Current Event News -  Relationship Mueller Russia . . . Trump (59356 views) Notify me whenever anyone posts in this discussion.Subscribe
From: BG311 Posted by host5/30/17 11:46 AM 
To: sparrow153  (21 of 7119) 
 22935.21 in reply to 22935.20 

sparrow153 said...

Many people have raised the question, including myself, WHAT IS MUELLER INVESTIGATING?  WHAT CRIIME WAS COMMITTED?

Calling him a Special Counsel is foolish.  Now he is being called a Special Prosecutor.  Who or what is he prosecuting?


I agree!  It was a mistake for the Deputy Attorney General to give in to the Democrats pressure.  But, how can his decision and an action already begun be ended?

 Reply   Options 

From: sparrow1535/30/17 2:19 PM 
To: BG311  (22 of 7119) 
 22935.22 in reply to 22935.21 

BG311 said...

  But, how can his decision and an action already begun be ended?

I don't know, but many are calling for some clarification into what "crime" he is investigating.  You can't just say go look for a crime.



From: sparrow1535/30/17 2:23 PM 
To: All  (23 of 7119) 
 22935.23 in reply to 22935.1 

Hi Elaine:

See the side view for Face Book.



From: sparrow1535/30/17 2:34 PM 
To: BG311  (24 of 7119) 
 22935.24 in reply to 22935.23

May 29, 2017

The real Russia-gate scandal

By Cliff Kincaid

Josh Gerstein's Politico story about the owners of a Russian bank suing BuzzFeed for publishing the "Trump Dossier" containing "unproven claims" doesn't go far enough. These "unproven" and even disproven claims that have guided the FBI's dead-end investigation of President Donald Trump are one reason that former Director James Comey deserved to be fired.

The real Russian disinformation has been the notorious "Trump Dossier," which has been serving as the "roadmap" for the FBI.

Weeks after Accuracy in Media exposed the nature of this phony document in a three-part series, "The Final Truth About the Trump Dossier," Wall Street Journal columnist Holman W. Jenkins, Jr., has stumbled upon the truth, saying the dossier smells like a Russian plant. Our verdict was that the dossier compiled by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele was part of a Russian effort, financed by Hillary Clinton donors, to smear Trump. That's what the evidence shows.

In his column "The Trump-Russia Story Starts Making Sense," Jenkins writes that it is likely that Steele "was the semi-witting vehicle for Russian rumors designed expressly to undermine Mr. Trump...."

Thank you, Mr. Jenkins, for confirming what we have been saying all along.

In addition to the latest lawsuit over the dossier, Politico's Gerstein reported that BuzzFeed was sued in February by Russian Internet entrepreneur Aleksej Gubarev over claims in the dossier that he and his firms used "botnets and porn traffic" to conduct cyber operations against Democratic Party leaders. "At about the time the suit was filed, BuzzFeed apologized and redacted the information about Gubarev and his companies from the document [the dossier] on BuzzFeed's site," Gerstein said.

So some of the "unproven claims" have been disproved and retracted.

Remember that Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) asked Comey about the FBI's relationship with Steele and the dossier at a May 3 hearing:

Grassley: On March 6, I wrote to you asking about the FBI's relationship with the author of the Trump-Russia dossier, Christopher Steele. Most of these questions have not been answered, so I'm going to ask them now. Prior to the Bureau launching the investigation of alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia, did anyone from the FBI have interactions with Mr. Steele regarding the issue?

Comey: That's not a question that I can answer in this forum. As you know, I – I briefed you privately on this and if there's more that's necessary then I'd be happy to do it privately.

Grassley: Have you ever represented to a judge that the FBI had interaction with Mr. Steele, whether by name or not, regarding alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia prior to the Bureau launching its investigation of the matter?

Comey: I have to give you the same answer, Mr. Chairman.

At the same hearing, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) asked Comey about Fusion GPS, which was financed by Hillary donors and acted as an alleged foreign agent for the Russians in Washington, D.C. Fusion is reported to have financed the dossier. Mollie Hemingway of The Federalist pointed to this exchange:

Graham: Are you familiar with Fusion?

Comey: I know the name.

Graham: Are they part of the Russian intelligence apparatus?

Comey: I can't say.

Graham: Do you agree with me that if Fusion was involved in preparing a dossier against Donald Trump, that would be interfering in our election by the Russians?

Comey: I don't want to say.

The liberal media will not admit, as the Journal's Jenkins now does, that the dossier was a piece of Russian disinformation. But the Washington Post and other liberal media are now admitting that Comey used a "dubious" piece of Russian intelligence to conduct part of the investi
...[Message truncated]


From: BG311 Posted by host5/30/17 2:46 PM 
To: sparrow153  (25 of 7119) 
 22935.25 in reply to 22935.24 


Thank you for that important information.  There is so much that so many people just don't know.  It is vital for us to share the truth with others so they can be well informed about what is taken place in our government as a carry-over from the Obama Administration.


From: sparrow1535/30/17 3:20 PM 
To: BG311  (26 of 7119) 
 22935.26 in reply to 22935.25 

Hi Brenda:

Truth comes from various places many people do not have access to or know where to find it.  We cannot depend on the MSM.



