The Amateur Message Boards of the World Famous VoyeurWeb

he FBI had three reasons for choosing Deripaska for a mission worthy of a spy novel. First, his aluminum empire had business in Iran. Second, the FBI wanted a foreigner to fund the operation because spending money in Iran might violate U.S. sanctions and other laws. Third, agents knew Deripaska had been banished since 2006 from the United States by State over reports he had ties to organized crime and other nefarious activities. He denies the allegations, and nothing was ever proven in court.

The FBI rewarded Deripaska for his help. In fall 2009, according to U.S. entry records, Deripaska visited Washington on a rare law enforcement parole visa. And since 2011, he has been granted entry at least eight times on a diplomatic passport, even though he doesn’t work for the Russian Foreign Ministry.

Former FBI officials confirm they arranged the access.
Deripaska said in a statement through Adam Waldman, his American lawyer, that FBI agents told him State’s reasons for blocking his U.S. visa were “merely a pretext.”

“The FBI said they had undertaken a careful background check, and if there was any validity to the State Department smears, they would not have reached out to me for assistance,” the Russian said.

Then, over the past two years, evidence emerged tying him to former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, the first defendant charged by Mueller’s Russia probe with money laundering and illegal lobbying.

Deripaska once hired Manafort as a political adviser and invested money with him in a business venture that went bad. Deripaska sued Manafort, alleging he stole money.

It's becoming very clear that we did have those working with the Russians, the investigations need to take place.

Can you imagine what it would be like if they looked into Clintons past the way they are Trumps.

It doesn't look like Mueller will even be able to provide the requested discovery material on the Russians he indicted.

He never thought they would ever show up in court, but they sent some lawyer to demand what info was behind the charges and they probably didn't have any.

It really is shocking that the apparatus of government was apparently used to protect Hillary, prevent Trump from winning, and failing that to make it diffcult/impossible for Trump to govern.

Manaford and Flynn will never, when all the appeals are done, end up convicted of a thing.

The Russian lawyers are calling election-meddling a "make-believe crime?"

We've reached that awkward moment in history where the President of the United States is using the same defense as Russian criminals.

:lol:

The Russian lawyers are calling election-meddling a "make-believe crime?"

No they're telling Mueller put up or shout up, take them to court!

Tool is too stupid to understand that the Russians are just trying to learn what Mueller has on them and Trump so that Trump will know whether or not he needs to fire Mueller and Rosenstein.

Even if Trump's pals (the Russians) are convicted, they aren't in the U.S. so the trial would just be a fact finding exercise for them and Trump.
Watch Mueller stall until the investigation is complete and it's too late for Trump to stop him.

Put away your checkers. You clowns really need to learn to play chess to understand the modern world.

Clownkicker wrote:Tool is too stupid to understand that the Russians are just trying to learn what Mueller has on them and Trump so that Trump will know whether or not he needs to fire Mueller and Rosenstein.

Even if Trump's pals (the Russians) are convicted, they aren't in the U.S. so the trial would just be a fact finding exercise for them and Trump.
Watch Mueller stall until the investigation is complete and it's too late for Trump to stop him.

Put away your checkers. You clowns really need to learn to play chess to understand the modern world.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: As bad as you libs want Trump out. Muller, if he ever did have anything it would have been months ago.. Talk about dumb as a box of old used brakes..

A year in, and Mueller's entire staff -- every single one -- is a Democrat.

Most of them are so partisan they actually donated to Obama or Hillary.

This is the precise opposite of what a genuine, true, neutral investigation would look like.

Despite that, Mueller a year later doesn't have a single shred of evidence, but there is now a mountain of evidence that Hillary colluded with Russians to cobble together the phony dossier, that she sold 1/5 of the uranium supply, and that her foundation got over 140 m.

johnforbes wrote:A year in, and Mueller's entire staff -- every single one -- is a Democrat.

Most of them are so partisan they actually donated to Obama or Hillary.

This is the precise opposite of what a genuine, true, neutral investigation would look like.

Despite that, Mueller a year later doesn't have a single shred of evidence, but there is now a mountain of evidence that Hillary colluded with Russians to cobble together the phony dossier, that she sold 1/5 of the uranium supply, and that her foundation got over 140 m.

But do you really think hes going to go after Hillary with all this info..





Ya, I didting think so either

"A year in, and Mueller's entire staff -- every single one -- is a Democrat.
Most of them are so partisan they actually donated to Obama or Hillary.
This is the precise opposite of what a genuine, true, neutral investigation would look like."-johnflubs

So johnforbes actually believes that Mueller's team should be made up entirely of Republicans, most of whom had donated to Trump. That's what he said---"the precise opposite"

johnny, Mueller needs to prevent all l e a k s, which he has succeeded in doing so far. If there were Republican Trump supporters on the team, everything would have l e a k e d by now. You see what the entirely Republican Trump White House is doing. They can't keep anything secret, no matter how damaging.

