Muller investigation - 2 years, 34 convictions
Durham investigation - 3 years, ZERO convictions
So much for uncovering the deep state FBI
LOL I NEVER THOUGHT HE WOULD. THAT'S WHY SESSIONS APPOINTED HIM.
THE DEEP STATE IS DEEEEEEEEEEEEP ~ IMO
"Muller investigation - 2 years, 34 convictions
Durham investigation - 3 years, ZERO convictions
So much for uncovering the deep state FBI"
+++++++++++++++++
Thanks joj, I love it!
Actually it showed the deep state big time and how they control the system and use it to operate with impunity!
Muellers investigation - 34 convictions after 2.5 years. Many of them created BY THE INVESTIGATION featuring crimes that didn't exist before the investigation, while continuing the false narrative and objective, that Trump colluded with Russia the entire time......when they knew right away that was a lie. An investigation that gave Mueller free reign to politically target anybody connected to Donald Trump investigating anything they wanted to. As deep state as it gets. And use entrapment techniques out the wazoo.
Another Trump foreign policy adviser, he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI about the timing of his conversations with a professor who had ties to Russian intelligence. He'd said he'd spoken with the professor before he went to work for Trump, when it was afterward. Papadopoulos was sentenced to 14 days in jail.
The London-based lawyer admitted to lying to Mueller's investigators about his contacts with Gates. Van der Zwaan had worked with Gates and Manafort for a Ukrainian political party that was closely allied with Russia. He was sentenced to 30 days behind bars and fined $20,000.
A top Trump surrogate and foreign policy adviser during the 2016 campaign who admitted to lying to the FBI about the substance of his conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak during his brief stint as national security adviser. He's expected to be sentenced later this year.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There is no doubt that Trump had some suspected crooked people in his circle and it was a piece of cake for Mueller to set them up to get them to lie under oath about questions that they already had the answers to as well as do unlimited investigations to find any crimes that he could about any of them. Yeah, that's what I want 25 million of my tax money to pay for. I know that you think it was worth it as a Mueller cheerleader and defender from the get go because of your strong political affiliation.
It's pretty obvious what my powerful, very negative personal feelings are for Trump and his cronies. So I'm not really defending them(lying is wrong) as much as CONDEMNING MUELLER, even though I personally liked the guy. But its based entirely on objective, authentic facts and analysis that discards all the propaganda, false narratives and political bs which completely drove the entire investigation. NOT my personal feelings.
If you are a D, it was all legit. If you are a R, it was all a witchhunt because of your party affiliation and desire to believe whatever lines up with your party.
I'm here to SHOW YOU(not with words but with facts) that it was a witch hunt.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Durham investigation- ZERO convictions. Much of the evidence was destroyed by the ones being investigated, experts at covering their tracks. This was expected(by me).
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/89579/#89592
By metmike - Oct. 10, 2022, 1:43 p.m.
Here's another take. I would destroy some of these arguments/DISinformation with evidence(again) but have more productive things to do at the moment.
However, they are probably right about the outcome. US intelligence agents are elite experts at creating and destroying evidence. They would never leave any behind that could get them prosecuted. This is what they do for a living.
Here's more reminders of our corrupt DOJ, and the stories that Trump colluded with Russia and it greatly affected/altered the results of the 2016 election. This dominated the MSM news during the Mueller investigation.
I'm betting you were one of the ones that believed all of it.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/90750/#90868
Perfect time for a little flashback to remind everybody of some things that have been long forgotten about that election......when the democrats, MSM and DOJ blamed Russia's interference and Trump colluding with Russia for the election loss by Clinton.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/61447/#61449
By metmike - Nov. 19, 2020, 6:20 p.m.
You guys are a trip (-:
You're acting in similar fashion to the ones you condemned for acting this way 4 years ago after their very tough loss.
And the ones that acted this way 4 years ago, after losing are condemning Trump supporters for acting like they did 4 years ago.
4 years ago, we were hearing the exact same absurd things from the Clinton supporters and some in the MSM who refused to acknowledge the loss or that Trump was elected fairly or should be the president.
This goes way deeper than we first thought.
https://www.vox.com/world/2017/6/13/15791744/russia-election-39-states-hack-putin-trump-sessions
Russia’s efforts to hack the 2016 presidential election were much more widespread than originally thought. The Russian campaign hit 39 states — twice as many as originally reported — and in one case hackers tried to delete and alter voter data.
That’s the startling revelation from a Bloomberg report this morning. The extent of the cyber intrusion was so widespread that Obama administration officials used the infamous “red phone” — which is really a digital communications channel that allows the countries to send information back and forth — to show Kremlin leaders what they had discovered. It remains unclear, though, if these intrusions had any direct effect on the election’s outcome.
