Senate Democrats just released full testimony on the Trump-Russia dossier. Here's what's in it

This is going to be my last reply to you in this thread.

I suggest you Google "Martha Stewart." Your facts are not quite straight. She was being investigated for insider trading and lied about it. Once she lied, she was criminally prosecuted. Once she was out of prison, after being found guilty of obstruction, she settled the civil case.

If you are innocent, there is no reason to lie to law enforcement. My position is that if you lie to law enforcement, you're likely going to prison for obstruction. I don't suggest anyone lie to law enforcement. It indicates deception. However, with that being said, since you're so sure you're right, then you do as you like.

As to Hillary Clinton, I never mentioned her in this thread and I don't see that she is on topic. You mentioned her, apparently to win some kind of partisan debate point. Feel free to search my posting history. My position on her has been consistent. If there is sufficient evidence she committed a crime, then take her to court. So far, after more money was spent investigating her than 9/11, and those investigations found insufficient evidence for charges in both the Benghazi situation and with the email server, I'm going to assume they didn't have evidence to prove guilt. In this country, you're assumed innocent until proven guilty. Seems you're willing to declare Martha Stewart innocent when the jury found compelling evidence to convict her AND she chose to settle the civil case, yet believe Hillary Clinton is guilty despite investigations producing insufficient evidence for charges. That seems partisan to me. The Law should not be treated as a partisan matter, IMO.

 

We're talking about the United States in the present time, not some hyperbolic historical nonsense.

Everyone does not agree that Flynn did nothing illegal by talking to the Russian ambassador. He was negotiating the Russian response to Obama expelling Russian diplomats and we have one President at a time. It is illegal for ordinary American citizens to negotiate with other countries on behalf of the government. The fallacy of your argument lies in this misperception. The Russian ambassador was under surveillance. The FBI knew what was said in the phone call, and it wasn't what Flynn told them. There's a reason for that. He knew he wasn't supposed to be negotiating with the Russian government. Had Flynn told the truth, he would likely have had his hand slapped. When he lied to the FBI, it was a felony. Let's not pretend that is the only issue with Flynn though. He was also an illegally unregistered foreign agent and used his position as National Security Advisor to change US military plans to favor Turkey's position.

I already gave you the life tip- don't lie to law enforcement. It makes you look guilty and is a crime in and of itself.

I'm not a Democrat, so I'm not going to address the partisan portion of your post.

 

Okay the conspiracy tinfoil people maybe. But no one who knows the law thinks that. The Logan act is 203 years old and no one has ever been charged under it. It's an Adams administration overreach, like the allien sedition act, that is only still on the books because it's never been challenged in court.

It's violated everyday by 10s if thousands of people. If you work for an international NGO you are violating the Logan Act an a daily basis.

The Logan Act was just a pretext to catch Flynn on a process crime. Once they got the process crime we stopped hearing about the Logan Act.

And I don't care if you are a Democrat or not. You have clearly bought into the democrats 'we lost the election because we were stabbed in the back by the Jews... uh I mean the Russians.'

That kind if thinking only mastaticise and ends up killing millions you need to back away now.

Like I said replace Russians with Jews and ask yourself who you sound like.

In the late 1910-1920s when Germans started grumbling about how they had been stabbed in the back by the Jewish bankers I dont think many of them realized that their mode of thinking was the exact same mode of thinking that lead to the Spanish Inquisition or the Salem Witch trials. I don't think they ever believed that they were on a paranoid path that leads to genocide. You guys need to stop and check yourself now.

 

Did you read my whole post before responding? I clearly said had Flynn not lied, he would have probably gotten a hand slap. BUT… he lied. Here's where you should direct your angst- Why did he lie? There's lots of speculation out there from Trump told him to call and he was protecting Trump, to it really was a Merry Christmas call that went into the Russian response to expelled diplomats. He lied for a reason and it wasn't because he was worried about the Logan Act. I also highly doubt a retired Army General was afraid of the FBI.