Such Republican "secrecy" would have crippled the investigation, which is of course the aim of every Trump supporter---and that means you, dummy. You have no interest in either learning the truth nor administering justice to criminals attacking our political system.

So johnforbes actually believes that Mueller's team should be made up entirely of Republicans, most of whom had donated to Trump. That's what he said---"the precise opposite"

See there you go taking peoples words and twisting them. Its no wonder no one on here believes a word you say.

Show us where he said anything about Muller's team being all Republican..




cant, because you lied as usual... fucking moron... Idiot traitor, scum sucking asshole licking Marxist

What is "the precise opposite" of an all Democrat team, dumbfuck?

An all Republican team, dummy.

Maybe you need to join RealTool in his ESL classes, you fucking moron... Idiot traitor, scum sucking asshole licker.

I've been very clear on what Mueller should have done -- assemble a neutral team, where NOBODY has donated a penny to either party.

If some of the team members have some Democrat bias, balance that off evenly with a Repub.

Have a FAIR investigation, one which the average American citizen could trust and accept.

(See the work of Jerry Mashaw on the need to have a system of justice which the public accepts.)

johnforbes wrote:I've been very clear on what Mueller should have done -- assemble a neutral team, where NOBODY has donated a penny to either party.

Q: If you have three-quarters of the T14 lawyers who are contributing more to Democrats, doesn't that mean that there's still a sizable chunk of Republican donating lawyers? Why not pull from that pool?

That's right. There are two things going on. The first and most important thing is that Bob Mueller was prevented by Justice Department rules from taking into account ideology or partisanship in assembling his team. He actually was not asking. We believe that if he followed the rules, which everything suggests that he did, he was not asking about the party affiliations of the people he hired. He was looking for the best and the brightest.

There are no DoJ rules which prevented Mueller from being fair.

There are tens of thousands of qualified lawyers he could have drawn from, but he selected a team which was 100 percent Democrat.

More than half of those Democrats actually proved their partisanship by donating to Obama or Hillary.

Instead of assembling a team which could have produced a result acceptable to the public, and viewed as fair (both critical elements per Yale Professor Mashaw's work), Mueller assembled a totally partisan team.

johnny, if your aim is to pick the best and brightest, and you aren't allowed to ask party affiliation, you shouldn't be surprised there are no Republicans among the lot you select.

Clownkicker wrote:What is "the precise opposite" of an all Democrat team, dumbfuck?

An all Republican team, dummy.

Maybe you need to join RealTool in his ESL classes, you fucking moron... Idiot traitor, scum sucking asshole licker.

Thanks for admitting you dont have a clue what "FAIR" means..

Clown, put your partisan rhetoric on hold for a second and try to understand Mashaw's point.

Yes, it requires a little thought, but ponder the question of why any investigation should be widely perceived as fair and neutral.

It is NOT good for the country to have an investigation which anybody can see is completely partisan and slanted.

Let's summarize:

22 Indictments
4 Guilty Pleas
1 In Jail
3 Back Channels
72 Secret Russia Contacts
50 Calls, Emails, Communications with Russians
22 Meetings with Russians
10+ Lied, 2 Under Oath
1 Probable Dossier

Hillary clearly broke 18 USC 793, among others.

As a Democrat, a phony investigation -- where she was "exonerated" months before the investigation was even finished -- was done and she skated free as a bird.

Manafort and Flynn will end up, after appeals, convicted of nothing whatever.

Obama -- probably personally, but at least his folks -- conspired to protect Hillary and frame Trump.

johnny, what has Hillary got to do with Mueller or his alleged conflict of interest?

Try to stay on the topic laid out by the original poster on this thread.

Or should I say "the original posterior on this thread"?

So let's summarize Trump's history of excuses:

There was no collusion
Maybe there was but I didn't know about it
Maybe I knew but so what
Lots of people collude
It's not illegal when the president does it
What about Hillary?
WITCH HUNT!!!!
You can't indict a president

What does Hillary have to do with this?

Well, she broke the law and for the Left this didn't matter.

Therefore, the rule of law has been suspended for presidents or political candidates.

illary clearly broke 18 USC 793, among others.

As a Democrat, a phony investigation -- where she was "exonerated" months before the investigation was even finished -- was done and she skated free as a bird.

Manafort and Flynn will end up, after appeals, convicted of nothing whatever.

Obama -- probably personally, but at least his folks -- conspired to protect Hillary and frame Trump.
j

Mueller's whole mission is to disrupt Trump's political agenda by any means possible. This isn't about investigating crimes or putting Trump or his staff in jail, it's about creating division and disruption and steering as many voters as possible to the Democrats so they have a change of taking the House back this year. If they do get the House back, Mueller will turn the job of creating division and disruption over to them. In mean time watch for Mueller to indict a few more ham sandwiches to make people think Trump was involved in a large scandal

Exactly.

Mueller knows he has no evidence and that, even if he did, the question is iffy whether a sitting prez could be indicted anyhow.

What he was clearly hoping for was evidence to slow up Trump's presidency with an impeachment charge, just like Bill Clinton's second term was hamstrung.

