U.S President: Donald Trump

The thoughts are that it’s to try and make Manafort ‘flip’.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

Yawn, what Russian connection?
Proof please, bear in mind, not even Senate Intelligence Committee have seen any to date.

Happy to oblige, I'm sure people will be named in due course.

Originally Posted by Damien

First charges filed in Mueller investigation:

http://myfox8.com/2017/10/27/first-c...investigation/

Charges are sealed for now as are the names of those charged

and http://news.sky.com/story/jury-appro...ction-11101685

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Happy to oblige, I'm sure people will be named in due course.



and http://news.sky.com/story/jury-appro...ction-11101685

Thanks for quoting my post, that I still stand by, so not sure what you are actually obliging.

The only Russian Collusion I see is the Uranium One scandal that the Clintons and Obama Administration was reportedly said to be involved in and then to top it off, the dirty tricks continued leading up to the US Election, with the fake dossier that the Clintons and DNC paid for to try and undermine Trump.

---------- Post added at 12:00 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

The thoughts are that it’s to try and make Manafort ‘flip’.

It’s a tactical strategy they use, but I’ve read some ‘bent’ things Mueller is said to have used in the past, reports of inventing crimes on suspects to get them to talk.

By the way, I have been led to believe, his team have not revealed any of this charges information, and have not confirmed the story, so who ever has leaked it, has committed a federal crime.

Originally Posted by Mick

It’s a tactical strategy they use, but I’ve read some ‘bent’ things Mueller is said to have used in the past, reports of inventing crimes on suspects to get them to talk.

Trump and his supporters will try to discredit Mueller as much as they can but it was his own Attorney General who appointed him, with the support of congress, after Trump fired the FBI director. I am sure there will be 'reports' about anyone whose investigating Trump even if they got rid of Mueller.

By the way, I have been led to believe, his team have not revealed any of this charges information, and have not confirmed the story, so who ever has leaked it, has committed a federal crime.

The charges are sealed as part of the process. I am not a legal expert as to why they do this, I think it's because the investigation is constantly monitored by a grand jury who give permission for actions to be taken. So they see the evidence and charges etc to provide oversight.

I have no idea of if it's illegal or not to leak that sealed charges have been issued, I would thought that's the purpose of them being sealed.

Originally Posted by Damien

Trump and his supporters will try to discredit Mueller as much as they can but it was his own Attorney General who appointed him, with the support of congress, after Trump fired the FBI director. I am sure there will be 'reports' about anyone whose investigating Trump even if they got rid of Mueller.

It was the Deputy Attorney General who appointed him, Jeff Sessions has recused himself, so is unable to be involved to do any appointing in the case. It’s not just Trump supporters questions Muellers involvement, he is conflicted in so many ways according to a few legal commentators. Not to mention as already stated, the grand jury has got folk who have donated to the Clintons.

I’m sure whoever is appointed will also have legal commentators saying they’re but suitable. It’s weird how everyone whose investigating Trump’s campaign is biased. FBI Director, his replacement, the special prosecutor and even the grand jury. Trump is either really unlucky or lucky that from the press to lawyers and prosecutors they’re all compromised in some way.

---------- Post added at 13:36 ---------- Previous post was at 13:32 ----------

I also don’t know if the members of the grand jury donated to Clinton because they’re kept secret.

Originally Posted by Mick

Thanks for quoting my post, that I still stand by, so not sure what you are actually obliging.

The only Russian Collusion I see is the Uranium One scandal that the Clintons and Obama Administration was reportedly said to be involved in and then to top it off, the dirty tricks continued leading up to the US Election, with the fake dossier that the Clintons and DNC paid for to try and undermine Trump.

---------- Post added at 12:00 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------



It’s a tactical strategy they use, but I’ve read some ‘bent’ things Mueller is said to have used in the past, reports of inventing crimes on suspects to get them to talk.

By the way, I have been led to believe, his team have not revealed any of this charges information, and have not confirmed the story, so who ever has leaked it, has committed a federal crime.