Why not just say he was talking to the Russian ambassador about the response to expelling diplomats? He might have gotten in a little trouble, but he wouldn't go to prison for that. If you break the law, then you deal with the consequences. If you lie to law enforcement, then you go to prison. Law enforcement, judges, and juries do not appreciate lies/obstruction of justice and reflect it in court decisions.

Getting back on topic- The issue with Grassley and Graham asking for charges against Steele was pure partisan politics. There's a reason they didn't want the entire testimony released. Once the transcript was released, Grassley and Graham appear to have urged criminal charges for partisan reasons. If the transcript had shown that Steele did something illegal, Grassley certainly wouldn't have had an issue with releasing it. Now he's been shown to be playing partisan politics in a VERY important investigation. The question is why?

 

"Are you now or have you ever been a member of the communist party."

That is why. You are ignoring the psychology of the witchhunt because you don't want to question your own biases that caused you to get caught up in a mass paranoia.

"It's not a witchhunt because I'm too smart to get taken in by a witchhunt."

Is not a valid argument.

Once again you are flipflopping sorry an hour has passed and you can't edit your post.

And then there is this gem where you conflate her conviction for lying with her being guilty of insider trading.

This is dangerous dangerous dangerous thinking. You're on a path that kills millions. Please comeback to reality. She was convicted of lying to investigators no more no less.

Again this is pure mass paranoia. They didn't release it because Fusion wanted it confidential and it's not their policy to release confidential testimony in ongoing cases.

This isn't surprising I'm in a case right now that is on hold for months. I can't talk to anyone involved in the case about what has already been testified to by other witnesses because it would prejudice further testimony. That is simply basic legal procedure.

When Feinstein released it, it was a huge nothing burger. The whole 'release the transcripts' was grandstanding because people with bias would assume there was something there that wasnt, Fusion knew it would fuel the parinioa because they are in the paranoia business.

 

Let's hope it doesn't ever get to that point. Let's hope it stays to whining. Whining might be annoying, but it's never hurt people.

 

Sneaky Dianne Feinstein Confirms She Leaked Glenn Simpson Transcript at the Request of Fusion GPS’s Lawyers

 

You need to let go of your false equivalence here. The difference is that you are a total nobody just like all of us stiffs. A nobody. No one cares who you talk to because you're not presenting yourself as an agent of the government let alone the president's inner circle of top level people. And furthermore, what might you say about their attempt to set up a back-channel communication that circumvented the US government through the Russian Embassy? Honestly. This is not bar talk. This couldn't be farther from bar talk. To imagine or condone this behavior because you one time talked to a Russian is just... it's insane. Sorry but it is.

 

Oh shut up. Ive worked 13 years in international energy. My field is electrical generation and distribution. How do you think we make electricity? Natural gas. I deal with Russians on a regular basis because they are kicking our ass in arctic LNG right now.

One of the reasons I'm so worried by this parinioa is what separates me from Carter Page is I don't work for the Trump campaign. If I did I couldnt tell you every detail of every talk I had with Russians. They are ****ing Russians I was blitzed in Vodka.

 

Ask any cop how he knows that someone is lying and he will tell you it is when the story changes each time. Liars can't keep their stories straight whereas there is only one version of the truth.

The BLOTUS is a congenital liar and those around him are professional liars.

As an Independent I know that all politicians are liars because it is part of the job description but it is what they lie about that matters.

 

Why did the Russian Ambassador report what Flynn and Kushner wanted to the Americans?

Because it was ILLEGAL to want to use RUSSIAN SPY APPARATUS to circumvent the US Law of the Land.

No other incoming administration has ever asked to do something of that illegal nature which is why the RUSSIANS reported it.

 

Irrelevant even if true.

The paranoia is yours alone. The fact that you can't seem to differentiate between your conversations with some Gazprom guy at the bar and the revelations of secret contact and attempts at circumventing government oversight between Trump's people (as agents of the government) and official agents of the Russian government is your own blind spot.

Literally *no one* cares if you talk to some Russian guy.

