What exactly did they do?

[Redfish]

a deal like that requires the approval (signature) of the secretary of state. Who was SecState when the uranium deal was made? any idea?

No, dope.

It required the approval of the State Dept. Not the SoS.

Uh, duh, the secretary of state is head of the state department. So you are now saying that a deal like this could be made without the approval of the secretary of state?

LOLOL

Well since you failed so miserably to prove she signed it, seems her signature was not required.

talking to you is like talking to a dead frog that was smashed flat in the street. Are you a human being, or a parrot, or a computer program?

I know, it’s so pesky challenging you to prove the bullshit you post.

you made the claim that she did not and need not sign off on the deal. its your claim, not mine.

 

[Redfish]

Really, How the **** is making a donation to a foundation money laundering? Come on smsrt guy. Tell us., The Clintons take no money from their foundation.

I hope you're being facetious.

or totally stupid. where does he think Chelsea's 900K salary comes from?

 

[Faun]

Prove it. Show proof she personally signed off on it....

a deal like that requires the approval (signature) of the secretary of state. Who was SecState when the uranium deal was made? any idea?

No, dope.

It required the approval of the State Dept. Not the SoS.

Uh, duh, the secretary of state is head of the state department. So you are now saying that a deal like this could be made without the approval of the secretary of state?

Oh look, Jose Fernandez, assistant Secretary at that time, says Hillary wasn’t involved in the decision...

We don’t even know if Clinton was involved in the committee’s review and approval of the uranium deal. Jose Fernandez, a former assistant secretary of state, told the New York Times that he represented the department on the committee. “Mrs. Clinton never intervened with me on any C.F.I.U.S. matter,” he told the Times, referring to the committee by its acronym.

The Facts on Uranium One - FactCheck.org

Looks like you got caught lying yet again.​

"we don't know" and "never intervened" I don't see "didn't approve" or "didn't sign". Can you quote the state dept regulation that would allow such a deal without the approval of the secretary?

I am quite sure that the documents exist showing her signature. Could those be some of the ones that they are refusing to release?

Neither you or I know the answer, but logic and the general rules of government agencies say that the secretary would have to approve such a deal.

OR, are you now saying that Hillary was so out of touch with reality that she neglected her responsibilities as secretary? I think Comey called her "extremely careless" right?

The “we” is politifact. The former assistant Secretary said Hillary never intervened on any CFIUS matter.

 

[Redfish]

a deal like that requires the approval (signature) of the secretary of state. Who was SecState when the uranium deal was made? any idea?

No, dope.

It required the approval of the State Dept. Not the SoS.

Uh, duh, the secretary of state is head of the state department. So you are now saying that a deal like this could be made without the approval of the secretary of state?

Oh look, Jose Fernandez, assistant Secretary at that time, says Hillary wasn’t involved in the decision...

We don’t even know if Clinton was involved in the committee’s review and approval of the uranium deal. Jose Fernandez, a former assistant secretary of state, told the New York Times that he represented the department on the committee. “Mrs. Clinton never intervened with me on any C.F.I.U.S. matter,” he told the Times, referring to the committee by its acronym.

The Facts on Uranium One - FactCheck.org

Looks like you got caught lying yet again.​

"we don't know" and "never intervened" I don't see "didn't approve" or "didn't sign". Can you quote the state dept regulation that would allow such a deal without the approval of the secretary?

I am quite sure that the documents exist showing her signature. Could those be some of the ones that they are refusing to release?

Neither you or I know the answer, but logic and the general rules of government agencies say that the secretary would have to approve such a deal.

OR, are you now saying that Hillary was so out of touch with reality that she neglected her responsibilities as secretary? I think Comey called her "extremely careless" right?

The “we” is politifact. The former assistant Secretary said Hillary never intervened on any CFIUS matter.

Ok, do you understand what "intervened" means? hint: it does not mean participate or approve.

 

[Faun]

No, dope.

It required the approval of the State Dept. Not the SoS.

Uh, duh, the secretary of state is head of the state department. So you are now saying that a deal like this could be made without the approval of the secretary of state?

LOLOL

Well since you failed so miserably to prove she signed it, seems her signature was not required.

talking to you is like talking to a dead frog that was smashed flat in the street. Are you a human being, or a parrot, or a computer program?

I know, it’s so pesky challenging you to prove the bullshit you post.

you made the claim that she did not and need not sign off on the deal. its your claim, not mine.

I made the claim after you failed to prove your claim she was required to signing off on it. I based that off of your inability to prove what you said.