From: BG311 Posted by host5/30/17 3:29 PM 
To: sparrow153  (27 of 7119) 
 22935.27 in reply to 22935.20 


Thanks for this information:

Mueller Roving Commission a Danger to Civil Liberties

By Alan Dershowitz
Sunday, 28 May 2017 12:07 PM

Special Counsel Robert Mueller was commissioned to investigate not only crime, but also the entire Russian "matter." That is an ominous development that endangers the civil liberties of all Americans.

Federal Prosecutors generally begin by identifying specific crimes that may have been committed — in this case, violation of federal statutes. But no one has yet identified the specific statute or statutes that constrain Mueller’s investigation of the Russian matter. It is not a violation of any federal law for a campaign to have collaborated with a foreign government to help elect their candidate. Perhaps it should be, but it is not. Even if there were evidence that the Trump campaign collaborated with Russian officials toward this end — and I am not aware of any — that would be a terrible political sin, but not a crime. Since the witchcraft trials in Salem, prosecutors have not been authorized to investigate sin. That is left to pastors and pundits who only have the power of persuasion. Federal prosecutors have the power of the secret grand jury, the subpoena, the selective leak, and ultimately indictment and prosecution.

That is why prosecutors must be constrained by law as to what they are authorized to investigate. Federal prosecutors are not given roving commissions to investigate "evil" or "wrongdoing" — only violations of federal criminal statutes.

Since I began raising this issue, pundits and friends have been suggesting federal statutes that might have been violated. They include treason, obstruction of justice, attempted obstruction of justice, accessory after the fact to hacking, and other elastic statutes capable of being stretched to fit the conduct of any villain de jure.

But this untrammeled approach to criminal justice is fraught with danger of overreaching and selective prosecution.

The particular statutes most often cited by defenders of the investigation are among the most dangerous on the books, precisely because they are so broad, vague, open ended and capable of being stretched to fit nearly any targeted individual. Today it's Donald trump. Yesterday it was Hillary Clinton. Tomorrow it could be you!

One does not have to go back to the Soviet Union and Lavrentiy Beria’s infamous boast to Stalin, "Show me the man and I will show you the crime," in order to be concerned about the expansion of elastic criminal statutes. There are enough examples of abuse in our own history.

From McCarthyism to the failed prosecutions of Senator Ted Stevens, Congressman Thomas DeLay, Governor Rick Perry, and others we have seen vague criminal statutes stretched in an effort to criminalize political differences. Those Trump supporters who shouted "lock her up" with regard to Hillary Clinton were doing the same thing. Republicans use this tactic against Democrats and vice versa. We all lose when prosecutors abuse their enormous powers.

In the current case, the issues are more complex because there is a strong argument that collaborating with an enemy government like Russia to influence an American election should be a crime. Perhaps that is correct, though the task of drafting such a statute would be daunting. But under current statutes it is not a crime. This is an appropriate concern of Congress, but not of a prosecutor whose mandate should not extent beyond existing criminal statutes.

It would be appropriate for Congress to have future-looking hearings designed to determine whether new laws are needed to correct existing abuses. These hearings would be accessible to the public and witnesses would have the right to counsel. After conducting such hearings Congress could then decide whether new laws are needed, especially in an age where hacking private emails and selectively releasing them has become a political tactic. The act of hacking should be a crime, but if publishing the hacked material were to be criminalized, First Amendment issues might arise. Striking the appropriate balance between discouraging hacking and the public’s right know is appropriately left to Congress and ultimately to the courts, but certainly not to prosecutors.

Another appropriate vehicle for investigating what happened during the most recent presidential election would be a congressionally mandated independent non-partisan commission of the kind that looked into the causes of 911 and the need for new laws and procedures. Such a commission would hear evidence in public, unless it were classified, and would provide safeguards to witnesses not available in secret grand juries.

All civil libertarians, whether Democrat or Republican, should be concerned about the fishing net given to Special Counsel Robert Mueller. A criminal investigation should not be a fishing expedition or a search for criminal statutes that can be stretched to fit particular targets. Partisan politics should not blind us to the dangers of prosecutors with roving commissions to investigate "matters" rather than specific crimes.

This article was first published in The Hill.

You can follow Alan Dershowitz on Twitter (@AlanDersh) and Facebook (AlanMDershowitz).

Professor Alan Dershowitz is the author of "Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law" and most recently, "Electile Dysfunction: A Guide for Unaroused Voters." Read more reports from Alan M. Dershowitz — Click Here Now.

...[Message truncated]


From: sparrow1535/30/17 4:10 PM 
To: BG311  (28 of 7119) 
 22935.28 in reply to 22935.27 

Thanks, Brenda:

The question is, can this be stopped or better defined as to limitations of such a "Special Counsel."



