.1.16    2 weeks ago
p.  Congress can open hearings to see the extent of Trump's cooperation with Russia

They've been doing that for 2 1/2 years, plus a special prosecutor with investigatory powers Congress can only dream of. 

Do you need another report saying the same things the others have said? Russia and the Trump campaign did not engage in a conspiracy to  interfere in the 2016 election.

Just be honest. This is about dirtying Trump up politically. No honest person believes in the silly conspiracy theories that progressives have been throwing around for almost three years now.   

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.18  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @1.1.16    2 weeks ago

What have I claimed that you need proof of? Please be specific.

Congress CAN open hearings--and have done so already. Do you honestly believe that Congress will find stuff Mueller did not, despite the fact he took two years and has concluded his thorough investigation?

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Tessylo @1    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
2  seeder  Tessylo    2 weeks ago

Page - the supposed victim here - I'm just waiting for the usual posters' support of this 'frame job'.  The ruining of the life of an innocent man.  

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.1  Ronin2  replied to  Tessylo @2    2 weeks ago

What charges have been brought against him? After all of the FISA warrants, and wire taps, used against him and anyone associated against him, this master spy is still walking free.  He wasn't even questioned by Comey or Mueller. 

But according to left, nothing to see here, the US government has a right to spy on anyone, for any reason.  Unless it is for a Republican against a Democrat that is.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1    2 weeks ago

Riiiiiiiggggghhhhhhhhttttttt.

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.2  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @2    2 weeks ago

What has Page been convicted of?

 
 
 
Tessylo
3  seeder  Tessylo    2 weeks ago

'Whatever the interpretation of the Mueller report, the panelists focused on attacking the investigation itself, and suggested that former Democratic officials need to now be investigated, some three years after the activity in question may have taken place.'

Investigate the investigators who were doing their jobs.

jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Ronin2
3.1  Ronin2  replied to  Tessylo @3    2 weeks ago

Nixon would be very proud of Democrats and their followers these days.

The weaponizing of the intelligence agencies and DOJ against a political opponent. Followed by a public cry to stop any investigation into whether it was legal at any level. 

Investigate the investigators who were doing their jobs.

[Removed]

 
 
 
Greg Jones
3.2  Greg Jones  replied to  Tessylo @3    2 weeks ago

Investigate the investigators who were doing their jobs.

They did their jobs, and Mueller plainly told us yesterday that no crimes were committed by Trump or his associates.

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.2.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @3.2    2 weeks ago

Nope.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
3.3  1stwarrior  replied to  Tessylo @3    2 weeks ago

[delete]

 
 
 
Tessylo
4  seeder  Tessylo    2 weeks ago

“It is time to look into the politicization of the DOJ and the intelligence community in their effort to undermine the president,” said a press release for the event, which took place at the studio of One America News, a conservative media outlet.

jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

They're so obviously guilty.  

 
 
 
cjcold
4.1  cjcold  replied to  Tessylo @4    2 weeks ago

Just more right wing lies, spin and misdirection meant to distract from Trump's and the GOP's crimes.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  cjcold @4.1    2 weeks ago

Mueller said there was insufficient evidence to charge either collusion or obstruction.

That's the whole truth, and the end of the matter.

Forever and ever.

We're waiting for the Democrats to start impeachment proceedings.

What are they waiting for, or afraid of?

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.1.2  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @4.1.1    2 weeks ago

Nope.

 
 
 
lib50
4.1.3  lib50  replied to  Greg Jones @4.1.1    2 weeks ago

Dems will make the call when they are ready to make the call.  Not when Trump is, you are, or McConnell.  You want it so bad, tell the senate.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @4.1.3    2 weeks ago

The Senate can not start impeachment proceedings.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.2  Greg Jones  replied to  Tessylo @4    2 weeks ago

Guilty of what, and what do you mean by obvious?

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.2.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @4.2    2 weeks ago
ob·vi·ous
/ˈäbvēəs/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
  1. easily perceived or understood; clear, self-evident, or apparent.
    "unemployment has been the most obvious cost of the recession"
    synonyms: clearplainplain to see, crystal clear, evidentapparentmanifestpatentconspicuouspronouncedtransparentclear-cutpalpableprominentmarkeddecidedsalientstrikingdistinctboldnoticeableperceptibleperceivable, visiblediscernibledetectableobservabletangiblerecognizable; More
    • DEROGATORY
      predictable and lacking in subtlety.
      "it was an obvious remark to make"
 
 
 
1stwarrior
4.3  1stwarrior  replied to  Tessylo @4    2 weeks ago

[delete]

 
 
 
Tessylo
5  seeder  Tessylo    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
6  The Magic Eight Ball    2 weeks ago

Obama Testimony

that would be a stuttering mess... LOL

lookin forward to it :)

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @6    2 weeks ago

A stuttering mess?  Good description of the turd Rump

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
6.1.1  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Tessylo @6.1    2 weeks ago
A stuttering mess?

yes, I did not stutter. 

no matter how ya feel about trump,  it is not his ass that is now in the hot seat.

I wonder how obama is sleeping these days...  

and to be fair, I also wonder if the bush family will pay for their crimes as well.

to set all right with the world, three families must pay.

the perfect trifecta.

  • bush's
  • clinton's
  • obama's

cheers :)

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.2  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @6.1.1    2 weeks ago

jrSmiley_44_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_25_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
6.1.3  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.2    2 weeks ago

no time outs left on the clock.

that is the same reply you gave me over two yrs ago when I told you,

  future 'deep state' investigation s would lead to Obama testimony

but don't worry...   im always wrong... LOL  "nothing is happening.

cheers :)

 

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.4  seeder  Tessylo  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @6.1.3    2 weeks ago

jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_44_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
bbl-1
7  bbl-1    2 weeks ago

So the conspiracy adherents want an Obama testimony?

If I were Obama I would tell them that I would testify under oath as long as Trump is testifying also, right next to me and under oath also.  If I were Obama I would also add the proceedings be public, televised live.  That statement would end this crap immediately.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Don Overton
epistte
XXJefferson#51
Dulay


51 visitors