 

[Redfish]

Uh, duh, the secretary of state is head of the state department. So you are now saying that a deal like this could be made without the approval of the secretary of state?

LOLOL

Well since you failed so miserably to prove she signed it, seems her signature was not required.

talking to you is like talking to a dead frog that was smashed flat in the street. Are you a human being, or a parrot, or a computer program?

I know, it’s so pesky challenging you to prove the bullshit you post.

you made the claim that she did not and need not sign off on the deal. its your claim, not mine.

I made the claim after you failed to prove your claim she was required to signing off on it. I based that off of your inability to prove what you said.

you are a waste of my time, welcome to my ignore list.

 

[Faun]

No, dope.

It required the approval of the State Dept. Not the SoS.

Uh, duh, the secretary of state is head of the state department. So you are now saying that a deal like this could be made without the approval of the secretary of state?

Oh look, Jose Fernandez, assistant Secretary at that time, says Hillary wasn’t involved in the decision...

We don’t even know if Clinton was involved in the committee’s review and approval of the uranium deal. Jose Fernandez, a former assistant secretary of state, told the New York Times that he represented the department on the committee. “Mrs. Clinton never intervened with me on any C.F.I.U.S. matter,” he told the Times, referring to the committee by its acronym.

The Facts on Uranium One - FactCheck.org

Looks like you got caught lying yet again.​

"we don't know" and "never intervened" I don't see "didn't approve" or "didn't sign". Can you quote the state dept regulation that would allow such a deal without the approval of the secretary?

I am quite sure that the documents exist showing her signature. Could those be some of the ones that they are refusing to release?

Neither you or I know the answer, but logic and the general rules of government agencies say that the secretary would have to approve such a deal.

OR, are you now saying that Hillary was so out of touch with reality that she neglected her responsibilities as secretary? I think Comey called her "extremely careless" right?

The “we” is politifact. The former assistant Secretary said Hillary never intervened on any CFIUS matter.

Ok, do you understand what "intervened" means? hint: it does not mean participate or approve.

Yeah, it means she did not intervene with the decision to allow the deal to go through.

 

[Redfish]

Faun is the latest ad to my ignore list. I don't waste my time with partisan idiots who cannot carry on a civil adult discussion.

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

Well since you failed so miserably to prove she signed it, seems her signature was not required.

talking to you is like talking to a dead frog that was smashed flat in the street. Are you a human being, or a parrot, or a computer program?

I know, it’s so pesky challenging you to prove the bullshit you post.

you made the claim that she did not and need not sign off on the deal. its your claim, not mine.

I made the claim after you failed to prove your claim she was required to signing off on it. I based that off of your inability to prove what you said.

you are a waste of my time, welcome to my ignore list.

Run, Forrest! Run!!!!






By the way, ignoring me doesn’t mean I ignore all of the lies you tell.... I’ll still point them out. All you just did was to put yourself into a disadvantage of not being able to defend yourself.

 

[flacaltenn]

You gotta step outside the bubble for a minute and just listen to yourself. This deep state conspiracy stuff is just plain silly. If they had legal and solid ground to go after Clinton then they would and they would receive the support of Trump and his base and the entire right wing media institution. They aren’t scared, they just don’t have the evidence and legal standing behind them.

Not true. What you don't appreciate is how "Hands Off" trump has actually been about the conspiracy in our govt to deny him the Presidency and then attempt to topple him. He's FUMING. But he's not gonna twitch until Mueller is out and done. Because if HE or his Admin appointed a special counsel NOW -- Mueller would NEVER wrap it up.

Like I said, Sessions chose a very competent DOJ prosecutor (Huber) and put him and 20 special agents in this somewhat hidden "special counsel" and they ARE working the legal details in quiet. There'\s also the Insp.Gen reports YET to come out. When the Mueller drama queen pageant wraps up and the IG reports are public -- I suspect that Sessions will start to bring out the subpoenas and indictments. NO WAY all this scandal goes completely unpunished. Trump is NOT that guy that forgives and forgets.

 

[bripat9643]

Our entire intel infrastructure is not loyal to Clinton. Just the idiots at the top....dumbass.

Oh, ok. So just the "idiots at the top" perpetrated all of this and the thousands of others just what, go along?

Sure, dope.

They are powerless to do anything about it, moron. Furthermore, most of them ddidn't know anything about it.

So, you believe all of the thousands of every day intel folks in the trenches are oblivious to the plans of their " masters" ?



What a sad QTARD you are.

Yes. That's obvious. Why would they know everything a few scumbags are doing?

They're the one's obtaining and corroborating the intelligence, dope. Do you imagine the intel chiefs do all that themselves?

What a dope.

No one corroborated their intelligence, moron. What part of "unverified" didn't you understand? Even if someone was doing it, they would only be a minute fraction of the personnel in the FBI.

 

[flacaltenn]

Trump's publicly asking the Russians to hack the Dems emails is enough to get him impeached and removed from office.

Mueller is just making sure that all the 'Is' are dotted and the 'Ts' crossed.

Besides which he knows that the spineless GOP weenies in congress will never impeach Trump no matter what, so he's just biding time for a responsible congress to get elected.

/-----/ "Trump's publicly asking the Russians to hack the Dems emails is enough to get him impeached and removed from office." Here is what PRIVATE CITIZEN TRUMP said:
July 27, 2016” — “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump said, looking directly into TV cameras, at a press conference in Florida. So the next dem president can be impeached for things he/she said while a private citizen? Are you sure you want to go down that road?

It's simpler than that. THere was nothing but sarcasm in that statement on a debate stage in front of Gawd and everybody. Folks that don't get that are clinically deranged That's NOT legal evidence of "conspiring of Russia".

However, PAYING russian Intel pros and former foreign spy for dirt on your opponent like Hillary did IS a crime. ESPECIALLY when the CIA/DNI/FBI help you pass that shit dossier to American people and a ******* FISA court as a legitimate American Intel product.

Need a 2nd special counsel for that whole collusion to abuse the govt power...

Why doesn’t Sessions and Wray arrest Clinton for buying the dossier? If it’s so cut and dry and if Trumps people are running the DOJ and FBI then why hasn’t that happened?

Because Repubs are whimps. Theyre afraid of being pummeled by the heavy artillery of the press. And Sessions is hiding under his desk or something. Never hire a Senator to be the chief law enforcer of the land.

There's deals being made. That's why. Under ALL of this is the FACT that the NSA Big Brother Spy Machine was hijacked and weaponized for political purposes. And NO ONE (well 95% of them) in Congress wants to go there and ADMIT that it happened because they all LOVE the idea of Domestic Spying.

So there will be deals to LIMIT the carnage. That's why when it was discovered that spies HAD been inserted into the Trump campaign (actually instigators and pranksters -- more than spies or informants) -- even Trey Gowdy and some of Liberty Caucus was making the "back-up" noise. Because that part implicates the actual INTEL agencies -- not just the FBI.

Sessions DOES HAVE a team in Arkansas thats' growing as big as Mueller's team investigating all this. And the FBI IGeneral still has TWO more reports that are supposed to dump this year. If the Repubs want to preserve their party -- they should be SCREAMING for a 2nd special counsel NOW. BEFORE the midterms.

But they are chickenshits. And I repeat myself. Regardless of how the midterms go, the anger is building over all the seriousness of these revelations. They are the largest political scandal of our lifetimes. And there WILL eventually be mass demonstrations and demands for justice. Repubs and Indies and all the ones without TDSydrome.

You gotta step outside the bubble for a minute and just listen to yourself. This deep state conspiracy stuff is just plain silly. If they had legal and solid ground to go after Clinton then they would and they would receive the support of Trump and his base and the entire right wing media institution. They aren’t scared, they just don’t have the evidence and legal standing behind them. Trumps tactic is to point the finger the other direction every time he is accused of something. He finds a narrative and then drills it in until his puppets start to follow. Don’t be a puppet, you’re just embarassing yourself.

Just because you wanted a factual answer and I know that "in YOUR BUBBLE" these facts would never be shown to you --- here's some REAL news on prosecuting the guilty.

Jeff Sessions: Senior federal prosecutor already investigating DOJ/FBI abuse, no Special Counsel needed yet

The breaking news last night was that the DOJ Office of Inspector General announced it was launching an investigation of possible Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court abuse.

The presumption, though not literally in the OIG announcement, was that it concerned the FISA warrant to surveil Carter Page based on the Steele dossier.


I wrote that an OIG investigation was “investigation is fine, we need to have a person empowered to empanel a grand jury and with the full force of criminal investigatory tools. Because if the scandal is as many people suspect, we need to be talking about locking people up, not just issuing a report.”

Tonight it was confirmed what Jeff Sessions had previously intimated, that there already is a criminal investigation of possible DOJ/FBI misconduct.

Fox News reports:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions revealed Thursday a federal prosecutor was evaluating certain issues involving the FBI, the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One, but said he would not appoint a second special counsel at this point.

In a letter directed to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, Sessions revealed that he asked U.S. Attorney John Huber to lead the evaluation into issues raised by the committees in recent months.

“I write in response to recent letters requesting the appointment of a Special Counsel to review certain prosecutorial and investigative determinations made by the Department of Justice in 2016 and 2017. I take the concerns you raise seriously,” Sessions wrote, noting how important it was that the American people and Congress had “confidence” in the Justice Department….

“Mr. Huber is conducting his work from outside the Washington D.C. area and in cooperation with the Inspector General,” Sessions said, noting that Huber’s review would “include a full, complete, and objective evaluation of these matters in a manner that is consistent with the law and facts.” …

John Huber, U.S. attorney leading FBI investigation, a special counsel in every way but name

Attorney General Jeff Sessions may have declined calls to appoint a second special counsel to investigate the FBI’s behavior during the 2016 campaign, but the man he has picked to lead an internal Justice Department review is a special counsel in every way but name.

John W. Huber, the U.S. attorney in Utah, can convene a grand jury, issue subpoenas, collect evidence and order witnesses to testify — all the usual powers a federal prosecutor has — as he delves into whether the FBI abused its powers when it sought permission and then carried out wiretapping of a Trump campaign figure, or whether it trod too lightly in pursuing questions about Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Mr. Sessions said the facts of the FBI situation don’t yet rise to the level of demanding a special counsel, but Mr. Huber is as close as can be.

“He will have the full authority of a federal prosecutor,” said Richard Painter, former chief ethics attorney for President George W. Bush. “If he looks at this and finds someone in the DOJ lied to a government official, he would be able to convene a grand jury, compel testimony and even prosecute them.”

By appointing an active federal prosecutor — in this case one first nominated by President Obama and kept on by President Trump — Mr. Sessions also may deflect criticism that the review is a partisan attempt to undermine the other special counsel, Robert Mueller, who is investigating the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russia in 2016.

Paul G. Cassell, a former federal judge who has known Mr. Huber since law school, said asking an acting U.S. attorney to lead the investigation is a good move because it may tamp down on excesses.

“When you have a special counsel, you always have to wonder if there is overzealousness in their prosecution because they only have one case,” he said. “Huber is going to be less inclined to move forward with prosecution unless it’s warranted because if he moves one case forward, others will be left behind.”

 

[francoHFW]

/-----/ "Trump's publicly asking the Russians to hack the Dems emails is enough to get him impeached and removed from office." Here is what PRIVATE CITIZEN TRUMP said:
July 27, 2016” — “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump said, looking directly into TV cameras, at a press conference in Florida. So the next dem president can be impeached for things he/she said while a private citizen? Are you sure you want to go down that road?

It's simpler than that. THere was nothing but sarcasm in that statement on a debate stage in front of Gawd and everybody. Folks that don't get that are clinically deranged That's NOT legal evidence of "conspiring of Russia".

However, PAYING russian Intel pros and former foreign spy for dirt on your opponent like Hillary did IS a crime. ESPECIALLY when the CIA/DNI/FBI help you pass that shit dossier to American people and a ******* FISA court as a legitimate American Intel product.

Need a 2nd special counsel for that whole collusion to abuse the govt power...

Why doesn’t Sessions and Wray arrest Clinton for buying the dossier? If it’s so cut and dry and if Trumps people are running the DOJ and FBI then why hasn’t that happened?

Because Repubs are whimps. Theyre afraid of being pummeled by the heavy artillery of the press. And Sessions is hiding under his desk or something. Never hire a Senator to be the chief law enforcer of the land.

There's deals being made. That's why. Under ALL of this is the FACT that the NSA Big Brother Spy Machine was hijacked and weaponized for political purposes. And NO ONE (well 95% of them) in Congress wants to go there and ADMIT that it happened because they all LOVE the idea of Domestic Spying.

So there will be deals to LIMIT the carnage. That's why when it was discovered that spies HAD been inserted into the Trump campaign (actually instigators and pranksters -- more than spies or informants) -- even Trey Gowdy and some of Liberty Caucus was making the "back-up" noise. Because that part implicates the actual INTEL agencies -- not just the FBI.

Sessions DOES HAVE a team in Arkansas thats' growing as big as Mueller's team investigating all this. And the FBI IGeneral still has TWO more reports that are supposed to dump this year. If the Repubs want to preserve their party -- they should be SCREAMING for a 2nd special counsel NOW. BEFORE the midterms.

But they are chickenshits. And I repeat myself. Regardless of how the midterms go, the anger is building over all the seriousness of these revelations. They are the largest political scandal of our lifetimes. And there WILL eventually be mass demonstrations and demands for justice. Repubs and Indies and all the ones without TDSydrome.

You gotta step outside the bubble for a minute and just listen to yourself. This deep state conspiracy stuff is just plain silly. If they had legal and solid ground to go after Clinton then they would and they would receive the support of Trump and his base and the entire right wing media institution. They aren’t scared, they just don’t have the evidence and legal standing behind them. Trumps tactic is to point the finger the other direction every time he is accused of something. He finds a narrative and then drills it in until his puppets start to follow. Don’t be a puppet, you’re just embarassing yourself.

Just because you wanted a factual answer and I know that "in YOUR BUBBLE" these facts would never be shown to you --- here's some REAL news on prosecuting the guilty.

Jeff Sessions: Senior federal prosecutor already investigating DOJ/FBI abuse, no Special Counsel needed yet

The breaking news last night was that the DOJ Office of Inspector General announced it was launching an investigation of possible Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court abuse.

The presumption, though not literally in the OIG announcement, was that it concerned the FISA warrant to surveil Carter Page based on the Steele dossier.


I wrote that an OIG investigation was “investigation is fine, we need to have a person empowered to empanel a grand jury and with the full force of criminal investigatory tools. Because if the scandal is as many people suspect, we need to be talking about locking people up, not just issuing a report.”

Tonight it was confirmed what Jeff Sessions had previously intimated, that there already is a criminal investigation of possible DOJ/FBI misconduct.

Fox News reports:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions revealed Thursday a federal prosecutor was evaluating certain issues involving the FBI, the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One, but said he would not appoint a second special counsel at this point.

In a letter directed to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, Sessions revealed that he asked U.S. Attorney John Huber to lead the evaluation into issues raised by the committees in recent months.

“I write in response to recent letters requesting the appointment of a Special Counsel to review certain prosecutorial and investigative determinations made by the Department of Justice in 2016 and 2017. I take the concerns you raise seriously,” Sessions wrote, noting how important it was that the American people and Congress had “confidence” in the Justice Department….

“Mr. Huber is conducting his work from outside the Washington D.C. area and in cooperation with the Inspector General,” Sessions said, noting that Huber’s review would “include a full, complete, and objective evaluation of these matters in a manner that is consistent with the law and facts.” …

John Huber, U.S. attorney leading FBI investigation, a special counsel in every way but name

Attorney General Jeff Sessions may have declined calls to appoint a second special counsel to investigate the FBI’s behavior during the 2016 campaign, but the man he has picked to lead an internal Justice Department review is a special counsel in every way but name.

John W. Huber, the U.S. attorney in Utah, can convene a grand jury, issue subpoenas, collect evidence and order witnesses to testify — all the usual powers a federal prosecutor has — as he delves into whether the FBI abused its powers when it sought permission and then carried out wiretapping of a Trump campaign figure, or whether it trod too lightly in pursuing questions about Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Mr. Sessions said the facts of the FBI situation don’t yet rise to the level of demanding a special counsel, but Mr. Huber is as close as can be.

“He will have the full authority of a federal prosecutor,” said Richard Painter, former chief ethics attorney for President George W. Bush. “If he looks at this and finds someone in the DOJ lied to a government official, he would be able to convene a grand jury, compel testimony and even prosecute them.”

By appointing an active federal prosecutor — in this case one first nominated by President Obama and kept on by President Trump — Mr. Sessions also may deflect criticism that the review is a partisan attempt to undermine the other special counsel, Robert Mueller, who is investigating the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russia in 2016.

Paul G. Cassell, a former federal judge who has known Mr. Huber since law school, said asking an acting U.S. attorney to lead the investigation is a good move because it may tamp down on excesses.

“When you have a special counsel, you always have to wonder if there is overzealousness in their prosecution because they only have one case,” he said. “Huber is going to be less inclined to move forward with prosecution unless it’s warranted because if he moves one case forward, others will be left behind.”

Ofcourse when 30% of the country believes garbage, you have to investigate it...

 

[bripat9643]

I'm still waiting . . . . has a single Leftard given just ONE clear example yet of exactly where and when Russia affected and changed votes as per the OP of this thread?

Nah, still didn't think so. . . .

The actual affects aren't quantifiable but logic informs us that it didn't need to be very many whose votes were influenced by Russian efforts.

Just their social media operations alone reached over 126 million people. Trump won the three key electoral states by a margin of only 77k votes.

77k/126 m =.0006%

That is the percentage that needed to be affected to get the desired outcome. Certainly within reason.

The phrase "they reached 126 million people" is meaningless. What does "reached" mean, someone may have seen a single tweet? It doesn't mean anything. Where is the evidence for your claim? Are you including the Wikileaks emails which the Russians weren't even responsible for?

No, dope, I'm not including wikileaks. That's why I said, "just their social media operations alone". When you include the entirety of their operations, that number shrinks exponentially. If you add in Comey's contribution it becomes undeniable that the election was influenced against Clinton.

You mean the $100,000 the spent on Facebook? Yeah, I'm sure that had a big impact compared to the $1.5 billion Hillary spent on her campaign. Hillary only spent 15,000 times more than the Russians spent on bots.

Another dopey trope. Social media advertising is cheap because it is shared by the users of the platforms. One inexpensive item can be shared millions of times accross multiple platforms.

Cheap for Putin, and cheap for Hillary. Your excuse doesn't wash.

 

[Markle]

sorry, but I don't consider propaganda cites as a valid source of economic stats, remember figures don't lie, but liars figure.

the pollsters said Hillary could not lose and that Trump had no path to 270 EC votes, were they lying or just stupid? it has to be one or the other

you are diverting again... why are you talking about pollsters and what makes you think I’m talking partisan opinion/propaganda sites? I’m talking about facts and stats.

yes, the numbers were getting better during Obama's term, I guess under your premise, Bush gets credit.

In case you didn’t get the memo, the economy crashed under Bush. Part of the responsibility for that crash lies in policies initiated by Clinton. Do you deny that??

So that son of a bitchin' Clintion fucked up everything by balancing the budget. Those pol;icies were the ones pushed by the Republican Congrtess.

you are diverting again... why are you talking about pollsters and what makes you think I’m talking partisan opinion/propaganda sites? I’m talking about facts and stats.

yes, the numbers were getting better during Obama's term, I guess under your premise, Bush gets credit.

In case you didn’t get the memo, the economy crashed under Bush. Part of the responsibility for that crash lies in policies initiated by Clinton. Do you deny that??

well actually it crashed under obammy in 2009, just saying

The recession started 4th quarter of 2007

big word started, it didn't crash until the bottom fell out in 2009.

Wrong.

 

[flacaltenn]

It's simpler than that. THere was nothing but sarcasm in that statement on a debate stage in front of Gawd and everybody. Folks that don't get that are clinically deranged That's NOT legal evidence of "conspiring of Russia".

However, PAYING russian Intel pros and former foreign spy for dirt on your opponent like Hillary did IS a crime. ESPECIALLY when the CIA/DNI/FBI help you pass that shit dossier to American people and a ******* FISA court as a legitimate American Intel product.

Need a 2nd special counsel for that whole collusion to abuse the govt power...

Why doesn’t Sessions and Wray arrest Clinton for buying the dossier? If it’s so cut and dry and if Trumps people are running the DOJ and FBI then why hasn’t that happened?

Because Repubs are whimps. Theyre afraid of being pummeled by the heavy artillery of the press. And Sessions is hiding under his desk or something. Never hire a Senator to be the chief law enforcer of the land.

There's deals being made. That's why. Under ALL of this is the FACT that the NSA Big Brother Spy Machine was hijacked and weaponized for political purposes. And NO ONE (well 95% of them) in Congress wants to go there and ADMIT that it happened because they all LOVE the idea of Domestic Spying.

So there will be deals to LIMIT the carnage. That's why when it was discovered that spies HAD been inserted into the Trump campaign (actually instigators and pranksters -- more than spies or informants) -- even Trey Gowdy and some of Liberty Caucus was making the "back-up" noise. Because that part implicates the actual INTEL agencies -- not just the FBI.

Sessions DOES HAVE a team in Arkansas thats' growing as big as Mueller's team investigating all this. And the FBI IGeneral still has TWO more reports that are supposed to dump this year. If the Repubs want to preserve their party -- they should be SCREAMING for a 2nd special counsel NOW. BEFORE the midterms.

But they are chickenshits. And I repeat myself. Regardless of how the midterms go, the anger is building over all the seriousness of these revelations. They are the largest political scandal of our lifetimes. And there WILL eventually be mass demonstrations and demands for justice. Repubs and Indies and all the ones without TDSydrome.