Still, this is another example of Russia taking advantage of the many online vulnerabilities in America’s voting network, which is comprised of software companies, online registration sites, and vital information that election officials willingly send to each other over email.
All of them play an important part in obtaining and safeguarding sensitive voter information, but it appears the Russians have figured out how to get that data.
“If you got 10 people working to try and figure out what the US election system is for 18 months, of course they’re going to figure it out,” said Beau Woods, a cybersecurity expert at the Atlantic Council, a Washington-based think tank.
Russia, of course, denies having anything to do with the hackers that pulled this off. Either way, the news comes at an inauspicious time for President Donald Trump, who has had to deal with congressional hearings featuring former FBI Director James Comey last week and Attorney General Jeff Sessions today, each digging deep into his campaign’s possible collusion with Russia.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Re: Re: Dominion machine confiscated in Germany
By metmike - Nov. 19, 2020, 6:24 p.m.
Robert Mueller’s latest indictments raise new questions about the integrity of Georgia’s voting infrastructure. Why is the state stonewalling?
When the Department of Homeland Security notified 21 states in 2017 that they had been targeted by Russian hackers intent on interfering with the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Georgia—despite having one of the most vulnerable voting systems in the country—was not among them. Trump won the state by nearly 6 percentage points over Democrat Hillary Clinton, whose campaign had hoped to pick up the reliably Republican state for the first time since 1992.
DHS said Russian hackers had probed websites in the 21 states looking for vulnerabilities, and in at least one state—Illinois—they found a vulnerability in a server that hosted the state’s voter registration database, allowing them to access 90,000 voter records. But the Russians were apparently unsuccessful in finding vulnerabilities in other state election sites and evidently never bothered at all with servers in Georgia, according to the agency.
This was odd because around the same time the Russians were targeting other states, a security researcher in Georgia named Logan Lamb discovered a serious security vulnerability in an election server in his state. The vulnerability allowed him to download the state’s entire database of 6.7 million registered voters and would have allowed him or any other intruder to alter versions of the database distributed to counties prior to the election. Lamb also found PDFs with instructions and passwords for election workers to sign in to a central server on Election Day as well as software files for the state’s ExpressPoll pollbooks—the electronic devices used by poll workers to verify voters’ eligibility to vote before allowing them to cast a ballot.
The unpatched and misconfigured server had been vulnerable since 2014 and was managed by the Center for Election Systems, a small training and testing center that until recently occupied a former two-story house on the Kennesaw State University campus. Until last year, the Ccnter was responsible for programming every voting machine across the state, raising concerns that if the Russians or other adversaries had been able to penetrate the center’s servers as Lamb had done, they might have been able to find a way to subvert software distributed by the center to voting machines across the state.
But Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, who was the only state election official to refuse security assistance from the Department of Homeland Security prior to the election, has insisted for more than a year that his state’s voting systems were never at risk in the 2016 election, because DHS told him the Russians had not targeted Georgia.
This changed on Friday, however, when the Justice Department unsealed the indictment against 12 Russian intelligence officers who oversaw an operation that, the department says, included targeting county websites in Georgia."
++++++++++++++++++++++++
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/29881/
Comey, it's possible that Russia has leverage over Trump
Started by metmike - May 10, 2019, 9:15 p.m.
"Former FBI Director James Comey defends remarks he made about unverified allegations contained in the Steele dossier and tells CNN's Anderson Cooper that it's possible Russians have leverage over President Donald"
++++++++++++++++++
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/22034/
What if Trump really is working for Russia? What then?
Started by mojo - Jan. 19, 2019, 7:46 a.m.
According to reports last weekend, the FBI first began to suspect Trump was working for Russia when he fired FBI Director James Comey in May of 2017. “Counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security,” The New York Times reported. “Agents also sought to determine whether Mr. Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow’s influence.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/01/trump-really-working-russia/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Deep State ...
By metmike - Sept. 1, 2018, 10:41 a.m.
"Your post is long on opinion, but you do offer a couple of facts." " I'm not convinced of a vast conspiracy, with secret meetings to discuss strategies"
Carl,
Actually, I gave you the quintessential example of a deep state secret meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch in June 2016 to discuss the arrangements of the deal which to overlook all of the criminal evidence in the investigation resulting in no charges...........so that Hillary could be the next president.
If not for the whistle blower contacting the Phoenix tv station anonymously(so they could be out there to witness it) we would have never known................like we never know about all the other secret meetings.
Unless you believe that they really stumbled on to each other and talked about grandkids and Bills golf game that never happened.
Suddenly, James Comey became the spokesperson(and was trained by Lynch on what to say) instead of Lorreta Lynch after she got busted with her deep state arrangement.
