Mueller draft report says trump 'helped putin destabilize the united states', watergate journalist s

[tres borrachos]

His immediate supervisor recused himself but we're not talking about an AG ... we're talking about lower level FBI and DOJ staff knowing what's in Mueller's report and then telling Congress.
Absurd.

And this "lower level FBI and DOJ staff" is who, exactly? Names, please.

 

[bubbabgone]

If I had wanted to claim that, I would have actually claimed that.

But I can see how the guy who thought I claimed Muellers team leaked after reading my post saying it was a member of Congress would think I claimed that.

So what are you claiming?

 

[sangha]

Baker is lower level than AG or acting AG.

Still waiting for the reference to the draft Mueller Report in that testimony transcript.
Are you working on that?

No. Your straw man was not enticing enough

 

[sangha]

So what are you claiming?

I am claiming exactly what I claimed. No more or no less.

I understand that presents a problem for those who have problems understanding plain and clear declarative statements

 

[justabubba]

His immediate supervisor recused himself but we're not talking about an AG

when did the acting attorney general recuse himself from the Mueller investigation?

... we're talking about lower level FBI and DOJ staff knowing what's in Mueller's report and then telling Congress.
Absurd.

what prevents the acting AG from discussing what he learned from Rosenstein with the president or members of congress?

 

[bubbabgone]

No. Your straw man was not enticing enough

I understand ... believe me ... I understood when you first started down your rabbit hole and saw you were terribly misinformed.

 

[bubbabgone]

when did the acting attorney general recuse himself from the Mueller investigation?


what prevents the acting AG from discussing what he learned from Rosenstein with the president or members of congress?

Huh? Sessions recused himself.

Because the S.C. investigation is supposed to be conducted independently and the AG provides oversight.
No reports to Congress, no reports to the President, no reports to Carl Bernstein.
I'm afraid you an Congress will have to wait to find out what's in his report, if then.

 

[bubbabgone]

I am claiming exactly what I claimed. No more or no less.

I understand that presents a problem for those who have problems understanding plain and clear declarative statements

So what are those clear declarative statements?

 

[justabubba]

Huh? Sessions recused himself.

maybe you did not realize that sessions is NOT the acting AG
which then tells us that the current acting AG is not recused ... unless you can show us that he is

thus, as far as i can tell, there is NOTHING which prohibits Rosenstein from sharing with the acting AG information about the Mueller investigation
likewise, i am unaware of any prohibition preventing the acting AG from then sharing that same information with the president and/or members of congress
if you find information showing my position to be in error, please post it

Because the S.C. investigation is supposed to be conducted independently and the AG provides oversight.
No reports to Congress, no reports to the President, no reports to Carl Bernstein.
I'm afraid you an Congress will have to wait to find out what's in his report, if then.

then show us the law which disallows the acting Attorney General from sharing what he knows about the Mueller investigation with the president and/or members of congress

i look forward to reading about such a prohibition

 

[sangha]

So what are those clear declarative statements?

1) Mueller and members of his team have discussed their investigation with high level members of the FBI, as the law both allows him to do --in some instances-- and REQUIRES him to do --in other circumstances

2) The FBI members that Mueller and his team have spoken to have been called to testify to the intelligence committees in Congress about the status of the SC investigation

3) At least one transcript of that testimony has been leaked by a member of Congress or one of their aides to CNN. Some of those FBI employees have leaked to Bernstein and possibly others.

If your record in this thread is any indication, and I believe it is, you will continue to not understand what I have said

 

[Slyfox696]

The IG said he didn't find documented evidence.

So, absent partisan attacks and speculation, there is nothing.

Regardless, S & P were kicked off Mueller's team. Why.

Avoid the appearance of impropriety. It is what should have happened, which, unfortunately, so many people in the Trump administration don't seem to appreciate.

Comey lied to Congress about leaking.

Uh, what?

Source?

Baker was reassigned by Wray "The FBI's top lawyer, James Baker, is being reassigned — one of the first moves by new director Christopher A. Wray to assemble his own team of senior advisers as he tries to fend off accusations of politicization within the bureau."https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbis-top-lawyer-said-to-be-reassigned/2017/12/21/2ac76640-e6b5-11e7-833f-155031558ff4_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.4124ec1b8f8b

So...no evidence of any wrongdoing at all?

Bruce Ohr was the go-between with Fusion where his wife worked, and with Steele, and the FBI ... even after Steele was fired as a source by the FBI.

So, again...no evidence of any wrong doing at all?

Really.

No, not really. Aside from partisan attacks ALL you have is speculation. You have provided ZERO facts to support your position, with the exception of the agreed upon example of McCabe.

So, as I said to vesper, it's nothing but a bunch of useless nonsense.

