• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

And it Begins:Special Prosecutor To Investigate Trump And Russia

Status
Not open for further replies.
The problem there is that the left has been 'wishful thinking' on Trump being impeached for an entire year, and the media keeps struggling to find that one sliver of a crime to pin on him so that it happens.

The investigation into the Trump campaign's collusion with Russia is revealing that the Clinton camp was in bed with the Russians long before the election. So tell me... would there have been this level of scrutiny into Hillary's Russian connections had she won the Presidency?

If you believe that she would have been under the same level of suspicion, than you're completely naive.

I think if the Russians did anything during the election, they played BOTH sides. That should be the real concern.

This times 10.

The "facts", what exists of them, implicated the DNC and Clinton as much as Trump. Yet we ALL KNOW (and you do to Tibs) that had Clinton won this election, there would be no "investigation" in Russian so-called interference in our election. Or if there was it would "ha, ha, look what the big, bad Russians tried to do... ha, ha" while Clinton continued to do deals with them.

Everyone in this country knows that had Clinton won, the story of "Russia" would be nonsense and never spoken by a media outlet in this entire country.

When you get that truth through your thick skull Tibs, then maybe you'll finally figure out how wrong you are on this issue.
 
The "facts", what exists of them...

We won't know the 'facts' until Muller releases them. All we know thus far are the indictments against three Trump campaign officials. And that the investigation continues in a full, operative mode. Nothing has been determined, nobody has been cleared. Everything else, as I wrote, shows wishful thinking - and a high degree of impatience - on your part. I'll let Mueller determine the outcome of this investigation. As will the whole country, including you Trump fanboys, like it or not.
 
We won't know the 'facts' until Muller releases them. All we know thus far are the indictments against three Trump campaign officials.

Have you read the indictment? I have. It has NOTHING, AT ALL, WHATSOEVER to do with the campaign or Russia or collusion or votes or voting or any conduct after 2013. The vast majority of the alleged wrongful conduct involves payment by Ukraine to Paul Manafort's business for PR in 2008 and 2009, and Manafort's hiding that money from taxes through Caribbean banks. You know, six or seven years before Trump even thought about running for President. Read it for yourself by clicking the link here:

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/30/full-text-paul-manafort-indictment-244307

NOTHING at all, in any fashion, to do with Russia or the 2016 election - repeat, NOTHING.

How many more millions do we spend on this investigation? How many millions have already been spent? Why are we not told what we are spending on this team of 16 or 18 or 21 or whatever of the most brilliant minds ever to walk the planet, plus support staff, office space, travel, etc.?
 
Why are we not told what we are spending on this team of 16 or 18 or 21 or whatever of the most brilliant minds ever to walk the planet, plus support staff, office space, travel, etc.?
Be patient Steeltime, it will all make sense to you in due time. When it comes to special prosecution investigations, we're still in the 1st quarter. If Trump has nothing to hide, if he has nothing to fear, then why not lean back and let Mueller do his job? Why all the teeth gnashing over this? Mueller will do a fair and diligent job getting to the bottom of what happened or didn't happen. Until then....


tenor.gif
 
Be patient Mueller will do a fair and diligent job getting to the bottom of what happened or didn't happen. Until then....

Mueller can't do a fair job. He is up to his neck in conflicts of interest.
 
How many more millions do we spend on this investigation?

As much as it take to find SOMETHING, ANYTHING. As much as it takes to complete the bloodless coup
 
Be patient Steeltime, it will all make sense to you in due time. When it comes to special prosecution investigations, we're still in the 1st quarter. If Trump has nothing to hide, if he has nothing to fear, then why not lean back and let Mueller do his job? Why all the teeth gnashing over this? Mueller will do a fair and diligent job getting to the bottom of what happened or didn't happen. Until then....

I have no choice but to await the next step. But it is fair that I, as a taxpayer, be told how much this is costing, right?

And once again, as to the investigation, that began with the FBI investigation in approximately June of 2016, we still have yet to hear one word - one syllable - about any collusion between Trump, or Trump campaign officials, and the Russians as to the 2016 election. Leaks are as common to any Trump matter as water in the Great Lakes, and yet we are to believe that not one word about any evidence of collusion has leaked out because of the great secrecy of these investigators? Yeah, right.
 
Be patient Steeltime, it will all make sense to you in due time. When it comes to special prosecution investigations, we're still in the 1st quarter. If Trump has nothing to hide, if he has nothing to fear, then why not lean back and let Mueller do his job? Why all the teeth gnashing over this? Mueller will do a fair and diligent job getting to the bottom of what happened or didn't happen. Until then....


tenor.gif

My goodness, you are still holding out hope for this dog and pony show? I shouldn't be surprised that you're still hanging in there after all this time and zero to show for it, but I always am
 
But...but, but, but, Trump!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sadly, I'll be flying into Little Rock this week into Bill and Hillary Clinton Airport (yet again). The feel of corruption is on everything when I'm in town.

------------------------------------------------------

'Blowback': Clinton campaign planned to fire me over email probe, Obama intel watchdog says

A government watchdog who played a central role in the Hillary Clinton email investigation during the Obama administration told Fox News that he, his family and his staffers faced an intense backlash at the time from Clinton allies – and that the campaign even put out word that it planned to fire him if the Democratic presidential nominee won the 2016 election.

“There was personal blowback. Personal blowback to me, to my family, to my office,” former Intelligence Community Inspector General Charles McCullough III said.

The Obama appointee discussed his role in the Clinton email probe for the first time on television, during an exclusive interview with Fox News. McCullough – who came to the inspector general position with more than two decades of experience at the FBI, Treasury and intelligence community – shed light on how quickly the probe was politicized and his office was marginalized by Democrats.

In January 2016, after McCullough told the Republican leadership on the Senate intelligence and foreign affairs committees that emails beyond the “Top Secret” level passed through the former secretary of state's unsecured personal server, the backlash intensified.

1511829033988.jpg


“All of a sudden I became a shill of the right,” McCullough recalled. “And I was told by members of Congress, ‘Be careful. You're losing your credibility. You need to be careful. There are people out to get you.’”

But the former inspector general, with responsibility for the 17 intelligence agencies, said the executive who recommended him to the Obama administration for the job – then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper – was also disturbed by the independent Clinton email findings.

“[Clapper] said, ‘This is extremely reckless.’ And he mentioned something about -- the campaign … will have heartburn about that,” McCullough said.

He said Clapper's Clinton email comments came during an in-person meeting about a year before the presidential election – in late December 2015 or early 2016. “[Clapper] was as off-put as the rest of us were.”

After the Clapper meeting, McCullough said his team was marginalized. “I was told by senior officials to keep [Clapper] out of it,” he said, while acknowledging he tried to keep his boss in the loop.

As one of the few people who viewed the 22 Top Secret Clinton emails deemed too classified to release under any circumstances, the former IG said, “There was a very good reason to withhold those emails ... there would have been harm to national security.” McCullough went further, telling Fox News that “sources and methods, lives and operations” could be put at risk.

Some of those email exchanges contained Special Access Privilege (SAP) information characterized by intel experts as “above top secret.”

WikiLeaks documents show the campaign was formulating talking points as the review of 30,000 Clinton emails was ongoing.

The campaign team wrote in August 2015 that “Clinton only used her account for unclassified email. When information is reviewed for public release, it is common for information previously unclassified to be upgraded to classified.”

McCullough was critical of the campaign’s response, as the classified review had barely begun. “There was an effort … certainly on the part of the campaign to mislead people into thinking that there was nothing to see here,” McCullough said.

In March 2016, seven senior Democrats sent a letter to McCullough and his State Department counterpart, saying they had serious questions about the impartiality of the Clinton email review. However, McCullough was not making the decisions on what material in Clinton’s emails was classified -- he was passing along the findings of the individual agencies who got the intelligence and have final say on classification.

“I think there was certainly a coordinated strategy,” McCullough said.

