• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

The Russian Special Prosecuter ..where will it go?

Doc

Bottoms Up
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
I just saw Mr. Clapper, the ex head of the CIA, testify before a congressional hearing. He said he noticed some questionable activity with Russian reps and so he investigated further.

When asked if this lead to any of Trump's team he said no, he did not find anything. He was also asked about unmasking names and he gave an answer that was wishy washy. He didn't recall ordering any names unmasked on Jan 20th or 21st.

They are zeroing in on Flynn. Flynn is not talking. I sure hope there is nothing there but at the same time I'm concerned.

....but, just thinking on the Russian possible interference .... I saw a cartoon saying if the Russians interfered in previous elections we would not have had 8 years of Obama.

I completely disagree. If I were Russian and wanting to get away with whatever ...I would want Obama in there, and after buying the uranium from Hillary I would also think they would have preferred Hillary be in the seat right now.

I can sure understand any business donating to both Dems and Repubs ...to cover all bets no matter who gets in but if you are trying to sway and election you want the side that will be most beneficial to you. The side that wants open borders. The side that will never want to build a wall. The side that will take in refugees without question. Believing all this I am truly at a loss as to how the Dems can put forth some of these ideas and think anyone will take them seriously. :soapbox:
 

tiredretired

The Old Salt
SUPER Site Supporter
When the smoke clears, more of this will lead to the Dummos then to Trump.

If I were the Dummos, I would simply have let the sleeping dog lie. But then again, they are the Dummos, so they must live up to their name.
 

Doc

Bottoms Up
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
When the smoke clears, more of this will lead to the Dummos then to Trump.

If I were the Dummos, I would simply have let the sleeping dog lie. But then again, they are the Dummos, so they must live up to their name.
I do hope you are right. I fear the corruption in DC will keep the Dems safe. Barack has set up house close by and is part of the resistance. Hillary is part of the resistance. Soros or someone has an army of protesters paid to protest and create havoc at the drop of a pin. If things were to be all on the up and up I think you'd be right TR. Unfortunately I do not see things being on the up and up. Deceit, lies and corruption will screw up the outcome.
 

rugerman

New member
From what I've seen Clapper has no evidence but he keeps saying that he thinks that something was going on. But he didn't notice all the junk that obama and Clinton were doing with the Russians. I don't trust him for a minute, trying to extend his 15 minutes of fame, using the democrats and this Russian crap to do it.
 

rugerman

New member
Now they are going after Trumps son in law for trying to set up secret communication with the Russians. Last time I checked it was NOT against the law to talk to Russians, by ANYONE. I guess that if I called Russia then there would be a special congressional investigation about it. More political bull shit, waste time, waste money, still don't do squat.
 

tiredretired

The Old Salt
SUPER Site Supporter
Of course the Obama Admin set up back door communication with the Iranians, with whom we had NO diplomatic relations, to sell us down the road with that awful nuke deal and the media looked the other way.

I am no conspiracy tin foil hat guy, but as each day passes it becomes more and more evident something is going on with the Soros group, the MSM and the Dummocrats. This Deep State thing is becoming more real by the day.
 

XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq

Master of Distraction
Staff member
SUPER Site Supporter
I'm confused. Is it illegal for a private american citizen to talk to the Russian government? At the time Kushner was simply working on a political campaign - he was still a private citizen.
 

MrLiberty

Bronze Member
Site Supporter
I doubt the Russian investigation will turn up much as I think most of it is media driven.

The Daily Caller has a great piece about it and Trump's S-I-L Jared. What is the Post hiding. And the same goes to the NYT's.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/30/what-is-the-washington-post-hiding-about-its-jared-kushner-story/

The Washington Post editors refuse to publicly release the smoking gun “anonymous letter” that serves as the foundation of their sensational charge that White House advisor Jared Kushner sought a secret, back-channel to Russian officials.


The “anonymous letter” was part of a front-page article claiming the president’s son-in-law sought to set up a private communications channel to Russian officials during a discussion with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The piece was published Sunday and received high profile coverage throughout the long Memorial Day weekend.


“The Post was first alerted in mid-December to the meeting by an anonymous letter, which said, among other things, that Kushner had talked to Kislyak about setting up the communications channel,” the article’s three authors stated.


WaPo also claimed American intelligence agencies discovered the ploy through an intercepted open phone call by Kislyak to Moscow. Observers have noted that Kislyak, a seasoned spy, made the phone call on an “open line,” and therefore knew it was likely to be intercepted.