 

[bubbabgone]

1) Mueller and members of his team have discussed their investigation with high level members of the FBI, as the law both allows him to do --in some instances-- and REQUIRES him to do --in other circumstances

2) The FBI members that Mueller and his team have spoken to have been called to testify to the intelligence committees in Congress about the status of the SC investigation

3) At least one transcript of that testimony has been leaked by a member of Congress or one of their aides to CNN. Some of those FBI employees have leaked to Bernstein and possibly others.

If your record in this thread is any indication, and I believe it is, you will continue to not understand what I have said

Show me where the Mueller team has disclosed to anyone what's in the S.C. report.

 

[bubbabgone]

So, absent partisan attacks and speculation, there is nothing.

Avoid the appearance of impropriety. It is what should have happened, which, unfortunately, so many people in the Trump administration don't seem to appreciate.

Uh, what?

Source?

So...no evidence of any wrongdoing at all?

So, again...no evidence of any wrong doing at all?

No, not really. Aside from partisan attacks ALL you have is speculation. You have provided ZERO facts to support your position, with the exception of the agreed upon example of McCabe.

So, as I said to vesper, it's nothing but a bunch of useless nonsense.

You're too much. Getting removed from a team of investigators, getting reassigned, and getting demoted indicates nothing to you.

Comey testified under oath to Congress that he leaked to his friend at Columbia who then repeated it to the media and who now claims to be Comey's attorney. How clever is that?
And yes, I'm aware that the wagons have circled Comey to absolve him of violating privilege but given the following that doesn't help ...

“My staff has since reviewed these memoranda in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) at the FBI, and I reviewed them in a SCIF at the Office of Senate Security,” Grassley wrote. “The FBI insisted that these reviews take place in a SCIF because the majority of the memos are classified. Of the seven memos, four are marked classified at the ‘SECRET’ or ‘CONFIDENTIAL’ levels.”

“If it’s true that Professor Richman had four of the seven memos, then in light of the fact that four of the seven memos the Committee reviewed are classified, it would appear that at least one memo the former FBI director gave Professor Richman contained classified information,” Grassley noted in the letter.​

 

[joko104]

Back in 2008 I disavowed Ron Paul's libertarian movement as nothing but an anti-American Russian front. In 2012 when the other third parties like the Green Party rose to prominence, I also dismissed that one for having Russian ties. Now it seems Russians have infiltrated a number of high ranking Republican congresspeople. Destabilizing the US is not a political talking point in this report and anybody who says otherwise is choosing to ignore the gravity of the situation.

Who knows, you may some day get the nuclear war holocaust you so want.

Nothing in the task of Mueller's team of Democrat hacks calls for analysis of President Trump's foreign policy.

 

[sangha]

Show me where the Mueller team has disclosed to anyone what's in the S.C. report.

So you agree that the SCO has not leaked!!! :lamo

 

[bubbabgone]

So you agree that the SCO has not leaked!!! :lamo

Yes. They very likely haven't leaked anything about a S.C. Report.
That means anything you imagine you've read about the contents of a Mueller draft Report was BS since such information could only have come from the Mueller team and they ain't talking.
You said otherwise and then spent a couple of days trying to recover from your mistaken notion that the Special Counsel Office operation testified to Congress about the report who then leaked the Report.
Hard to believe you're that misinformed but it sure looks like it.

 

[jmotivator]

https://www.newsweek.com/mueller-re...abilize-us-watergate-journalist-1289541?amp=1 Nothing really to add, I’m just gonna grab some popcorn and watch the 3 ring circus.

LOL. Sooooo... if that is what the Mueller probe will actually conclude then the ACTUAL destabilizers would be those who willfully paid for and distributed the Steele Dossier as well as those who spent the last 2 years reporting that Trump was guilty of deliberate conspiracy without any evidence of that actually being the case.

In other words, the prisons will soon be full of "unnamed sources".

Funny how that works.

 

[Slyfox696]

You're too much. Getting removed from a team of investigators, getting reassigned, and getting demoted indicates nothing to you.

Not when you don't have evidence of actual wrongdoing. :shrug:

If you allege wrongdoing, then you have to support it with facts. You have not done so.

Comey testified under oath to Congress that he leaked to his friend at Columbia who then repeated it to the media and who now claims to be Comey's attorney. How clever is that?
And yes, I'm aware that the wagons have circled Comey to absolve him of violating privilege but given the following that doesn't help ...

“My staff has since reviewed these memoranda in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) at the FBI, and I reviewed them in a SCIF at the Office of Senate Security,” Grassley wrote. “The FBI insisted that these reviews take place in a SCIF because the majority of the memos are classified. Of the seven memos, four are marked classified at the ‘SECRET’ or ‘CONFIDENTIAL’ levels.”

“If it’s true that Professor Richman had four of the seven memos, then in light of the fact that four of the seven memos the Committee reviewed are classified, it would appear that at least one memo the former FBI director gave Professor Richman contained classified information,” Grassley noted in the letter.​

Response:

Let’s summarize. Comey is alleged to have shared four memos with Richman:

1. An unclassified memo that he gave Richman in May with instructions to share it with the Times. This was the only identified deliberate leak to the media.
2. Another unclassified memo dated either March 1 or March 30 that, like the three other memos, he shared at an unknown time.
3. A redacted memo that, if unredacted, would have been classified.
4. A memo that is now classified but that apparently was not classified at the time Comey shared it. (“Apparently” because it’s not clear when he shared it or when it was reclassified.) Update: And the recipient of that document was apparently cleared to receive classified material.

The Journal reports that the Justice Department is reviewing the situation. It seems unlikely, based on what we know now, that the department’s inspector general will side with Trump’s portrayal of what happened.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-of-whats-classified/?utm_term=.d08fad24298f

Additionally, this happened AFTER Trump fired Comey, so it still would have no bearing on our discussion.

So, again...not really.

 

[bubbabgone]

Not when you don't have evidence of actual wrongdoing. :shrug:

If you allege wrongdoing, then you have to support it with facts. You have not done so.


Response:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-of-whats-classified/?utm_term=.d08fad24298f

Additionally, this happened AFTER Trump fired Comey, so it still would have no bearing on our discussion.

So, again...not really.

People are removed from a team of investigators, get reassigned, and get demoted... that's my fact ... only because someone else is partisan ... that's your partisan fantasy.

And I already said the wagons were circled around Comey.
I'm curious, why would it matter if Comey leaked after Trump fired him? Is that in the Law? You can carry out classified material when you get fired and you're free to do what you want with it?
And are you suggesting Rosenstein's letter to fire Comey for cause doesn't count because it focused on his misdeeds regarding the Clinton investigation?

 

[Amelia]

Here's what gets me on this; let's say that Trump really is working with Putin to bring down America. What would he get out of it? Is he going to get a bigger house than he already has? Is he going to get a hotter wife? Is he going to get more political power? I mean, seriously, what does Putin possibly have to offer him that he doesn't already have? I'm quite sure he's not doing this for a Trump Hotel Moscow.

He's not doing it to bring down America.

He's doing it because he's poor misunderstood little old Trump and Putin flatters him.

It's all about his reptilian ego. No intention of doing harm. Just gravitating to the people shamelessly flatter him in spite of there being nothing about him worthy of flattering. Putin and the world's other dictators can afford to do that where responsible leaders of democratic nations can't do it. And Trump needs it desperately and can be duped into doing some really stupid stuff for as long as the person keeps whispering sweet nothings in his ear.

 

[Pedestrian]

Whatever. At least he's not Hillary.

/Trump supporter mode

.....who trump makes look like Mary Poppins.

 

[Pedestrian]

If Mueller's report is his Democratic team making political analysis rather than whether or not there is evidence of a crime, then it is per se fact that the Mueller investigation was corrupt and is only a partisan hate campaign against Trump at taxpayer expense on behalf of the Democratic Party.

Well now we know what you...want to believe.

 

[Pedestrian]

So far this is just hearsay from Bernstein. Looking forward to the report coming out and if it actually says that (or worse). Bear in mind though that if the report concludes that Trump helped Putin destabilize the country that is effectively putting the T-word on the table. What Congress and or the DOJ do with that will affect whether we hear official charges of Treason in any legal or impeachment proceedings.

But for those who continue to maintain Trump's innocence and the witch-hunt narrative, it is fair to point out that rather than drying up and evaporating as time goes by, this investigation as turned over one rock after another, each getting progressively worse for Individual-1. It's almost impossible to pretend with a straight face there's nothing to see here folks.

However, this repub senate wouldn't vote out Dillinger or Capone, so.....?

 

[Pedestrian]

It is not about me, it is about Carl Bernstein and his crap quality journalism and about how emotionally involved in the story he clearly is.

Your "Power is lying to me" alarms should be ringing.

Just more partisan bull****. Go after the politics, morals, sexlife and everything...about the messenger.

Can't go after his ethnicity, damn, he's white. Oh well, the right always thinks of something upon which to

denigrate and demonize their opposition. Hell surely, hath no fury like a republican scorned.

 

[eohrnberger]

So many 'news' (propaganda) stories based on unnamed sources (or wishful thinking), I'll wait for the report to come out, thanks.

It's unsubstantiated articles like this that have caused the 'news' media's credibility to suffer, self-inflicted no less.