You live by the sword you die by the sword.

Stop griping Johnnie.....

Come on, Elkin, do you really approve of Brennan, Clapper, et al. essentially protecting Hillary with a fake investigation and using a phony dossier to wiretap Trump for political reasons?

That should only happen in El Salvador.

Trump just used his executive authority to order an investigation that is the Democrats worse nightmare...one of transparency. Did the Obama Administration attempt to influence the election by using federal agencies to spy of Trump? The liberal media is melting down at this attempt at transparency which might disclose something that doesn't fit their agenda.

johnforbes wrote:Come on, Elkin, do you really approve of Brennan, Clapper, et al. essentially protecting Hillary with a fake investigation and using a phony dossier to wiretap Trump for political reasons?

That should only happen in El Salvador.

Johnnie....I could effortlessly debunk every single one of your talking points about Hillary, Uranium One, emails, etc just as Shepard Smith already did on Hoax News... but your mind is already made up and you've stopped listening, so how about I just tell you to and move on.

But you just can't, you circle back to Clinton...over and over and over and over and over..................

You get the point.

Shep is a gay leftist.

And, frankly, we all know Elkin couldn't debunk a Girl Scout in a bunk house.

And his commentary is bunk.

Here's some food for thought Johnnie....

Think if you were in a pot of legal boiling hot water just like Trump is. And your advisors were; Rudy Ghouliani, Steve Doocy and Hannity.

Perhaps you should be imagining what prison will be like for the rest of your life...

:lol:

I do not have to imagine what prison would be like.

After spending 47 years on the Internet reading Clownslacker's posts, I have suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.

Foreign country: “we would like to illegally assist your father’s presidential campaign”

Donnie Jr: “love it, let’s meet at Trump Tower!”

Why the fuck is this criminal still walking the streets and is not in prison by now...........

Grow up, Elkin.

Every politician tries to get dirt on his opponent, and that's why Don Jr went.

Meanwhile, Hillary spent TWELVE MILLION FOR THE FAKE DOSSIER WHICH CROOKS USED TO WIRETAP TRUMP.

It's always curious to see johnforbes actually supporting Hillary's paying for a real dossier on Trump like this. :lol:

"Every politician tries to get dirt on his opponent, and that's why Don Jr went."

So why such a critical tone about Hillary getting dirt on Trump, johnny, but you applaud the Trumps for doing it?

Always the partisan hypocrite, johnny. :lol:

Be honest for a second, Clown.

Every politician tries to get dirt on his opponent.

Hillary had none, but she spent TWELVE MILLION ON A FAKE DOSSIER AND THEN ABUSED THE FISA COURT TO WIRETAP TRUMP.

Surely Obama and Valerie Jarrett knew about this?

Honest for "a second"? :lol: Unlike you, I'm always honest, johnny.

You're the one always being hypocritical. And you drone on with your repeated lies as if it will somehow make them true if you repeat them often enough. You think you're Trump or something.

"Every politician tries to get dirt on his opponent."-johnforbes

And yet to this day you are critical of Hillary for trying to get dirt on Trump but say it is just fine for the Trumps to get dirt on Hillary. Why do you keep implying she did something wrong by going to a decades-long trusted source of our intelligence community to get that dirt?
Never have I said it was wrong for any politician to try to get dirt on their opponent. You, however, keep saying it was wrong of Hillary to try to get dirt on Trump.
You're just a partisan hypocritical scumbag, johnny.

"Hillary had none, but she spent TWELVE MILLION ON A FAKE DOSSIER..."-johnfibs

As you said, she had none, and so she paid for the Republican-origin dossier which you say is just fine for candidates to do, dimwit.
And to this day no one has been able to show anything substantive in the dossier is false.
If you can't point to anything untrue in the dossier, you don't get to claim it's "FAKE". Only lying scumbags do that.
Be honest for a second, johnny.

"...AND THEN ABUSED THE FISA COURT TO WIRETAP TRUMP."-johnfibs

Newsflash, johnny. Hillary had no power whatsoever to abuse a FISA court, and you know it. And because you know it, it's a lie for you to say otherwise.
And Trump was never wiretapped. People under investigation who Trump talked to were wiretapped.
Trump himself was never tapped. You can say it until you die, but it won't make it true.
Be honest for a second, johnny, you condescending tool.

Unread postby Clownkicker » Wed May 23, 2018 2:11 pm
Honest for "a second"? :lol: Unlike you, I'm always honest, johnny.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

That Russian lawyer came from speaking with Glenn Simpson at Fusion, then met with Trump Jr, then went to meet again with Fusion.

It was all a setup from the start.

As to Hillary, there was nothing wrong with her seeking dirt on Trump, but paying 12 million for a fake dossier, then telling lies to a FISA judge, then wiretapping Trump, that was illegal.

Johnnie...why don't you go and tell everybody about the criminal deep state, does it operate out of the basement of that pizza parlor that has no basement on the days when Hillary isn't using it for her child sex ring?

:o :shock: