• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mueller fail--DOJ drops Concord Management case

dixon01767 said:
Even worse in that it was US political theatre with a script written by Russia.
Click to expand...

Have it your way sir. :lol:

Russia was chuckling at the nonsense being fed the American public.
 
danielpalos said:
The Senate was worse. They fixed the Standard of ethics and morals in public office by their vote.
Click to expand...

During the Bush administration both houses of Congress set the standard for ethics and morals in Washington DC when they passed the Unpatriot Act. Renewals of that offensive act by subsequent governments have confirmed the putrid aroma in Washington DC.

Those who kid themselves into believing that the government offers ANY ethical or moral leadership on any matter at all are hopelessly deluded.
 
Thoreau72 said:
During the Bush administration both houses of Congress set the standard for ethics and morals in Washington DC when they passed the Unpatriot Act. Renewals of that offensive act by subsequent governments have confirmed the putrid aroma in Washington DC.

Those who kid themselves into believing that the government offers ANY ethical or moral leadership on any matter at all are hopelessly deluded.
Click to expand...

No need to take right wingers seriously. We know they have no better ethics or morals.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Have it your way sir. :lol:

Russia was chuckling at the nonsense being fed the American public.
Click to expand...

Im sure they were. Especially when the Obama administration took what they were being fed and turned it into a federal investigation
 
Paradoxical said:
The attorneys called the bluff by the former criminals at the DOJ. They knew that it would be exposed that these people did NOT post any thing on social media and that Weissmann indicted them as a cover to create the narrative knowing that Russians would never come to the United States to testify. The bluff was called. The former criminal DOJ lost bigly.
Click to expand...

This simply is not true.

And you’re parroting Russian propoganda by taking a Russian propoganda source at face value and repeating it uncritically.

Had you any real familiarity with the Mueller Report or the facts and events in question, the obvious intent to mislead would have been clear to you.

Instead, you promote the false narrative.

It was never in doubt that the DoJ would have had trouble prosecuting Concord Management, for the same reason that the GOP used to acquit Trump. They can hide the evidence, and the President’s political allies will let them get away with it.

Which is what is happening here.

Notice that the Russian propoganda does not question a single fact in the indictment, nor does it offer any evidence to the contrary.

I suspect that it was fed to you by the FSB, via your FB, Twitter or Instagram accounts, probably by someone who shares your politics.

That person could be real, or a Russian troll.

Judging by the way you rushed here to spread the Russian generated message, you don’t really care of you’re being had by Russian propoganda, as long as it is what you were already disposed to believe.
 
TomFitz said:
Peddling Russian propoganda again?
Click to expand...

No Tom, just speaking the truth in a time of universal deception.

Our government has quite a few skeletons in its closet. Perhaps someday you will realize that.
 
danielpalos said:
No need to take right wingers seriously. We know they have no better ethics or morals.
Click to expand...

Especially, since the very far right wingers who are yelling about how evil the Patriot Act is, are the very ones who shouted down anyone who dared raise civil liberties concerns about the bill when it was new.

It’s also the same crowd that cheered and stomped when the Bush administration made a pubic show of imprisoning an “alleged terrorist” named Padilla over an imaginary “dirty bomb”, and kept him in secret prison for several years, much to the cheers of the Limbaughloonies.
 
TomFitz said:
Especially, since the very far right wingers who are yelling about how evil the Patriot Act is, are the very ones who shouted down anyone who dared raise civil liberties concerns about the bill when it was new.

It’s also the same crowd that cheered and stomped when the Bush administration made a pubic show of imprisoning an “alleged terrorist” named Padilla over an imaginary “dirty bomb”, and kept him in secret prison for several years, much to the cheers of the Limbaughloonies.
Click to expand...

Just right wingers getting "caught in their own right wing devices" and complaining about it, like usual.
 
TomFitz said:
This simply is not true.

And you’re parroting Russian propoganda by taking a Russian propoganda source at face value and repeating it uncritically.

Had you any real familiarity with the Mueller Report or the facts and events in question, the obvious intent to mislead would have been clear to you.

Instead, you promote the false narrative.

It was never in doubt that the DoJ would have had trouble prosecuting Concord Management, for the same reason that the GOP used to acquit Trump. They can hide the evidence, and the President’s political allies will let them get away with it.

Which is what is happening here.

Notice that the Russian propoganda does not question a single fact in the indictment, nor does it offer any evidence to the contrary.

I suspect that it was fed to you by the FSB, via your FB, Twitter or Instagram accounts, probably by someone who shares your politics.

That person could be real, or a Russian troll.

Judging by the way you rushed here to spread the Russian generated message, you don’t really care of you’re being had by Russian propoganda, as long as it is what you were already disposed to believe.
Click to expand...

The Russians, Concord Management, very much DID question the charges, by way of hiring an attorney in Washington. Playing by the rules (for those into rules) they plead not guilty and demanded to see the evidence against them by way of the perfectly lawful and mandatory Discovery Process.

Your heroes in the DOJ then folded their cards. They had nothing.

Sure gullible americans will buy the line "Our methods were so secret that revealing the case would expose or threaten national security", rather like they did in the case of U.S. v. Reynolds way back in 1953. That case is 345US1. The government lies, cheats and steals, as Mike Pompeo brags about, and the DOJ also bluffs.

You've lost the case Tom. Wake up and smell the napalm--the US Constitution is burning.
 
TomFitz said:
This simply is not true.

And you’re parroting Russian propoganda by taking a Russian propoganda source at face value and repeating it uncritically.

Had you any real familiarity with the Mueller Report or the facts and events in question, the obvious intent to mislead would have been clear to you.

Instead, you promote the false narrative.

It was never in doubt that the DoJ would have had trouble prosecuting Concord Management, for the same reason that the GOP used to acquit Trump. They can hide the evidence, and the President’s political allies will let them get away with it.

Which is what is happening here.

Notice that the Russian propoganda does not question a single fact in the indictment, nor does it offer any evidence to the contrary.

I suspect that it was fed to you by the FSB, via your FB, Twitter or Instagram accounts, probably by someone who shares your politics.

That person could be real, or a Russian troll.

Judging by the way you rushed here to spread the Russian generated message, you don’t really care of you’re being had by Russian propoganda, as long as it is what you were already disposed to believe.
Click to expand...

I knew this all along. The reason Weissmann did this was to make it appear that Russia tried to influence the election by indicting people named Boris or Natasha. It was easy peasy to see this. They duped the public into thinking they really had something on Russia. They didn't count on their bluff being called, and it was immediately ad vehemently.

This is the MO of Weissmann who ruined an investment firm and cost thousands of jobs and was rebuked by the the Supreme Court.
 
Thoreau72 said:
No Tom, just speaking the truth in a time of universal deception.

Our government has quite a few skeletons in its closet. Perhaps someday you will realize that.
Click to expand...


No, you’re peddling Russian propoganda right from Vladimir’s mouth.

the claims in this propoganda piece are obviously intended to mislead, and hit their intended target, as your parroting, and doubling down make abundantly clear.

The Russian claim that the DoJ couldn’t face discovery is especially dishonest.

The Russian’s legal team consistantly tried to use discovery as a legal weapon to obtain information that the FSB has been trying to get their hands on for years. Many of their motions had nothing to do with the case. They were just throwing paper at the wall, expecting to lose in court, and planning to use their defeats for propoganda purposes/

That worked, as your posts make clear.

It should also be noted that the matter has not been vacated. Only the Concord Management piece.

BTW, you also parrot the Russian’s false attempt to portray this action as a victory for justice against overreach. In fact, it is the Trump team abandoning the effort, not some legal victory by the Russian’s legal team.

This follows on the heels of a four year long effort by the Trump Administration and its political allies to block any legislation or any real investigation into the role of the Russian intelligence services and government in influencing the last election, and certainly blocking any attempt to do anything about it.

Meanwhile your fool’s gold fuhrer moves on and engages in a political blackmail scheme against a head of state. (Don’t insult anyone’s intelligence by denying that one. Trump confessed on live television, just as he has shrugged off his Russian collusion).

Playing the useful idiot is a fool’s errand.
 
TomFitz said:
No, you’re peddling Russian propoganda right from Vladimir’s mouth.

the claims in this propoganda piece are obviously intended to mislead, and hit their intended target, as your parroting, and doubling down make abundantly clear.

The Russian claim that the DoJ couldn’t face discovery is especially dishonest.

The Russian’s legal team consistantly tried to use discovery as a legal weapon to obtain information that the FSB has been trying to get their hands on for years. Many of their motions had nothing to do with the case. They were just throwing paper at the wall, expecting to lose in court, and planning to use their defeats for propoganda purposes/

That worked, as your posts make clear.

It should also be noted that the matter has not been vacated. Only the Concord Management piece.

BTW, you also parrot the Russian’s false attempt to portray this action as a victory for justice against overreach. In fact, it is the Trump team abandoning the effort, not some legal victory by the Russian’s legal team.

This follows on the heels of a four year long effort by the Trump Administration and its political allies to block any legislation or any real investigation into the role of the Russian intelligence services and government in influencing the last election, and certainly blocking any attempt to do anything about it.

Meanwhile your fool’s gold fuhrer moves on and engages in a political blackmail scheme against a head of state. (Don’t insult anyone’s intelligence by denying that one. Trump confessed on live television, just as he has shrugged off his Russian collusion).

Playing the useful idiot is a fool’s errand.
Click to expand...

Hook, line and sinker. You go boy!
 
Thoreau72 said:
The Russians, Concord Management, very much DID question the charges, by way of hiring an attorney in Washington. Playing by the rules (for those into rules) they plead not guilty and demanded to see the evidence against them by way of the perfectly lawful and mandatory Discovery Process.

Your heroes in the DOJ then folded their cards. They had nothing.

Sure gullible americans will buy the line "Our methods were so secret that revealing the case would expose or threaten national security", rather like they did in the case of U.S. v. Reynolds way back in 1953. That case is 345US1. The government lies, cheats and steals, as Mike Pompeo brags about, and the DOJ also bluffs.

You've lost the case Tom. Wake up and smell the napalm--the US Constitution is burning.
Click to expand...



The Russians used their US attorneys to file a long series of discovery motions for all sorts of information that were all Russian intelligence objectives.

They knew that Concord was probably not going to be prosecuted. The objective was to get as much of the documentation of what the US knew about the Russian influence campaign into the record.

Again, the RT story does not offer any exculpatory evidence, nor does it even attempt to refute the facts.

It’s a cover piece intended to falsely portray the DoJ’s action as some sort of retreat from overreach, rather than as the self serving actions of the Attorney General, who has made no secret of being actually interested in protecting the America public or the US constitution.

It is also designed to misrepresent the Russian discovery efforts as anything other than the nuisance actions that they were intended to be.

The facts remain. So does the FSB indictment. Although I expect Barr to submarine those efforts too.

Indeed, when you have good enough intelligence to identify the officers involved in running the Russians social media influence campaign, you’re pretty well documented.

Whether that makes a legal case in court, is not particularly relevant.



Trumpsters are taking the word of the propoganda organs of a authoritarian dictator, defending his own actions and the successful campaign of his secret police.

Which has served the Russian objectives very nicely.

Useful idiots.

Thanks for making my point.

Parroting Russian propoganda will not preserve the US Constitution. Particularly not from a wannabe baron and his enabler. (who, even now, is trying to award his prince a whole new set of extra Constitutional powers).

When Putin does you thinking, you’re not defending either freedom or the Constitution.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Hook, line and sinker. You go boy!
Click to expand...


Yes, you’re parroting Putin’s line. Hook like and sinker.

If you want to argue it., try and do so using a reliable information source. Breitbart, Info Wars and Russia Today won’t cut it.
 
TomFitz said:
The Russians used their US attorneys to file a long series of discovery motions for all sorts of information that were all Russian intelligence objectives.
Click to expand...

Probably.

They knew that Concord was probably not going to be prosecuted. The objective was to get as much of the documentation of what the US knew about the Russian influence campaign into the record.
Click to expand...

Ok.



It’s a cover piece intended to falsely portray the DoJ’s action as some sort of retreat from overreach, rather than as the self serving actions of the Attorney General, who has made no secret of being actually interested in protecting the America public or the US constitution.

It is also designed to misrepresent the Russian discovery efforts as anything other than the nuisance actions that they were intended to be.
Click to expand...

Well, in a prosecution the defense is entitled to all the evidence that the prosecutor possesses. Its bedrock American jurisprudence.
If indeed its true that the effort for discovery was part of a Russian intelligence effort, then Mr. Barr did the correct thing by dropping the case. Thus, Russia doesn't have access to it.
Why is that an issue?



Trumpsters are taking the word of the propoganda organs of a authoritarian dictator, defending his own actions and the successful campaign of his secret police.

Which has served the Russian objectives very nicely.
Click to expand...

Ok-- so prosecuting and not prosecuting serves Russia's interests.
So what do you want to do?
Click to expand...
 
TomFitz said:
The Russians used their US attorneys to file a long series of discovery motions for all sorts of information that were all Russian intelligence objectives.

They knew that Concord was probably not going to be prosecuted. The objective was to get as much of the documentation of what the US knew about the Russian influence campaign into the record.

Again, the RT story does not offer any exculpatory evidence, nor does it even attempt to refute the facts.

It’s a cover piece intended to falsely portray the DoJ’s action as some sort of retreat from overreach, rather than as the self serving actions of the Attorney General, who has made no secret of being actually interested in protecting the America public or the US constitution.

It is also designed to misrepresent the Russian discovery efforts as anything other than the nuisance actions that they were intended to be.

The facts remain. So does the FSB indictment. Although I expect Barr to submarine those efforts too.

Indeed, when you have good enough intelligence to identify the officers involved in running the Russians social media influence campaign, you’re pretty well documented.

Whether that makes a legal case in court, is not particularly relevant.



Trumpsters are taking the word of the propoganda organs of a authoritarian dictator, defending his own actions and the successful campaign of his secret police.

Which has served the Russian objectives very nicely.

Useful idiots.

Thanks for making my point.

Parroting Russian propoganda will not preserve the US Constitution. Particularly not from a wannabe baron and his enabler. (who, even now, is trying to award his prince a whole new set of extra Constitutional powers).

When Putin does you thinking, you’re not defending either freedom or the Constitution.
Click to expand...

It's a pity there are no facts or evidence to support your DNC fantasies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom