Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)

cajunrevenge said:
At the rate things are going whats the point of impeachment? He can only hide behind the Presidency for so long. Get a warrant ASAP after the inauguration and tell the secret service to drop his ass off at the local PD for booking. If only. Reality is he would spend less time in booking than Amber Guyger.
Click to expand...

That's a funny idea. After he's out of office his support from the GOP is going to dry up very fast.
 
There are a small number of questions that are central to this matter and we are getting closer to the answers.

1) Did the Russian hacking operation occur with the knowledge and support of Trump and senior members of his campaign team.

2) Did the Trump campaign coordinate with WikiLeaks to weaponize the stolen emails.
 
Last edited:
Carl Bernstein reporting Mueller is looking at a trip Manafort took to Quito in 2017 to meet with Ecuadorian president
 
I think that the story about Pavel’s visit to the embassy is a little problematic because it’s hard to imagine it being under wraps for this long. On the other hand, the denials of both WL and Pavel himself amount to less than a hill of beans. WL also denied corresponding with Roger Stone, and Pavel is basically a walking lie.
 
Julio3000 said:
I think that the story about Pavel’s visit to the embassy is a little problematic because it’s hard to imagine it being under wraps for this long. On the other hand, the denials of both WL and Pavel himself amount to less than a hill of beans. WL also denied corresponding with Roger Stone, and Pavel is basically a walking lie.
Click to expand...

Mueller and crew dont seem to leak to the press. The sourcing for the Guardian story appears to be Ecuadorean.
 
The objectives of a cooperation agreement like the one Mr. Manafort entered with Mr. Mueller are flatly inconsistent with the obligations of a joint defense agreement. So it doesn’t matter whether or not Mr. Manafort explicitly withdrew from his deal with Mr. Trump, because once he began cooperating — or, at least, pretending do — the legal theory supporting the agreement collapsed. Because Mr. Manafort no longer had, on paper, a “common interest” with Mr. Trump, his lawyers’ communications with Mr. Trump’s lawyers could no longer be seen as cloaked with any expectation of confidentiality.

If they revealed client confidences, they waived the attorney-client privilege. Mr. Mueller can, and perhaps should, try to find out what Mr. Trump’s and Mr. Manafort’s lawyers said to one another about their respective clients after Mr. Manafort began cooperating. The resulting legal battles over privilege would be spectacular.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/28/...l?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
 
New details about Stone’s interest in WikiLeaks’ plans emerged this week after one of his associates, conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi, announced that he had rejected a plea deal offered by Mueller’s team. He provided The Post and other news organizations with a draft filing by prosecutors describing his interactions with Stone — including an Aug. 2, 2016, email in which the right-wing author alerted Stone that he heard WikiLeaks was planning a major release of “very damaging” material.

The next day, Stone had one of his private talks with Trump, Stone said on a 2016 Infowars broadcast first reported by CNN.

In an interview, Stone insisted that the topic of hacked emails was never broached in the Aug. 3 phone call — or in any other communication with Trump.

“It just didn’t come up,” Stone said. “I am able to say we never discussed WikiLeaks. I’m not sure what I would have said to him anyway because it’s all speculation . . . I just didn’t know if it’s true or not.”

Stone, however, sounded much more certain in his public pronouncements at the time, stating confidently that Assange would reveal material that would hurt Clinton’s campaign.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...7e1948d55f4_story.html?utm_term=.63428072b28c
 
nsacpi said:
New details about Stone’s interest in WikiLeaks’ plans emerged this week after one of his associates, conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi, announced that he had rejected a plea deal offered by Mueller’s team. He provided The Post and other news organizations with a draft filing by prosecutors describing his interactions with Stone — including an Aug. 2, 2016, email in which the right-wing author alerted Stone that he heard WikiLeaks was planning a major release of “very damaging” material.

The next day, Stone had one of his private talks with Trump, Stone said on a 2016 Infowars broadcast first reported by CNN.

In an interview, Stone insisted that the topic of hacked emails was never broached in the Aug. 3 phone call — or in any other communication with Trump.

“It just didn’t come up,” Stone said. “I am able to say we never discussed WikiLeaks. I’m not sure what I would have said to him anyway because it’s all speculation . . . I just didn’t know if it’s true or not.”

Stone, however, sounded much more certain in his public pronouncements at the time, stating confidently that Assange would reveal material that would hurt Clinton’s campaign.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...7e1948d55f4_story.html?utm_term=.63428072b28c
Click to expand...

At the risk of practicing "fatism," I think the only conspiracy Corsi was truly concerned with was one that would lead to a possible shortage of bacon.
 
AP reporting that the guilty plea by Michael Cohen concerns lies to congressional committees about a Trump real estate project in Moscow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top