You gotta step outside the bubble for a minute and just listen to yourself. This deep state conspiracy stuff is just plain silly. If they had legal and solid ground to go after Clinton then they would and they would receive the support of Trump and his base and the entire right wing media institution. They aren’t scared, they just don’t have the evidence and legal standing behind them. Trumps tactic is to point the finger the other direction every time he is accused of something. He finds a narrative and then drills it in until his puppets start to follow. Don’t be a puppet, you’re just embarassing yourself.

Just because you wanted a factual answer and I know that "in YOUR BUBBLE" these facts would never be shown to you --- here's some REAL news on prosecuting the guilty.

Jeff Sessions: Senior federal prosecutor already investigating DOJ/FBI abuse, no Special Counsel needed yet

The breaking news last night was that the DOJ Office of Inspector General announced it was launching an investigation of possible Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court abuse.

The presumption, though not literally in the OIG announcement, was that it concerned the FISA warrant to surveil Carter Page based on the Steele dossier.


I wrote that an OIG investigation was “investigation is fine, we need to have a person empowered to empanel a grand jury and with the full force of criminal investigatory tools. Because if the scandal is as many people suspect, we need to be talking about locking people up, not just issuing a report.”

Tonight it was confirmed what Jeff Sessions had previously intimated, that there already is a criminal investigation of possible DOJ/FBI misconduct.

Fox News reports:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions revealed Thursday a federal prosecutor was evaluating certain issues involving the FBI, the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One, but said he would not appoint a second special counsel at this point.

In a letter directed to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, Sessions revealed that he asked U.S. Attorney John Huber to lead the evaluation into issues raised by the committees in recent months.

“I write in response to recent letters requesting the appointment of a Special Counsel to review certain prosecutorial and investigative determinations made by the Department of Justice in 2016 and 2017. I take the concerns you raise seriously,” Sessions wrote, noting how important it was that the American people and Congress had “confidence” in the Justice Department….

“Mr. Huber is conducting his work from outside the Washington D.C. area and in cooperation with the Inspector General,” Sessions said, noting that Huber’s review would “include a full, complete, and objective evaluation of these matters in a manner that is consistent with the law and facts.” …

John Huber, U.S. attorney leading FBI investigation, a special counsel in every way but name

Attorney General Jeff Sessions may have declined calls to appoint a second special counsel to investigate the FBI’s behavior during the 2016 campaign, but the man he has picked to lead an internal Justice Department review is a special counsel in every way but name.

John W. Huber, the U.S. attorney in Utah, can convene a grand jury, issue subpoenas, collect evidence and order witnesses to testify — all the usual powers a federal prosecutor has — as he delves into whether the FBI abused its powers when it sought permission and then carried out wiretapping of a Trump campaign figure, or whether it trod too lightly in pursuing questions about Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Mr. Sessions said the facts of the FBI situation don’t yet rise to the level of demanding a special counsel, but Mr. Huber is as close as can be.

“He will have the full authority of a federal prosecutor,” said Richard Painter, former chief ethics attorney for President George W. Bush. “If he looks at this and finds someone in the DOJ lied to a government official, he would be able to convene a grand jury, compel testimony and even prosecute them.”

By appointing an active federal prosecutor — in this case one first nominated by President Obama and kept on by President Trump — Mr. Sessions also may deflect criticism that the review is a partisan attempt to undermine the other special counsel, Robert Mueller, who is investigating the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russia in 2016.

Paul G. Cassell, a former federal judge who has known Mr. Huber since law school, said asking an acting U.S. attorney to lead the investigation is a good move because it may tamp down on excesses.

“When you have a special counsel, you always have to wonder if there is overzealousness in their prosecution because they only have one case,” he said. “Huber is going to be less inclined to move forward with prosecution unless it’s warranted because if he moves one case forward, others will be left behind.”

Ofcourse when 30% of the country believes garbage, you have to investigate it...

Only 30% of the country KNOWS these FACTS -- because YOUR 30% are kept in the dark and fed shit like mushrooms from the WaPo/CNN/MSNBC/DemUnderground. And the other 40% just does not care.

Did you KNOW about Huber being appointed to do a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION of all those stinky scandals? Of course you didn't.... You're bubble is still on dial-up to Don Lemon..

 

[bripat9643]

bullshit. If he released his returns (which are hundreds of pages) you assholes on the left would pull out one page, make up lies about it, and it would waste hundreds of hours refuting your lies.