I can't offer you a better and more clear example of the deep state, so if you don't want to believe it happened then I just can't do a better job explaining and showing you.
https://www.newsweek.com/loretta-lynch-bill-clinton-tarmac-meeting-details-comey-749995
If the meeting was a chance crossing of paths as Lynch insisted, how did the person(whistle blower) that contacted the Phoenix tv station know that there would be a chance crossing of paths between Lynch and Clinton well before it occurred?
Answer: They couldn't have because it had been planned. Since it was a secret meeting with no notes or recordings taken(intentionally) and was lied about, with absolute certainty and just happened to be near the end of the justice departments investigation of Hillary and the Clintons and just happened before Lynn stepped down and Comey up and Comey announced no charges would be filed....................what do you think they discussed?
Anybody that pretends to not know is displaying blatant bias or is very naive.
The news media falls under the category of being blatantly biased by accepting Loretta Lynch's lame explanation..........then going on.
Another important item to note: The Deep State" is not just people currently employed by the government. There are some very powerful people who dial in their input. Bill Clinton, was shown here to be playing a key role in the Deep States arrangement discussed at this secret meeting. Both Clintons, being part of the recent deep state have been protected from accountability for crimes(Clinton Foundation).
I prefer to spend my time here as moderator, trying to develop non political discussions. However, in this case, Carl has asked a couple of times for others to explain the deep state and had not received a substantive response(probably because most people don't really understand it)..........so here it is.
I am always happy to provide insight!
+++++++++++++++++++
Re: Re: Re: Re: The Deep State ...
By metmike - Sept. 1, 2018, 5:49 p.m.
"I've experienced too many coincidences in my life to believe opinion as fact."
So let's just look at rock solid facts carl. Nothing with opinion below.
1. Bill Clinton met with Loretta Lynch for 30 minutes inside of her plane according to Christopher Sign from ABC15 Phoenix who was there to witness the meeting.
2. Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton claimed that it was a chance encounter after her plane arrived and before his left.
3. Bill Clinton's plane had been scheduled to take off before her's landed but he intentionally held up his private plane's take off and got out after hers arrived.
4. This is the indisputable evidence that it was planned. The local ABC news crew was there to witness the meeting because a whistle blower had contacted the reporter well ahead of time to tell him that there was going to be a meeting between Lynch and Clinton. Mr. Sign, then met with management at ABC15 and got authorization to cover the meeting. They were there because of the tip from a source that wanted them busted. This fact, is what clearly proves with 100% certainty, that it could not have been a coincidence.
5. Lynch and Clinton both had explanations for exactly what happened, some of it contradicting but the one which was clearly not the truth was, Lynch stated Bill discussed his golf game that he played there. It was easy enough to check and Clinton did no golfing during his brief stay.................and this was Phoenix in June. The temperatures by mid morning were already over 100. A 70 year old man would not be golfing in the hottest place in the country at the hottest time of year.........and he didn't.
6. There was a huge investigation at the time into Hillary Clinton, who was running for president. The investigation was reaching the concluding stages. Loretta Lynch was the head of the justice department(attorney general). Bill Clinton, ex president and husband of Hillary. Both claimed that for 30 minutes they did not talk about anything related to the investigation.
Nothing but facts Carl..............and one of them is that they lied about the meeting being planned.......which busts the theory of coincidence. There were other lies, including the golf game.
Did they talk about the investigation?
Now that would be opinion. I guess that you think tha they didn't.
++++++++++++++++++
June 2016: Loretta Lynch-Bill Clinton meeting.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/24146/#24224
November 21, 2022 metmike: Lynch and the DOJ were getting extreme heat for this meeting that they obviously lied about, which is when Comey took over. The extreme heat continued from the right. With only a short time before the election, all polls and sources indicated that Clinton had the election "in the bag", I strongly believe that Mr. Impulsive, with a history of bad decisions suddenly thought it would be a great idea to make the announcement about Clinton because, in his mind it would strategically neutralize the accusations of bias protecting her(which were true and why he needed to do it) and at the same time, she was too far ahead for it to damage her. He wanted his cake and to eat it too. He lost his cake and didn't get anything at all to eat from either side. This guy had 0 credibility and was very dishonest and unethical(he leaked information in violation of DOJ protocol) and told people he leaked it because he's so arrogant that he thought they would understand the almighty St. Comey's reasoning.
The stuff here on that release event was at the OLD forum and is gone forever. This one started in late 2017?
++++++++++++++++++++++
"For more than two years, people in the “mainstream media” have relentlessly hammered President Trump and his allies with accusations of colluding with Russia during the 2016 election, which Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton was supposed to win in a landslide.
But once a letter from Attorney General Bill Barr revealed that Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation found no evidence of this criminal conspiracy, reporters, editors and others at liberal news outlets should be forced to state that they were wrong on this issue even though it's safe to say many won't give up the ghost.