McCullough described one confrontation with Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein's office just six weeks before the election, amid pressure to respond to the letter – which Feinstein had co-signed.

“I thought that any response to that letter would just hyper-politicize the situation,” McCullough said. “I recall even offering to resign, to the staff director. I said, ‘Tell [Feinstein] I'll resign tonight. I'd be happy to go. I'm not going to respond to that letter. It's just that simple.”

As Election Day approached, McCullough said the threats went further, singling out him and another senior government investigator on the email case.

“It was told in no uncertain terms, by a source directly from the campaign, that we would be the first two to be fired -- with [Clinton’s] administration. That that was definitely going to happen,” he said.

McCullough said he was just trying to do his job, which requires independence. "I was, in this context, a whistleblower. I was explaining to Congress -- I was doing exactly what they had expected me to do. Exactly what I promised them I would do during my confirmation hearing,” he said. “... This was a political matter, and all of a sudden I was the enemy."

He said pressures also increased early on from Clinton’s former team at the State Department, especially top official Patrick Kennedy.

"State Department management didn't want us there,” McCullough said. “We knew we had had a security problem at this point. We had a possible compromise."

Speaking about the case more than a year after the FBI probe concluded, McCullough in his interview also addressed the possibility that a more cooperative State Department and Clinton campaign might have precluded the FBI’s involvement from the start.

“Had they come in with the server willingly, without having us to refer this to the bureau … maybe we could have worked with the State Department,” he said.

More than 2,100 classified emails passed through Clinton's personal server, which was used exclusively for government business. No one has been charged.

Asked what would have happened to him if he had done such a thing, McCullough said: “I'd be sitting in Leavenworth right now.”

Fox News asked a Clinton campaign spokesman, Feinstein’s office and Clapper for comment. There was no immediate response.
 
But...but, but, but, Trump!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sadly, I'll be flying into Little Rock this week into Bill and Hillary Clinton Airport (yet again). The feel of corruption is on everything when I'm in town.

------------------------------------------------------

'Blowback': Clinton campaign planned to fire me over email probe, Obama intel watchdog says

A government watchdog who played a central role in the Hillary Clinton email investigation during the Obama administration told Fox News that he, his family and his staffers faced an intense backlash at the time from Clinton allies – and that the campaign even put out word that it planned to fire him if the Democratic presidential nominee won the 2016 election.

“There was personal blowback. Personal blowback to me, to my family, to my office,” former Intelligence Community Inspector General Charles McCullough III said.

The Obama appointee discussed his role in the Clinton email probe for the first time on television, during an exclusive interview with Fox News. McCullough – who came to the inspector general position with more than two decades of experience at the FBI, Treasury and intelligence community – shed light on how quickly the probe was politicized and his office was marginalized by Democrats.

In January 2016, after McCullough told the Republican leadership on the Senate intelligence and foreign affairs committees that emails beyond the “Top Secret” level passed through the former secretary of state's unsecured personal server, the backlash intensified.

1511829033988.jpg


“All of a sudden I became a shill of the right,” McCullough recalled. “And I was told by members of Congress, ‘Be careful. You're losing your credibility. You need to be careful. There are people out to get you.’”

But the former inspector general, with responsibility for the 17 intelligence agencies, said the executive who recommended him to the Obama administration for the job – then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper – was also disturbed by the independent Clinton email findings.

“[Clapper] said, ‘This is extremely reckless.’ And he mentioned something about -- the campaign … will have heartburn about that,” McCullough said.

He said Clapper's Clinton email comments came during an in-person meeting about a year before the presidential election – in late December 2015 or early 2016. “[Clapper] was as off-put as the rest of us were.”

After the Clapper meeting, McCullough said his team was marginalized. “I was told by senior officials to keep [Clapper] out of it,” he said, while acknowledging he tried to keep his boss in the loop.

As one of the few people who viewed the 22 Top Secret Clinton emails deemed too classified to release under any circumstances, the former IG said, “There was a very good reason to withhold those emails ... there would have been harm to national security.” McCullough went further, telling Fox News that “sources and methods, lives and operations” could be put at risk.