How about the returns from the "tax-exempt" Clinton foundation? Would you be interested in knowing what happened to the millions they collected for Haiti relief after the hurricane? That money never got to Haiti. Do you care about that corruption?

I am merely pointing out the disingenuousness of you liberals.

Our entire intel infrastructure is not loyal to Clinton. Just the idiots at the top....dumbass.

So all of the people Donald Trump appointed to head the Justice Department, and the FBI, are loyal to the Clintons? Then why did Comey announce he was re-opening the Clinton Investigation days before the election.

Your statement makes no sense considering that these agencies were headed by Republicans for 10 of the twenty five years the Clintons have been investigated, and they controlled the House and Senate for 12 more years when Democrats were in the White House.

One would think, given the animus of Republicans towards the Clintons and their investigations and attempts at removing them from office, that there is no loyalty protecting the Clintons at all.

FBI and DOJ corruption is apparently nothing new. But it is very clear that Strzok, Page, McCabe, Comey, and others were trying to rig the election by exonerating Hillary and attacking Trump with false documents paid for by the Clinton campaign.

So, when Comey announced he was reopening the e0mail investigation, you think that was done to help Hillary.

how did it hurt her?

your leftist view on americans is really quite sad. you're just a fking punk that knows nothing.

Really, do I have a dim view of Russia loving assholes like you & Trump? You betcha.

Gee, let me think, Announcing a candidate is back under scrutiny days before the election by the FBI isn't harmful? You can't be that ******* stupid, can you.

Call me a punk all you want. You are just pissed off that I have debunked your posts & pointed out what a dumbass you are. Go **** yourself you Commie loving, anti-American piece of shit.

It's less harmful to Comey that having it discovered he sat on evidence before the election. It's also less harmful to Hillary than going to jail, which is where she belongs.

 

[Markle]

We keep hearing from all sides that the Russians interfered with our 2016 election, but I have yet to hear any of them say exactly what the Russians did, where they did it, or which votes were influenced by it.

this is a serious inquiry, what did they Russians do? where, when, to who? which states?

Heir Mewler cant find anything, the IG cant find anything. So someone tell us, what did they do?

The concept of an 'Ongoing' investigation is obviously beyond you.

Prosecutors do not disclose information about an 'Ongoing' investigation. So the fact that you do not have much information about the Mueller investigation is not surprising.

But based on what has leaked out, and of the indictments so far, it certainly looks like Trump is toast.

Can we be a bit forward thinking and start debating Pres. Pence now?

/----/ If there was evidence on Trump it would have leaked by now to drive the numbers down.

Trump's publicly asking the Russians to hack the Dems emails is enough to get him impeached and removed from office.

Mueller is just making sure that all the 'Is' are dotted and the 'Ts' crossed.

Besides which he knows that the spineless GOP weenies in congress will never impeach Trump no matter what, so he's just biding time for a responsible congress to get elected.

/-----/ "Trump's publicly asking the Russians to hack the Dems emails is enough to get him impeached and removed from office." Here is what PRIVATE CITIZEN TRUMP said:
July 27, 2016” — “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump said, looking directly into TV cameras, at a press conference in Florida. So the next dem president can be impeached for things he/she said while a private citizen? Are you sure you want to go down that road?

The fact that Trump was a PRIVATE citizen is exactly what makes this so illegal.

It's called the Logan Act. Try looking it up.

You're off in fantasy land. As you know, Donald Trump NEVER asked the Russians to hack Hillary Clintons. It was well known that Russia had hacked the Democrats and Hillary Clinton's servers. Trump as asking them to look through what they had and publish those 30,000 emails since as far as the Democrats were concerned, they were just wiped clean with a cloth or something.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

You dumbfuck.... it wasn’t her Uranium to sell.

No fricken kidding, yet she approved the sale anyway....dumbass.

Prove it. Show proof she personally signed off on it....

a deal like that requires the approval (signature) of the secretary of state. Who was SecState when the uranium deal was made? any idea?

No, dope.

It required the approval of the State Dept. Not the SoS.

Uh, duh, the secretary of state is head of the state department. So you are now saying that a deal like this could be made without the approval of the secretary of state?

So you are now saying that a deal like this could be made without the approval of the secretary of state?

Sure.

Fact Check: Did Hillary Clinton Personally Approve the Uranium One Deal?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Again, the question was, what did russia do, dope?

You stated that it was spelled out in the indictment. What indictment.

The latest one, dope. Read it!

Read: Mueller indictment against 12 Russian spies for DNC hack