 

You're ignoring the fact that Flynn actually was caught up in FBI surveillance with his phone calls to a Russian foreign agent. It's not a witch hunt if there is a reason for the investigation. Surveillance of foreign agents is a matter of national security. The FBI already knew what Flynn had said. Flynn and Flynn alone, decided to lie about the conversation when the FBI asked about it. Is isn't a witch hunt when you talk to a person under FBI surveillance and then lie about what was said. He shouldn't have lied. No one should ever lie to law enforcement.

Comparing law enforcement questioning procedures to McCarthyism is beyond the pale.

I have not flip-flopped on anything. If you do something illegal and are questioned by the police, then tell the truth and accept whatever consequences come from the illegal action. That's the responsible thing to do. If you do nothing illegal and are questioned by law enforcement, then tell the truth and you won't become a felon for lying. Whether you did something illegal or not, tell the truth. The truth will set you free.

I didn't conflate Stewart's obstruction of justice with being guilty of insider trading. She lied about why she sold the stocks she sold. Her stockbroker lied about it too. They had a witness that testified he tipped off Martha Stewart, and he worked for her stockbroker. Had she not lied, she wouldn't have gone to prison. She might have paid a fine, but she lost that money anyway when she settled the civil case. It is illogical and illegal to purposefully mislead law enforcement, particularly if you are innocent. Lying is evidence of the desire to mislead, and innocent people have no reason to mislead law enforcement.

If you are so very concerned about witch hunts, why don't you also see that Grassley and Graham were promoting a partisan witch hunt against Steele? It's obvious from the transcript.

 

If you want me to ready anything further don't lead with something so ridiculous. If it's treason to talk to the Russian Ambassador why do we even have a Russian Ambassador?

Even at the height of the Cold War arguments never got this ridiculous.

 

No it's not. A lot of people in international markets are scared by the crazies on your side. You are criminalizing normal everyday buisnuiss by innuendo.

But then again what the **** do you care? They are not you.

The.

No one cared about Carter Page.

 

I don't understand why you can't differentiate between people doing business with Russians and presidential campaigns having secret meetings with people like Dvorkovich, presidential campaign people trying to set up secret back channel communications that exist outside of government oversight, presidential campaigns systematically lying about their contacts, obscuring their contacts, and obstructing the consequent investigations about those contacts. Dude, that is not the same as private sector people meeting in a bar.

Honestly Windigo, why do you think that you having a talk with some Russian contemporary in a bar is the same thing as a presidential advisor meeting secretly with the Deputy Prime Minister of Russia? Why is that the same to you?

The FBI disagrees with you, followed closely behind by the FISA court, the CIA, the NSA, and the DNI.

Shall we talk about Papadopoulos Next? Elephant Tail? Flynn? Manafort? The Logan Act? You tell me boss.

 

It is your illogic that is ridiculous.

It was the actual CONTENT of what Flynn said to the Ambassador that was a violation of the Law of the Land.

 

Psssssh… I didn't lead with that. You edited my post to that one part and built a straw man to criticize.

The phone call wasn't treasonous and I never said it was. We're not at war, required for a treason charge, and it wasn't espionage. It is illegal for an ordinary citizen to negotiate on the behalf of the US with a foreign country, and you know this. You've already mentioned the Logan Act and know that he wasn't going to be prosecuted over a Logan Act violation because of precedent. Yes, the FBI knew what Flynn had said in that call. Flynn knew they did too. He's not a newbie to politics and government, and even ordinary citizens know that foreign agents are surveilled in the US. My question to you remains WHY did he lie to the FBI?

 

LMAO, totally the part of the MO. Maybe explain what a strawman is and see how far that gets you, a likely segway to what an alpha supposedly means, etc. Patience is a virtue, good for you.

 

The desperation of the violent alt left is apparent in the disregard of their own sources if they dont like what they see.

 

They got caught with their pants down when Trump won the election. The "Russian Collusion" is their cover for explaining why their illegal spying would come out, once Trump took over the Executive Branch of the United States Government.

Kimberley Strassel warns this week about what's to come with dossier:

There's no such thing as a coincidence in Washington, so why the sudden, furious effort by Democrats and the media to give cover to the Steele dossier? As in, the sudden, furious effort that happens to coincide with congressional investigators' finally being given access to FBI records about the Trump-Russia probe?