That was the thrust of an op-ed from Washington Post contributing columnist and former Hillsboro, Ohio newspaper editor Gary Abernathy with the title “Admit It: Fox News Has been Right All Along.”
However, Abernathy continued, “Fox News was right, and the others were wrong. For at least two years, MSNBC and CNN devoted hour upon hour, day after day, to promoting the narrative that Trump colluded with the Russians, and that Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III was going ...
+++++++++++++++
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/12136/
By metmike - Sept. 4, 2018, 4:25 p.m.
Carl,
Of course there are numerous people in politics that switch their alliance and their previous parties consider them traitors or change their view..........but this is different.
I don't follow half this stuff but maybe you can find me a democrat, that was attacked and vilified for decades by the Republicans, that suddenly came out against Obama and tried to stop Obama's agenda because of his personal feelings and then became a hero for the Republicans............even while that person continued as a democrat?
Or somebody like Comey, that went from hero to goat to hero in less than a year, while still being the same guy?
One good thing about Comey, is that he really let the cat out of the bag with his big mouth and actions(not intentionally), giving us a great glimpse into how the deep state and intelligence community puts their fingers on the scale to influence outcomes based on agenda.
Admitting that he leaked out confidential information illegally to the press to have a powerful influence on the media coverage and that he was told by Loretta Lynch to not call the investigation into Hillary Clinton an investigation but "a matter". Lots of things like that which must have made the intelligence community cringe.
Wow!
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/336932-comey-leaked-memo-to-prompt-special-counsel/
+++++++++++++++++
STEIN: Yes, I would have because the security experts and researchers have told us for quite some time that we have a voting system which is essentially an invitation to tampering, to hacking and to human error.
STEIN: In my view, this is not likely at all to change the outcome, and that's what the computer and voting security experts say as well. They are not expecting the outcome to change here. But it's the voters who benefit by standing up and saying we deserve a voting system that is secure in which we know our votes are being counted and our votes are being respected.
STEIN: I think it's hardly been a peaceful transition process. You know, people are out in the streets. And it was hardly a peaceful election. I think it's a symptom of a political system under meltdown.
"However, they are probably right about the outcome. US intelligence agents are elite experts at creating and destroying evidence. They would never leave any behind that could get them prosecuted. This is what they do for a living."
So your argument that the FBI was guilty is that they must be guilty because they are good at hiding things. (I don't want to put words in your mouth). That is anything but "authentic facts" or reasonable deduction. The more likely explanation is that Durham found nothing after 3 years of waisting taxpayer money because there was nothing there!
Perhaps FBI killed JFK because they are so clever at hiding things? That's what they do for a living. Prove me wrong!
-----
Just to take one of your examples: Flynn's conviction was not a "manufactured crime". He lied about his dealings with Russia. Sheesh! Russia was what the investigation was about.
But my arguments obviously mean nothing because I have a 'D' associated with my name.
"But my arguments obviously mean nothing because I have a 'D' associated with my name."
You have that completely twisted to fit what you want to believe, joj. It's actually revealing that you see it that way.
You're used to going to D echo chambers and sources, like our Rs are used to going to R echo chambers. You go there because they tell you the news the way you like to read/hear it, like the NYTs.
I read the NYTs too. I was getting their daily email updates for 2 years. I was also getting the same thing from the Epoch Times. The NYTs is a 100 times better source but they very frequently display a strong liberal bias. Every once in a while, the Epoch Times would hit a great story(about as often as a broken clock is right 2 times a day(-:
Regardless of the infrequency of a source of being right or the pattern of being wrong more often...........when an entity IS right, they are right.
You asserting that I'm discriminating or discrediting what you state because it's from a D is completely absurd based on the complete opposite of my objective, non political affiliated posting.
mcfarm gets upset about me taking the side of Ds because he's an R.
Admit it, joj. We live in a world of echo chambers and people congregate with birds of a feather, which actually makes sense. People like to connect with others that think like them and when they affiliate with a party or have an ideology/belief system. Why in tarnation would people get their news from sources that follow the opposite believe system?
You will notice that I ALWAYS give solid evidence and authentic facts to support my objective positions.
I totally get that Flynn's convictions were not manufactured. I never said every crime and I never defended those people for lying. I made my solid points with specific examples to prove them which are indisputable facts.
"Perhaps FBI killed JFK because they are so clever at hiding things? That's what they do for a living. Prove me wrong!"
Seriously now joj. I just showed you tons of irrefutable evidence/facts to support my case. What facts/evidence does one have to support that analogy with JFK to make it similar?
Regardless of how this particular thread is going, I do consider you to be very open minded and willing to see other's positions much of the time..............when you aren't wearing your D hat and claiming to be a victim of the moderators political bias.