The Uranium story has been proven to be Fake News, and the dossier was first compiled for a Republican donor, who stopped paying when Trump got the nomination.

https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clint...m-russia-deal/

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

Thanks for quoting my post, that I still stand by, so not sure what you are actually obliging.

The only Russian Collusion I see is the Uranium One scandal that the Clintons and Obama Administration was reportedly said to be involved in and then to top it off, the dirty tricks continued leading up to the US Election, with the fake dossier that the Clintons and DNC paid for to try and undermine Trump. said to have used in the past, reports of inventing crimes on suspects to get them to talk.

If it's not about collusion between Trump's Team and the Russians what is it? Let's wait and see.
I also note that you have been fact-checked out by Hugh on the remainder of your reply so I won't duplicate effort here.

Originally Posted by Hugh

The Uranium story has been proven to be Fake News, and the dossier was first compiled for a Republican donor, who stopped paying when Trump got the nomination.

https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clint...m-russia-deal/

No it hasn’t been proven at all. If it’s been proven then why are Republican Senators asking for a special prosecutor to investigate it ?

I think you need to get clued up a bit better on the Fake Dossier story too, it was the Washington Post who broke the story about the Clintons and the Democrats paying for the story, yes a Republican contributed, but the DNC and Clintons paid millions of dollars.

---------- Post added at 17:12 ---------- Previous post was at 17:09 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I also note that you have been fact-checked out by Hugh on the remainder of your reply so I won't duplicate effort here.

Rubbish, no I haven’t. The Snopes article is referring to what was brought to light in 2016, a lot more info has come about. Republicans are calling for a special prosecutor, they would not be doing this, if the story did not hold any substance.

---------- Post added at 17:23 ---------- Previous post was at 17:12 ----------

https://truthfeednews.com/breaking-g...investigation/

Originally Posted by Mick

No it hasn’t been proven at all. If it’s been proven then why are Republican Senators asking for a special prosecutor to investigate it ?

I think you need to get clued up a bit better on the Fake Dossier story too, it was the Washington Post who broke the story about the Clintons and the Democrats paying for the story, yes a Republican contributed, but the DNC and Clintons paid millions of dollars.

---------- Post added at 17:12 ---------- Previous post was at 17:09 ----------



Rubbish, no I haven’t. The Snopes article is referring to what was brought to light in 2016, a lot more info has come about. Republicans are calling for a special prosecutor, they would not be doing this, if the story did not hold any substance.

---------- Post added at 17:23 ---------- Previous post was at 17:12 ----------

https://truthfeednews.com/breaking-g...investigation/

I mean they would be calling for it. The question is if there is anything there for it to happen. That Snopes link seems pretty clear, especially pointing out that the donation timelines don’t match.

Originally Posted by Mick

No it hasn’t been proven at all. If it’s been proven then why are Republican Senators asking for a special prosecutor to investigate it ?

I think you need to get clued up a bit better on the Fake Dossier story too, it was the Washington Post who broke the story about the Clintons and the Democrats paying for the story, yes a Republican contributed, but the DNC and Clintons paid millions of dollars.

---------- Post added at 17:12 ---------- Previous post was at 17:09 ----------



Rubbish, no I haven’t. The Snopes article is referring to what was brought to light in 2016, a lot more info has come about. Republicans are calling for a special prosecutor, they would not be doing this, if the story did not hold any substance.

---------- Post added at 17:23 ---------- Previous post was at 17:12 ----------

https://truthfeednews.com/breaking-g...investigation/

You mean the same Republicans that held 7 inquiries into Benghazi at a cost of 10s of millions of dollars and only found minor issues? They couldn’t possibly be following their previous pattern of behaviour, could they?

They couldn’t possibly be trying to distract/obfuscate what’s happening with the Mueller investigations, could they?

I wonder if Trey Gowdy will call for an inquiry into the 4 deaths in Niger?

Anyway, updated version of the Uranium One allegations from a different fact checking dire from 2 days ago...

http://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one/

The Hill story also rehashed an FBI investigation that resulted in “charges against the Russian nuclear industry’s point man in the United States, TENEX director Vadim Mikerin, as well as a Russian financier and an American trucking executive whose company moved Russian uranium around the United States.”

In 2015, Mikerin was sentenced to 48 months and required to pay more than $2 million in restitution for conspiring to commit money laundering, according to the Justice Department.
The Hill quoted the attorney for a former FBI informant in the TENEX case as saying her client “witnessed numerous, detailed conversations in which Russian actors described their efforts to lobby, influence or ingratiate themselves with the Clintons in hopes of winning favorable uranium decisions from the Obama administration.”

The convictions of Guryev and Mikerin are not new, and there’s no evidence that either case has any connection to the Rosatom-Uranium One merger. Nevertheless, the article has prompted the Republican chairmen of the House intelligence and oversight committees to announce a joint investigation of the merger.

On Fox News, Rep. Devin Nunes, the chairman of the House intelligence committee, said that “we’ve been communicating back and forth through different channels” with the FBI informant in the TENEX case.

“You are talking about major decisions that were made at a time when we were resetting relations with Russia that actually happened to benefit, you know, the Clinton Foundation, perhaps other avenues, we don’t know yet,” Nunes said in an Oct. 24 interview with Bret Baier.
It may be that individuals and companies sought to curry favor with Hillary Clinton and even influence her department’s decision on the Uranium One sale. But, as we’ve written before, there is no evidence that donations to the Clinton Foundation from people with ties to Uranium One or Bill Clinton’s speaking fee influenced Hillary Clinton’s official actions. That’s still the case. We will update this article with any major developments.

Originally Posted by Hugh

You mean the same Republicans that held 7 inquiries into Benghazi at a cost of 10s of millions of dollars and only found minor issues? They couldn’t possibly be following their previous pattern of behaviour, could they?

They couldn’t possibly be trying to distract/obfuscate what’s happening with the Mueller investigations, could they?

I wonder if Trey Gowdy will call for an inquiry into the 4 deaths in Niger?

Why don't you ask Trey ?

The Mueller investigation will carry on in the background as it always has. No need for them to distract/obfuscate and it isn't actually them doing this, you do realise it was the Washtington Post who broke the story on the DNC/Clinton paying millions for the fake Trump dossier?

By the way, I wouldn't call 4 American deaths in Benghazi, minor, that could have been avoided, had Hillary, done her job properly as Secretary of State. The victims own mothers, believe many times over, she told lies, said it was one thing and then another. Pffft, but yeah their deaths are minor, yeah sure.

[Mr K]

Amazing the amount of times Hilary and Obama get mentioned in this thread, and by the great Trumpster himself (usually soon after his latest cock up/failure to deliver.....)

Originally Posted by Mr K

Amazing the amount of times Hilary and Obama get mentioned in this thread, and by the great Trumpster himself (usually soon after his latest cock up/failure to deliver.....)

What latest failures?

What latest cock ups?

Name them.

He is 10 months in office..... Wall is being built...prototypes are already in place, his Republican budget just passed, the tax reforms are next, he is tackling the opioid crisis, that Obama did very little about. Jobs and growth are up. I’m struggling to see the failures. Ah, yes you chase the negative Trump hysteria headlines, like a lost sheep.

Obama was a President, this thread is about the current President, the comparison of each is bound to crop up in such a topic, told you this last time, you’re stuck in repeat mode again.

Two ll in Hillary by the way.

Originally Posted by Mick

By the way, I wouldn't call 4 American deaths in Benghazi, minor, that could have been avoided, had Hillary, done her job properly as Secretary of State. The victims own mothers, believe many times over, she told lies, said it was one thing and then another. Pffft, but yeah their deaths are minor, yeah sure.

That's really unfair. You know he was talking about errors in the administration and not calling the deaths minor. He was saying that the republicans had several inquiries into Benghazi and didn't find any evidence of negligence on the part of the State Department.