Attorney General Barr is Hinting There Will be Criminal Prosecutions for Russiagate

[occupied]

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

~~~~~~
Everyone is waiting for the carnage to begin. I don't want just the low hanging fruit I want AG Barr to get the ring leaders like Obama and Hillary....

Trump had better hope that it does not become fashionable for presidents to attempt to destroy their predecessors.

 

[BertramN]

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

Prosecuting attorneys will have many problems making a case against any member of Mueller's investigating team. They followed the evidence to where it led them. So Barr is just b;owing smoke.

Barr is a crook that dishonors the office of Attorney General, just like the impeached president trump dishonors the United States Presidency.


.

 

[lennypartiv]

I prefer that it be refered to as ObamaGate, but regardless indictments need to be handed down by Barr and Durham.

 

[kaz]

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

I'll simply say this. If the object was to "besmirch" the opposing party's election campaign

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

If the object was too besmirch the campaign of a political opponent l can only say they were pretty incompetent. Since it broke AFTER Trump got elected. Seems to be kind of relavant don't you think?

What's also relavant is the fact that just the other day. The congressional judiciary committee. A BIPARTISAN comitee, led by REPUBLICANS just stated that the Trump campaign had not only extensive contacts with Russians but that some of those contacts are identified as confirmed or suspected Russian intelligence assets.

I personally understand why the FBI the agency charged with counter-intelligence would take note and investigate.

No, the object was not bad publicity. It was harrassment.

Trump was the incoming President, responsible for foreign policy. It's part of his job to communicate with foreign governments,

Trump wasn't the incoming president. He was the presumptive nominee for the GOP when those contacts were made. Again it's the FBI 's JOB to look into that.

It's also their job to look into the Secretary of State taking millions in "donations" from governments that want to meet with her as well as for the son of the VP who manages the Ukraine relationship making millions in bribes from Ukraine and a long list of crimes committed by Democrats that were let go and not pursued

 

[BlindBoo]

So what? Barr is an reliable partisan who has proven time an time again to be a propaganda mouthpiece. What he says doesn't comport with reality.

 

[bendog]

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

I'll simply say this. If the object was to "besmirch" the opposing party's election campaign

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

If the object was too besmirch the campaign of a political opponent l can only say they were pretty incompetent. Since it broke AFTER Trump got elected. Seems to be kind of relavant don't you think?

What's also relavant is the fact that just the other day. The congressional judiciary committee. A BIPARTISAN comitee, led by REPUBLICANS just stated that the Trump campaign had not only extensive contacts with Russians but that some of those contacts are identified as confirmed or suspected Russian intelligence assets.

I personally understand why the FBI the agency charged with counter-intelligence would take note and investigate.

No, the object was not bad publicity. It was harrassment.

Trump was the incoming President, responsible for foreign policy. It's part of his job to communicate with foreign governments,

Trump wasn't the incoming president. He was the presumptive nominee for the GOP when those contacts were made. Again it's the FBI 's JOB to look into that.

It's also their job to look into the Secretary of State taking millions in "donations" from governments that want to meet with her as well as for the son of the VP who manages the Ukraine relationship making millions in bribes from Ukraine and a long list of crimes committed by Democrats that were let go and not pursued

If Barr indicts Biden on Oct 26th will anyone be surprised.

 

[kaz]

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

I'll simply say this. If the object was to "besmirch" the opposing party's election campaign

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

If the object was too besmirch the campaign of a political opponent l can only say they were pretty incompetent. Since it broke AFTER Trump got elected. Seems to be kind of relavant don't you think?

What's also relavant is the fact that just the other day. The congressional judiciary committee. A BIPARTISAN comitee, led by REPUBLICANS just stated that the Trump campaign had not only extensive contacts with Russians but that some of those contacts are identified as confirmed or suspected Russian intelligence assets.

I personally understand why the FBI the agency charged with counter-intelligence would take note and investigate.

No, the object was not bad publicity. It was harrassment.

Trump was the incoming President, responsible for foreign policy. It's part of his job to communicate with foreign governments,

Trump wasn't the incoming president. He was the presumptive nominee for the GOP when those contacts were made. Again it's the FBI 's JOB to look into that.

It's also their job to look into the Secretary of State taking millions in "donations" from governments that want to meet with her as well as for the son of the VP who manages the Ukraine relationship making millions in bribes from Ukraine and a long list of crimes committed by Democrats that were let go and not pursued

If Barr indicts Biden on Oct 26th will anyone be surprised.

Won't happen. Democrats are above the law

 

[bendog]

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

I'll simply say this. If the object was to "besmirch" the opposing party's election campaign

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

If the object was too besmirch the campaign of a political opponent l can only say they were pretty incompetent. Since it broke AFTER Trump got elected. Seems to be kind of relavant don't you think?

What's also relavant is the fact that just the other day. The congressional judiciary committee. A BIPARTISAN comitee, led by REPUBLICANS just stated that the Trump campaign had not only extensive contacts with Russians but that some of those contacts are identified as confirmed or suspected Russian intelligence assets.

I personally understand why the FBI the agency charged with counter-intelligence would take note and investigate.

No, the object was not bad publicity. It was harrassment.

Trump was the incoming President, responsible for foreign policy. It's part of his job to communicate with foreign governments,

Trump wasn't the incoming president. He was the presumptive nominee for the GOP when those contacts were made. Again it's the FBI 's JOB to look into that.

It's also their job to look into the Secretary of State taking millions in "donations" from governments that want to meet with her as well as for the son of the VP who manages the Ukraine relationship making millions in bribes from Ukraine and a long list of crimes committed by Democrats that were let go and not pursued

If Barr indicts Biden on Oct 26th will anyone be surprised.

Won't happen. Democrats are above the law

It worked so well with a week to go last time.

 

[forkup]

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

I'll simply say this. If the object was to "besmirch" the opposing party's election campaign

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

If the object was too besmirch the campaign of a political opponent l can only say they were pretty incompetent. Since it broke AFTER Trump got elected. Seems to be kind of relavant don't you think?

What's also relavant is the fact that just the other day. The congressional judiciary committee. A BIPARTISAN comitee, led by REPUBLICANS just stated that the Trump campaign had not only extensive contacts with Russians but that some of those contacts are identified as confirmed or suspected Russian intelligence assets.

I personally understand why the FBI the agency charged with counter-intelligence would take note and investigate.

No, the object was not bad publicity. It was harrassment.

Trump was the incoming President, responsible for foreign policy. It's part of his job to communicate with foreign governments,

Trump wasn't the incoming president. He was the presumptive nominee for the GOP when those contacts were made. Again it's the FBI 's JOB to look into that.

It's also their job to look into the Secretary of State taking millions in "donations" from governments that want to meet with her as well as for the son of the VP who manages the Ukraine relationship making millions in bribes from Ukraine and a long list of crimes committed by Democrats that were let go and not pursued

To the first they did. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...83932e-32f9-11ea-a053-dc6d944ba776_story.html
To the second the FBI isn't responsible for investigating alleged crimes in Ukraine.

As to your purported crimes by Democrats. The DOJ has been firmly in Republican hands for over 3 years now. They have conducted MULTIPLE investigations into Democrats. The departments that have Republican bosses have conducted MULTIPLE investigations in the goings-on during the Obama administration. The house of representatives was led by Republicans for 2 years and they conducted MULTIPLE investigations into Democrats. The United States Senate has conducted MULTIPLE investigations into Democrats.

At what point do you accept that finding nothing no matter how many investigations are started by people led by those that benefit politically from finding something that not finding something means no crimes where committed?

 

[JoeB131]

It's also their job to look into the Secretary of State taking millions in "donations" from governments that want to meet with her as well as for the son of the VP who manages the Ukraine relationship making millions in bribes from Ukraine and a long list of crimes committed by Democrats that were let go and not pursued

Well, first you actually have to make those things "Crimes"... I'd be all for serious campaign reform where the rich can't buy our politicians, but you "Libertarians" are the ones who went to court against McCain-Feingold and got the horrible Citizen United Decision of unlimited dark money passed.

 

[kaz]

It's also their job to look into the Secretary of State taking millions in "donations" from governments that want to meet with her as well as for the son of the VP who manages the Ukraine relationship making millions in bribes from Ukraine and a long list of crimes committed by Democrats that were let go and not pursued

Well, first you actually have to make those things "Crimes"... I'd be all for serious campaign reform where the rich can't buy our politicians, but you "Libertarians" are the ones who went to court against McCain-Feingold and got the horrible Citizen United Decision of unlimited dark money passed.

Taking bribes is already illegal, liar. Hillary and Dementia Joe/Hunter should have served jail time as they were prima facie guilty of accepting bribes. You can't use government positions for that. You thought it was legal? Seriously? You really will believe ANYTHING the DNC tells you

 

[JoeB131]

aking bribes is already illegal, liar. Hillary and Dementia Joe/Hunter should have served jail time as they were prima facie guilty of accepting bribes. You can't use government positions for that. You thought it was legal? Seriously? You really will believe ANYTHING the DNC tells you

Except they weren't bribes, they were campaign donations. You can't complain about the Koch brothers pouring money into the system hoping to get the results they want, and then whine like a little bitch when other people pour money into the system hoping to get the results THEY want.

Also- your side has spent the last 25 years and well over 100 million dollars trying to prove Hillary Clinton's supposed corruption. Heck, Ken Starr even investigated her husband's sex life. It seems to me that if you go to the well that often, and you never come back with any water, we can't take you seriously anymore.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Attorney General Barr is Hinting There Will be Criminal Prosecutions for Russiagate

Uh-huh...... sure...........

 

[kaz]

aking bribes is already illegal, liar. Hillary and Dementia Joe/Hunter should have served jail time as they were prima facie guilty of accepting bribes. You can't use government positions for that. You thought it was legal? Seriously? You really will believe ANYTHING the DNC tells you

Except they weren't bribes, they were campaign donations. You can't complain about the Koch brothers pouring money into the system hoping to get the results they want, and then whine like a little bitch when other people pour money into the system hoping to get the results THEY want.

Also- your side has spent the last 25 years and well over 100 million dollars trying to prove Hillary Clinton's supposed corruption. Heck, Ken Starr even investigated her husband's sex life. It seems to me that if you go to the well that often, and you never come back with any water, we can't take you seriously anymore.

Wrong again. Hillary directly took bribes to her "charity" and Hunter and Joe took millions in pay for Hunter. You're just clueless and uninformed. But go team Democrat, right Joe? That's all you care about

 

[kyzr]

It's bullshit. It is a practical impossibility to indict federal officials for doing their jobs. I do not doubt intelligence was gathered on the Trump campaign because they were talking with so many Kremlin stooges that we were spying on anyway. Whatever that intelligence actually was may never come to light. It was certainly never used against Trump in any overtly political way like he did with the Wikileaks.

That doesn't explain the perjury-trap setup of General Flynn.
Nor the falsified email on Carter Page (for FISA to use the NSA 2-hop rule)
Nor the CIA setup of Popadope
Nor all the illegitimate "unmaskings"
Nor the setup meeting in Trump Tower, and other use of CIA assets
The NSA even warned Trump the Trump Tower was bugged

The Obama admin and the deep state operatives were out to ruin Trump's presidency, as documented in the Strzok/Paige emails.

 

[kyzr]

AG Barr just signaled that things are about to get ugly for the Russia collusion team

"The biased, overeager Comey and McCabe, however, opened an unprecedented full-blown investigation into a presidential campaign. Worse, Durham possibly will show that the Comey team started involving itself in questionable intelligence community activities that improperly ran confidential sources against Papadopoulos well before they officially opened a case — a potentially big no-no that, if proven, will not go well for all involved.

That is especially true in light of what the AG went on to say during his interview. He likened the Comey team’s inappropriate investigation and subsequent fallout to sabotage, or the effects of sabotage. “Sabotage” is another powerful word, technically a wartime crime, but a useful metaphor in its ramifications, since it implicates a range of supporting crimes such as conspiracy, fraud, perjury and false statements.

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a “report” from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: “And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

These are incredibly hopeful words to many Americans who have come to believe — after the 2008 Wall Street-driven financial collapse, after the numerous Clinton family schemes and scandals, and after the wasteful Mueller “investigation” — that the powerful are never held accountable.

This is an attorney general projecting an air of confidence, not afraid to speak truth to slippery politicians even though the pushback will be fierce and personal. In light of that, it’s hard to imagine his confidence isn’t buttressed with mounting evidence of abusive government actions.

Justice Department to seek death penalty for Boston bomber: report
Russia says it will test coronavirus vaccine on 40,000 people
This is what the Durham investigation could well conclude: A group of people aligned with or sympathetic to one political party conspired to illicitly use the authorities of the FBI to besmirch the opposing party’s presidential candidate — and that every effort should be made to indict those who can be charged as a result.

If true, such a thing has never happened before. It would represent a direct, unprecedented attack on our democracy, to fraudulently influence the voting public with lies ostensibly emanating as facts from a noble, traditionally trusted FBI. And that, indeed, would be a travesty of historical significance. One never to be repeated, we can hope, against any future president of either party."

~~~~~~
Everyone is waiting for the carnage to begin. I don't want just the low hanging fruit I want AG Barr to get the ring leaders like Obama and Hillary....

Trump had better hope that it does not become fashionable for presidents to attempt to destroy their predecessors.

You mean like the Obama admin did to Trump?
The "Russia Collusion" hoax investigation and all.

 

[JoeB131]

Wrong again. Hillary directly took bribes to her "charity" and Hunter and Joe took millions in pay for Hunter. You're just clueless and uninformed. But go team Democrat, right Joe? That's all you care about

Okay- um, Hillary got CONTRIBUTIONS to her charity. That's why it's a CHARITY. Unlike Trump's charity, where he embezzled millions for personal use and is prohibited from running a charity in New York.

Hunter took a job in the Ukraine because it would have been a conflict of interest to continue to lobby Congress while his dad was Veep. But who got impeached over that deal again? Oh, that's right, it was Trump for using taxpayer funds to try to slander his opponent.

 

[kaz]

Wrong again. Hillary directly took bribes to her "charity" and Hunter and Joe took millions in pay for Hunter. You're just clueless and uninformed. But go team Democrat, right Joe? That's all you care about

Okay- um, Hillary got CONTRIBUTIONS to her charity. That's why it's a CHARITY. Unlike Trump's charity, where he embezzled millions for personal use and is prohibited from running a charity in New York.

Hunter took a job in the Ukraine because it would have been a conflict of interest to continue to lobby Congress while his dad was Veep. But who got impeached over that deal again? Oh, that's right, it was Trump for using taxpayer funds to try to slander his opponent.

And when Hillary left office, the contributions stopped. She was prima facie accepting bribes. And Hunter took a job where he provided zero skills and got millions. It's the most shallowly obvious bribe anyone can accept. Only a completely brain dead ideological extremist wouldn't be able to see it. You know, you

 

[JoeB131]

And when Hillary left office, the contributions stopped.

Nope, the Clinton Foundation is still out there doing stuff.

Home | Clinton Foundation

The Clinton Foundation makes a difference in people’s lives across the United States and around the world through programs and partnerships that expand economic opportunity, improve public health, confront the climate crisis, and inspire citizen engagement and service.

www.clintonfoundation.org

 

[kaz]

And when Hillary left office, the contributions stopped.

Nope, the Clinton Foundation is still out there doing stuff.

Home | Clinton Foundation

The Clinton Foundation makes a difference in people’s lives across the United States and around the world through programs and partnerships that expand economic opportunity, improve public health, confront the climate crisis, and inspire citizen engagement and service.

www.clintonfoundation.org

All you did is link to their website. Their funding has dropped off a cliff since Hillary is out of office. You didn't refute that. You can't. She isn't selling favors anymore since she has no power