This scandal's pivotal day was Jan. 3. That's the deadline House Intelligence chairman Devin Nunes gave the Federal Bureau of Investigation to turn over documents it had been holding for months. Speaker Paul Ryan backed Mr. Nunes' threat to cite officials for contempt of Congress. Everyone who played a part in encouraging the FBI's colonoscopy of the Trump campaign – congressional Democrats, FBI and Justice Department senior career staff, the Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama political mobs, dossier commissioner Fusion GPS, the press corps – knew about the deadline and clearly had been tipped to the likelihood that the FBI would have to comply. Thus the dossier rehabilitation campaign.

Weeks before, the same crew had taken a desperate shot at running away from the dossier, with a New York Times special that attempted to play down its significance in the FBI probe. You can see why. In the year since BuzzFeed published the salacious dossier, we've discovered that it was a work product of the Clinton campaign, commissioned by an oppo research firm (Fusion), compiled by a foreign ex-spook on the basis of anonymous sources, and rolled out to the media in the run-up to the election. And it appears to continue to be almost entirely false. When the best you've got is that a campaign orbiter made a public trip to Russia, you haven't got much.

We don't know exactly what Congress has seen, but it's a safe bet it's hot. Sens. Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham made their criminal referral of Mr. Steele to the Justice Department. The referral is suggestive of FBI misbehavior. Evidently whatever Messrs. Grassley and Graham found came only at this late stage, after the bureau reluctantly made key documents available to lawmakers. The implication is that the FBI and Justice Department knew they had a problem and were concealing it from investigators.

If Mr. Steele was such a professional, why was he out spreading national security "intelligence" through the media? If Mr. Simpson was so worried for his country, why did he spend months dodging congressional requests for testimony, and refuse to name his client? If Mr. Steele was confident enough in his document to spool it to the FBI, why has he ducked every congressional request that he explain his work? And that's before Mr. Grassley's claim to have credible evidence that Mr. Steele lied to the government.

It looks like we have a number of high officials in multiple counts of illegal leaking of classified information, along with perjury before Congress. The penalties for misusing FISA databases and a more stringent means of addressing privacy concerns need to be considered as Congress races to reauthorize FISA.

 

What law of the land would that be.

 

So, see, here's the thing. It's a two bites at the apple conversation. Mueller put Ms Martha in peril the minute he seated her. The evidence is that she was inconsistent in her statements, meaning that her testimony changed. Mueller, unable to prosecute for insider trading, then pushed the obstruction, based on inconsistent statements, and convicted ms Martha. The legal standard in this case being "beyond a reasonable doubt". Mueller could only prove the inconsistency, and the law allowed for her to be jailed for it. I cannot find sufficient evidence that she "lied" as you've characterized her recorded comments. She was clearly inconsistent.

As for the "civil case", this is the second bite at the apple. The civil case is after the fact, and demonstrates the power of suggestive persuasion of the jury. The "preponderance of the evidence" doesn't create the legal definition of a crime, just the perception of the jury which isn't the same thing, obviously. No more than OJ having been acquitted translates into his civil suit ruling have a criminal component to it, ascribing criminal responsibility for the murder of Nichole and Ron.

And in just the same way, ms Martha continues to remain un-convicted of insider trading. A civil jury awarded damages against her because the legal standard never had to be met. Preponderance of the evidence is simple persuasion. It's a judgment. It does not have the effect of being then associable to the criminal standard for which someone was not convicted for.

Given that, it is a perfectly rational position to then take to acknowledge the dynamic of peril. I would simply point out that it doesn't matter if you lie, or not, there are clearly folks who are innocent in our prisons today. Folks clearly are, and have been leveraged by prosecutorial power to their detriment. If you believe that the "truth" always is your shield, you are woefully misguided or simply naïve.

 

Asinine non sequitur!

 

Multiple felonies.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/us/politics/michael-flynn-russia.html

https://heavy.com/news/2017/04/what...-violate-break-security-clearance-punishment/