From: BG311 Posted by host6/1/17 8:58 AM 
To: sparrow153  (29 of 7119) 
 22935.29 in reply to 22935.28 

From: Dunggate6/1/17 11:28 AM 
To: BG311  (30 of 7119) 
 22935.30 in reply to 22935.29
Comey prepares to spill his guts to Congress
JUNE 1, 2017
Fired FBI Director James Comey has been cleared to testify in Congress – and plans to corroborate accusations that President Trump pressured him to squelch an investigation of former national security advisor Mike Flynn, according to reports.  Special counsel Robert Mueller has cleared Comey to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee, NBC

reported, citing a former law enforcement official who would not say whether Comey would be authorized to discuss his interactions with the president.  According to a CNN report, Comey is expected to back up press reports that Trump tried to pressure him into getting the FBI to back off an investigation of Flynn.  

Comey prepares to spill his guts to Congress as former FBI chief is expected to say Trump DID press him to end Russia probe of Mike Flynn
Former FBI Director James Comey has been in talks to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee
Since President Trump fired him, there have been a series of reports Trump asked him to ease off an investigation of former National Security Advisor Mike Flynn
A source told CNN he will say the president pressured him to end the investigation into Flynn
Comey has spoken to Special Counsel Robert Mueller about the contours of his testimony
Mueller cleared Comey to testify, NBC reported 
Trump has cited Comey's 'poor, poor performance' and handling of the Clinton email investigation among the reasons for his firing
By Geoff Earle, Deputy U.s. Political Editor For
PUBLISHED: 20:52, 31 May 2017 | UPDATED: 22:06, 31 May 2017
View comments
Fired FBI Director James Comey has been cleared to testify in Congress – and plans to corroborate accusations that President Trump pressured him to squelch an investigation of former national security advisor Mike Flynn, according to reports.

Special counsel Robert Mueller has cleared Comey to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee, NBC reported, citing a former law enforcement official who would not say whether Comey would be authorized to discuss his interactions with the president.

According to a CNN report, Comey is expected to back up press reports that Trump tried to pressure him into getting the FBI to back off an investigation of Flynn.

Fired FBI Director James Comey could testify as soon as next week before the Senate Intelligence Committee    +5

People close to Comey have said he wants to clear his name through public testimony.

Trump, after firing Comey, cited him for 'poor performance,' among a variety of other faults.

The White House also released a damaging letter from acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, which Rosenstein says he wrote at the president's request, slamming Comey's conduct in the Clinton email investigation.

Comey is said to be eager to testify to clear his name after getting fired from his post
His testimony, which could come next week, comes as the FBI and congressional panels are probing Russian election interference and contacts with Trump associates during and after the campaign.
The Intelligence panel has subpoenaed documents from Flynn and other Trump associates. 
The president blasted the probes online as a 'witch hunt,' in just his latest attack on the investigations. 
Intelligence panel said on May 19 that Comey would testify after Memorial Day.
Any statements Comey makes about conversations with the president could cut to the heart of whether or not he tried to interfere with an FBI investigation, something that can be a crime if it amounts to obstruction of justice.
A New York Times report citing notes Comey took after the incident says Trump asked him in relation to the Flynn probe: 'I hope you can let this go.'
PHOTO Stephen Miller, White House senior advisor for policy, from left, General Michael Flynn, U.S. national security advisor, and Jared Kushner, senior White House adviser, listen during a news conference with U.S. President Donald Trump
PHOTO PRES. TRUMP President Trump has blasted Russia probes as a 'witch hunt'
In an interview with NBC, Trump said the Russia investigation, which he considers unfair, was on his mind when he decided to fire Comey.
Trump tweeted on Wednesday in a pair of missives, 'So now it is reported that the Democrats, who have excoriated Carter Page about Russia, don't want him to testify. He blows away their ... case against him & now wants to clear his name by showing 'the false or misleading testimony by James Comey, John Brennan...' Witch Hunt!'
He was referring to former campaign advisor Carter Page, who has also come under scrutiny by investigators for his trip to Moscow during the campaign. Page has called out 'false narratives' of any inappropriate Russia contacts.
WATCH ANOTHER VIDEO FOLLOW ON PAGE.(Full video available. Comey speaking 
CNN reported that Comey is unlikely to want to discuss any details into possible collusion between Trump officials and the Russians – as he did during previous testimony.
But the report describes him as eager to discuss his tense exchanges with the president before his firing.
Comey a longtime member of the FBI, reportedly kept notes following a dinner and phone conversations with the president.
'The bottom line is he's going to testify,' a source told CNN in the only quotation in the story. 'He's happy to testify, and he's happy to cooperate.'
The New York Times reported that seven days after he was inaugurated, Trump asked Comey if he could pledge his 'loyalty.'
Trump has denied firing Comey over the Flynn probe. 'No, no, next question,' he said at a press conference. 
Read more: 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


Navigate this discussion: 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 ... 7091-7100 7101-7110 7111-7119
Adjust text size:

Welcome, guest! Get more out of Delphi Forums by logging in.

New to Delphi Forums? You can log in with your Facebook, Twitter, or Google account or use the New Member Login option and log in with any email address.

Home | Help | Forums | Chat | Blogs | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
© Delphi Forums LLC All rights reserved.