Some of those email exchanges contained Special Access Privilege (SAP) information characterized by intel experts as “above top secret.”

WikiLeaks documents show the campaign was formulating talking points as the review of 30,000 Clinton emails was ongoing.

The campaign team wrote in August 2015 that “Clinton only used her account for unclassified email. When information is reviewed for public release, it is common for information previously unclassified to be upgraded to classified.”

McCullough was critical of the campaign’s response, as the classified review had barely begun. “There was an effort … certainly on the part of the campaign to mislead people into thinking that there was nothing to see here,” McCullough said.

In March 2016, seven senior Democrats sent a letter to McCullough and his State Department counterpart, saying they had serious questions about the impartiality of the Clinton email review. However, McCullough was not making the decisions on what material in Clinton’s emails was classified -- he was passing along the findings of the individual agencies who got the intelligence and have final say on classification.

“I think there was certainly a coordinated strategy,” McCullough said.

McCullough described one confrontation with Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein's office just six weeks before the election, amid pressure to respond to the letter – which Feinstein had co-signed.

“I thought that any response to that letter would just hyper-politicize the situation,” McCullough said. “I recall even offering to resign, to the staff director. I said, ‘Tell [Feinstein] I'll resign tonight. I'd be happy to go. I'm not going to respond to that letter. It's just that simple.”

As Election Day approached, McCullough said the threats went further, singling out him and another senior government investigator on the email case.

“It was told in no uncertain terms, by a source directly from the campaign, that we would be the first two to be fired -- with [Clinton’s] administration. That that was definitely going to happen,” he said.

McCullough said he was just trying to do his job, which requires independence. "I was, in this context, a whistleblower. I was explaining to Congress -- I was doing exactly what they had expected me to do. Exactly what I promised them I would do during my confirmation hearing,” he said. “... This was a political matter, and all of a sudden I was the enemy."

He said pressures also increased early on from Clinton’s former team at the State Department, especially top official Patrick Kennedy.

"State Department management didn't want us there,” McCullough said. “We knew we had had a security problem at this point. We had a possible compromise."

Speaking about the case more than a year after the FBI probe concluded, McCullough in his interview also addressed the possibility that a more cooperative State Department and Clinton campaign might have precluded the FBI’s involvement from the start.

“Had they come in with the server willingly, without having us to refer this to the bureau … maybe we could have worked with the State Department,” he said.

More than 2,100 classified emails passed through Clinton's personal server, which was used exclusively for government business. No one has been charged.

Asked what would have happened to him if he had done such a thing, McCullough said: “I'd be sitting in Leavenworth right now.”

Fox News asked a Clinton campaign spokesman, Feinstein’s office and Clapper for comment. There was no immediate response.

You can't be surprised. Our government is corrupt from top to bottom. They have become drunk on their power and the good life full of tax payer funded perks that they lead. I can't imagine why anyone would question why another person is skeptical of anything our government says. I am glad this stuff is starting to come out. Not that it will change anything.
 
McCain To Hillary Clinton: ‘You’ve Got To Move On’

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., says he understands why Hillary Clinton decided to write her campaign memoir, “What Happened,” which was published in September — 10 months after her brutal election loss to Donald Trump.

“One of the almost irresistible impulses you have when you lose is to somehow justify why you lost and how you were mistreated: ’I did the right thing! I did!’” McCain told Esquire magazine for a lengthy profile published online Sunday. “The hardest thing to do is to just shut up.”

In “What Happened,” Clinton claims that the “attacks” Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., leveled at her during their Democratic primary battle “caused lasting damage,” made it harder to “unify progressives” and paved the way for Trump’s “Crooked Hillary” refrain.

“What’s the ******* point? Keep the fight up?” McCain said of Clinton’s tome. “History will judge that campaign, and it’s always a period of time before they do. You’ve got to move on. This is Hillary’s problem right now: She doesn’t have anything to do.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...tm_medium=facebook&ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000013

------------------------

hahahahahahahahaha

58f8e6c425438.image.jpg
 
Matt Lauer banging some chick in Russia during the Sochi games..well there ya go.....the REAL Russia scandal!

hahahahahah
 
And even More evidence that Ye Olde Pantsuit colluded with Russia! And committed treason.