To date, there has been no independent verification the letter is real or that WaPo’s description of its contents is accurate. The Washington Post editors also never explain why they withheld the letter.


The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group contacted The Post’s national desk over the weekend, seeking a copy of the letter and an explanation why their editors withheld it from the public. WaPo did not reply to either TheDCNF’s email or phone inquiries.


The question is, what is The Washington Post hiding?


The story is weakened further since its reporters only cite unnamed government officials to confirm the anonymous letter’s charges.
WaPo stated the letter’s allegations were affirmed by unnamed officials “who reviewed the letter and spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence.”


As a general rule, TheDCNF does not post documents if it endangers genuine whistleblowers, ongoing law enforcement or military operations, human life, or public safety.


Otherwise, TheDCNF emphasizes openness and transparency, which is especially important for original source documents related to its articles. And if it does not publicly link a document, it explicitly explains to readers the reasons why it has not released a key document.


The Post’s secrecy has produced its doubters. Over the weekend, Republican South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, who serves on the Senate Committees on Armed Services and the Judiciary, said he believed The Post’s account was bogus.


“I don’t trust this story as far as I can throw it,” the South Carolina Republican said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”


Graham, who served on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence between 2007 to 2009, doubted the Russian Ambassador would transmit the Kushner proposal via an open line, saying it “made no sense” since Kislyak would know U.S. intelligence authorities were monitoring the communication.


“I don’t know who leaked this information, but just think about it this way — you’ve got the ambassador of Russia reporting back to Moscow on an open channel, ‘Hey, Jared Kushner’s going to move into the embassy,'” Graham said on CNN.


Former U.S. Attorney Joseph DiGenova told TheDCNF other unreleased parts of the letter could undermine the credibility of the author and discredit the allegations about Kushner.


“Here’s the problem: we don’t know what else is in the letter. The letter may be so outrageous in its claims that if we read it all, it would throw doubt onto this particular allegation. And it may very well be that the letter is so scurrilous and outrageous that they won’t release it because it will make them look bad for relying on it at all,” he told TheDCNF in an interview.


Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a nonpartisan government watchdog group dedicated to openness and transparency, said he thought there could be references that show the letter’s author had a partisan agenda, which WaPo reporters wanted to hide.


“Are they coloring their documents in any way?” he asked during an interview with TheDCNF. “The way you figure that out is whether they disclose their politics or their agendas. We don’t know if the characterization of the underlying documents is accurate or if it’s being slanted.”


Former Air Force Col. James Waurishuk, a senior intelligence and political-military affairs advisor who served on the National Security Council and worked with news organizations, told TheDCNF journalistic integrity has evaporated in Washington.


“We’ve been turning the corner for some time on journalistic integrity. I remember in my career a time when a press organization would not release anything to jeopardize a source, jeopardizing a military operation or some ongoing political dialogue. I think those days are gone,” he told TheDCNF.


Another issue testing the credibility of mainstream news organizations is a May 16 New York Times article claiming a memo former FBI Director James Comey wrote revealed President Donald Trump asked him to drop his investigation of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.
But The NYTimes never possessed the Comey memo. According to the newspaper, “The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of it to a Times reporter.”


Fitton faulted The Times on the Comey memos.


“I’ve released documents for decades,” he said. “I could never get a reporter to write a story from a document that I’m reading to them without providing them with the full document.”


Brant Houston, who for a decade was the executive editor of the nonprofit Investigative Reporters and Editors, told TheDCNF that in the end, it’s up to readers to decide if anonymous sources or unseen documents appear credible.


“The great thing about journalism is it’s out there for everybody to see. Readers, viewers and fellow journalists will make their own judgments as to whether uses of anonymity was the appropriate thing to do,” he said.
 

rugerman

New member
Now they are saying that the special prosecutor and Comey are big buddies and that they are stacking the deck with democrat leaning folks to sway the investigation. I guess some folks sell for a lower price than others, I wonder what the going rate is for a special prosecutor?
 

Doc

Bottoms Up
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
Now they are saying that the special prosecutor and Comey are big buddies and that they are stacking the deck with democrat leaning folks to sway the investigation. I guess some folks sell for a lower price than others, I wonder what the going rate is for a special prosecutor?
I heard all the good chit about Muller, then I heard he was friends with Comey. I pray he has class enough to truthfully report findings.

I also have hopes of the investigation spreading to Hillary and Holder and Obama but I suppose I'm dreaming there.
If it is stacked with dems it could be to prevent such a spread.
 
Top