Flynn, Comey, and Mueller: What Trump Knew and When He Knew It

See post #73 for the Cliff Notes. Tks.

 

Yeah, telling the Grand Buffoon , "It's MY WAY, or the HIWAY"...such "fear"...

 

Time for a libwinger reality check.

 

This meme about sums it up nicely, Trump is right to be shaking in his Russian booties:

 

He can fire whoever he wants, but it doesn’t mean it’s not obstruction.
Suddenly now we should trust Rosensteins judgement ? Lmao

 

Mueller/Comey wanted to be the new Vyshinsky/Beria, but so far he has just served as an important political asset for Trump and the anti-eatablishment mass movement that Trump is serving so well.

 

In a piece for The Washington Post last year, Turley said that those relying on the line from Federalist 69 are missing its broader point. According to Turley, Hamilton "was not expounding on inherent immunity and would hardly be making such an implied argument in an essay designed to quell concerns over presidential powers." Instead, Turley argues, Hamilton was explaining that the president, unlike the British monarch, was not above the law and "could be stripped of his office and still prosecuted under the Constitution."

 

Memes? Is that all ya got?

 

It's Mueller Time & tRUmp is trembling in his Ruskie boots..........obstruction and seditious conspiracy anyone?

 

Mueller's real history is known. As a special prosecutor Mueller is perfect - for Trump.

“In Washington, Robert S. Mueller, assistant attorney general in charge of the department's criminal division, said "the Justice Department has fully supported the work of Dist. Atty. Robert Morgenthau related to the bank's Manhattan activities." He added: "We have provided substantial information to Mr. Morgenthau and will continue to cooperate in the investigation."

However, the Justice Department appeared to be one of the few agencies Morgenthau omitted from his office's prepared statement on the case, heaping thanks on everybody from Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan to various officials of the Federal Reserve System and New York state officials.

The one-sided claim of cooperation illustrates Mueller's eagerness to play down reports that the Justice Department has not answered Morgenthau's requests for information.” LOS ANGELES TIMES, BCCI, 2 Founders Indicted; U.S. Imposes Record Fine, July 30, 1991|VICTOR F. ZONANA | TIMES STAFF WRITER.
http://articles.latimes.com/1991-07-30/news/mn-126_1_record-fine/2

 

And now, "THE REST OF THE STORY" :

Robert Mueller Has Been Botching Investigations Since The Anthrax Attacks

Special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into the anthrax attacks following 9/11 -- one of the most important of his career -- did not go well, to say the least.

Under Mueller’s management, the FBI launched an investigation lasting ten years. They now brag about spending “hundreds of thousands of investigator hours on this case.” Let’s take a closer look at Mueller’s response to understand the context of the investigation — who his people investigated, targeted, and found guilty.

Mueller’s FBI honed in on Steven Hatfill as the culprit — a “flag-waving” American, who had served in the Army, then dedicated himself to protecting America from bioterrorist threats by working in the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases.

There was no direct link from Hatfill to the attacks, by the FBI’s own admission, and the bureau never charged Hatfill. The FBI did however spy on, follow, and harass him non-stop for years. The Department of Justice also publicly outed Hatfill as the possible terrorist.

While Hatfill’s dignity and life was being trampled on by America’s secret police, Mueller took a stand. But on a different topic. He made front page news for threatening President Bush he would resign over NSA policy. All while his own team was trampling on the rights of an American in the FBI’s largest-ever investigation.

Hatfill successfully sued the government for its unlawful actions. He won almost $6 million dollars.

The investigation was an unmitigated disaster for America. Mueller didn’t go after al-Qaida for the anthrax letters because he couldn’t find a direct link. But then he targeted American citizens without showing a direct link. For his deeds, he had the second longest tenure as FBI Director ever, and was roundly applauded by nearly everyone (except Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert).

Now he’s running the Trump-Russia investigation.

http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/robert-mueller-botching-investigations-since-anthrax-attacks/



The Grand Buffoon.

 

Start a thread..........you are straying off the tread topic that revolves around the target Trump.

 

Rabbit hole.

 

Of course..DEBUNKING YOUR BULLSHIT MEME = "straying off the topic".


The Grand Buffoon's BUFFOONISH RECORD IS ABSOLUTELY PERTINENT TO THE OP....

 

Moscow Mueller:

“While the indictments allege a wide range of criminal activity, they do not cite anything related to the Trump campaign and Russia. In fact, the indictment overwhelmingly deals with shady deals Manafort allegedly made throughout an extended period of years before he joined the Trump campaign.”

MOSCOW MUELLER: WHAT THE INDICTMENTS AND PLEA AGREEMENTS MEAN FOR DONALD TRUMP, Jeremy Scahill, November 3 2017.
https://theintercept.com/2017/11/03/robert-mueller-trump-campaign-russia-manafort-papadopoulos/

Add Moscow Steele, Moscow Ohr, and Moscow Fusion GPS ... .
These people are a threat to themselves - not Trump.

 

Time for a libwinger reality check.

 

Reality bites too hard for them.

“It’s even more surreal to watch Democrats act as though lying to the public is some grave firing offense when President Obama’s top national security official, James Clapper, got caught red-handed not only lying to the public but also to Congress — about a domestic surveillance program that courts ruled was illegal. And despite the fact that lying to Congress is a felony, he kept his job until the very last day of the Obama presidency.

But this is how political power and the addled partisan brain in D.C. functions. Those in power always regard leaks as a heinous crime, while those out of power regard them as a noble act. They seamlessly shift sides as their position in D.C. changes.”
THE INTERCEPT, The Leakers Who Exposed Gen. Flynn’s Lie Committed Serious — and Wholly Justified — Felonies, By, Glenn Greenwald, February 14 2017.
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/14...mitted-serious-and-wholly-justified-felonies/

 

No. Inextricably linked to the same people.

 

You said the unmasking was illegal. It wasn’t. The leaking probably was.

 

That depends, and not if they were the same people unmasking in order to leak.

Which we all know they were.

 

If they were unmasked with NO VERIFIED CRIMINAL of NATIONAL SECURITY REASON(s), it absolutely WAS ILLEGAL.

 

Why would a UN Ambassador need to unmask anyone?

Much less hundreds at the rate of one per day during the last year of the Obama regime.

Samantha Power, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was 'unmasking' at such a rapid pace in the final months of the Obama administration that she averaged more than one request for every working day in 2016 – and even sought information in the days leading up to President Trump’s inauguration, multiple sources close to the matter told Fox News.

Two sources, who were not authorized to speak on the record, said the requests to identify Americans whose names surfaced in foreign intelligence reporting, known as unmasking, exceeded 260 last year. One source indicated this occurred in the final days of the Obama White House.

 

And of course, the Socialist John Brennan couldn't recall any of it...

During a public congressional hearing earlier this year, Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina pressed former CIA director John Brennan on unmasking, without mentioning Power by name.

Gowdy: Do you recall any U.S. ambassadors asking that names be unmasked?

Brennan: I don't know. Maybe it's ringing a vague bell but I'm not -- I could not answer with any confidence.

Gowdy continued, asking: On either January 19 or up till noon on January 20, did you make any unmasking requests?

Brennan: I do not believe I did.

Gowdy: So you did not make any requests on the last day that you were employed?

Brennan: No, I was not in the agency on the last day I was employed.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ricans-on-almost-daily-basis-sources-say.html

 

Exactly. That's why I said that unmasking wasn't necessarily legal.

The how and the why are part of the equation.