The Clinton Foundation “vastly understated support that the Clinton Global Initiative received from APCO Worldwide, a global communications firm that lobbied on behalf of Russia’s state-owned nuclear company,” John Solomon and Alison Spann report in the Hill.

Lock her up!
 
If the Flynn testimony doesn't have direct ties from someone else in the campaign leadership to illegal Russian contacts that affected the election directly then it's probably time to move on....

I still see no issue with the Dems dirty laundry being exposed, but then again I think Snowden deserves a medal of honor, not banished for treason... when organizations and governments get exposed for illegal and immoral actions.. you applaud whomever exposes them regardless of agenda...
 
Jill Stein: I haven't read anything to indicate Russians interfered with 2016 elections

When I told her that she got a mention in 'What Happened'—along with Bernie Sanders, Vladimir Putin, and James Comey—she smiled and said, “I'm honored to be among the list of heavy hitters. Wow, bring it on.”

Despite receiving a mere 1,457,050 votes nationwide last year, she became the perfect patsy (alongside many other targets) for devastated Hillary Clinton supporters to project their post-election grief onto.

If Democrats hate her, it’s because “they’re threatened by voices of integrity that go much farther than they're willing to go in their kind of window dressing solutions.” If people misunderstand her intentions, that’s thanks to “the sponsors, the powerful special interests [that] are controlling the politicians, and unfortunately the corporate media.”

The question for her and like-minded leftist do-gooders who want to avoid the quagmire Democratic Party politics can sometimes be is whether good intentions can do much of anything.

Green Party candidate Jill Stein, on Russia interference:

When I asked her about the various reports that indicate there was Russian interference in the 2016 election, she told me she hadn’t read anything to indicate “it was Russians”

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/8x5pw3/jill-stein-profile

------------------------

I really really hope she runs again, snowflakes need her 3rd party option!

Vote your conscience!


hahahahahahaha
 
Last edited:
Aaaaaaa-ny minute now, LMAO!

Democrats have gone silent on the Trump dossier in recent weeks, as Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee have begun to find out more information about it.
FBI and Justice Department officials recently told House Intelligence Committee investigators that they could not verify any of the document’s assertions about collusion, according to a report, and not one Democrat has made a peep in response — in stark contrast with the past.
 
Still surprised it is taking so very long to find out all these facts that have been so very obvious to the liberal media.
 

Lying about several thousand dollars he received from a Russian PR firm called RT. Lying to the FBI about speaking to a Russian ambassador about sanctions in December, 2016, one month before Trump took office.

The article then veers into the bizarre by talking about some "offer" somebody in Turkey made for Flynn and his son to forcibly return a Turkish cleric to Turkey, and then states that involvement in such a plot would violate blah, blah.

Uhhh, there is no allegation he was involved in such a plot. And as seems to be the situation in basically every one of these independent counsel investigation, the most serious charge is a process crime - i.e., lying during the investigation itself.
 
And as seems to be the situation in basically every one of these independent counsel investigation, the most serious charge is a process crime - i.e., lying during the investigation itself.

Clearly you are incorrect.

These muthafuckas MUST go down.
 
It's so funny how the liberal media totally loses their **** over every little thing about this farce of an investigation, but they completely ignore what Hillary and Obama did with Russia. I don't how anyone can take the MSM seriously. They're all basically the Weekly World News and Baghdad Bob.
 
And as seems to be the situation in basically every one of these independent counsel investigation, the most serious charge is a process crime - i.e., lying during the investigation itself.

And that will be the biggest risk for Trump, Kushner etc. especially now that they've apparently flipped Flynn. That and possibly obstruction for pressuring Comey to drop the Flynn thing and then firing him when he didn't. That was an asinine move on Trump's part that could come back to bite him.

Still not a shred of evidence of anyone colluding with Russia on the election
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top