[FISA manipulation] Nunes sending eight criminal referrals to Attorney General

so Clinesmith's higher ups knew he was lying as did the DoJ lawyers. Curious as to who he reported it to.

 

Mueller report says Trump campaign figures hindered the investigation when they ‘deleted relevant information'

 

you suggesting perjury?

 

Based off a 9 second clip, no. But then again a 9 second clip can be made to mean anything and it seems this isn't the same context.

Did Mueller lie in his report about Trump and his associates deleting communications?

 

The Mueller Report clearly outlines the Trump's campaign interactions and information sharing with Russian backed associates. The Mueller Report outlines how the Trump campaign deleted relevant communications.

You can get bogged down by FISA court stuff, but the Trump campaign did interact and share information with Russian backed associates and it didn't meet the criminal standard.

You can call that a win, but globalist Trump has no problem interacting with hostile governments as a citizen.

 

you could of just gotten the transcript, but ill do it for you

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...rt-mueller-house-committee-testimony-n1033216

Spoiler

COLLINS:

In your press conference you said any testimony from your office would not go beyond our report. "We chose these words carefully. The word speaks for itself. I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before Congress." Do you stand by that statement?

MUELLER:

Yes.

COLLINS:

Since closing the special counsel's office in May of 2019, have you conducted any additional interviews or obtained any new information in your role as special counsel?

MUELLER:

In the -- in the -- in the wake of the report?

COLLINS:

Since the -- since the closing of the office in May of 2019.

MUELLER:

And the question was, have we conducted...

COLLINS:

Have you conducted any new interviews, any new witnesses, anything?

MUELLER:

No.

COLLINS:

And you can confirm you're no longer special counsel, correct?

MUELLER:

I am no longer special counsel.

COLLINS:

At any time in the investigation, was your investigation curtailed or stopped or hindered?

MUELLER:

No.

COLLINS:

Were you or your team provided any questions by members of Congress (inaudible) the majority ahead of your hearing today?

MUELLER:

No.

COLLINS:

Your report states that your investigative team included 19 lawyers and approximately 40 FBI agents and analysts and accountants. Are those numbers accurate?

MUELLER:

Could you repeat that, please?

COLLINS:

Forty FBI agents, 19 lawyers, intelligence analysts and forensic accountants; are those numbers accurate? This was in your report.

MUELLER:

Generally, yes.

COLLINS:

Is it also true that you issued over 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records and 50 pin registers?

MUELLER:

That went a little fast for me.

COLLINS:

OK. In your report -- I'll make this very simple -- you did a lot of work, correct?

MUELLER:

Yes, that I agree to.

COLLINS:

A lot of subpoenas, a lot of pin registers...

MUELLER:

A lot of subpoenas.

COLLINS:

OK, we'll walk this really slow if we need to.

MUELLER:

A lot of search warrants.

COLLINS:

All right, a lot of search warrants, a lot of things, so you are very thorough.

MUELLER:

What?

COLLINS:

In your opinion, very thorough, you listed this out in your report, correct?

MUELLER:

Yes.

COLLINS:

Thank you. Is it true, the evidence gathered during your investigation -- given the questions that you've just answered, is it true the evidence gathered during your investigation did not establish that the president was involved in the underlying crime related to Russian election interference as stated in Volume 1, page 7?

MUELLER:

We found insufficient evidence of the president's culpability.

COLLINS:

So that would be a yes.

MUELLER:

Pardon?

COLLINS:

That would be a yes.

MUELLER:

Yes.

COLLINS:

Thank you. Isn't it true the evidence did not establish that the president or those close to him were involved in the charged (ph) Russian computer hacking or active measure conspiracies or that the president otherwise had unlawful relationships with any Russian official, Volume 2, page 76? Correct?

MUELLER:

I will leave the answer to our report.

COLLINS:

So that is a yes. Is that any (ph) true your investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with Russian government in election interference activity, Volume 1, page 2; Volume 1, page 173?

MUELLER:

Thank you. Yes.

COLLINS:

Yes. Thank you. Although your reports states, "collusion is not some (ph) specific offense," -- and you said that this morning -- "or a term of art in federal criminal laws, conspiracy is." In the colloquial context, are collusion and conspiracy essentially synonymous terms?

MUELLER:

You're going to have to repeat that for me.

COLLINS:

Collusion is not a specific offense or a term of art in the federal criminal law. Conspiracy is.

MUELLER:

Yes.

COLLINS:

In the colloquial context, known public context, collusion -- collusion and conspiracy are essentially synonymous terms, correct?

MUELLER:

No.

COLLINS:

If no, on page 180 of Volume 1 of your report, you wrote, "As defined in legal dictionaries, collusion is largely synonymous with conspiracy as that crime is set forth in the general federal conspiracy statute, 18 USC 371."

MUELLER:

Yes (ph).

COLLINS:

You said at your May 29th press conference and here today you choose your words carefully. Are you sitting here today testifying something different than what your report states?

MUELLER:

Well, what I'm asking is if you can give me the citation, I can look at the citation and evaluate whether it is actually...

COLLINS:

OK. Let -- let me just -- let me clarify. You stated that you would stay within the report. I just stated your report back to you, and you said that collusion -- collusion and conspiracy were not synonymous terms. That was your answer, was no.

MUELLER:

That's correct.

COLLINS:

In that, page 180 of Volume 1 of your report, it says, "As defined in legal dictionaries, collusion is largely synonymous with conspiracy as that crime is set forth in general conspiracy statute 18 USC 371."

MUELLER:

Right.

COLLINS:

Now, you said you chose your words carefully. Are you contradicting your report right now?

MUELLER:

Not when I read it.

COLLINS:

So you would change your answer to yes, then?

MUELLER:

No, no -- the -- if you look at the language...

COLLINS:

I'm reading your report, sir. These are yes-or-no answers.

MUELLER:

(inaudible) Page 180?

COLLINS:

Page 180, Volume 1.

MUELLER:

OK.

COLLINS:

This is from your report.

MUELLER:

Correct, and I -- I -- I -- I leave it with the report.

COLLINS:

So the report says yes, they are synonymous.

MUELLER:

Yes.

COLLINS:

Hopefully, for finally, out of your own report, we can put to bed the collusion and conspiracy. One last question as we're going through: Did you ever look into other countries investigated in the Russians' interference into our election? Were other countries investigated...

MUELLER:

(inaudible)

COLLINS:

... or found knowledge that they had interference in our election?

MUELLER:

I'm not going to discuss other matters.

COLLINS:

All right. And I yield back.

 

Great, now highlight the part the contradicts the Report or what I claimed.... I missed it.

 

i posted the video of it . Your article claims Mueller investigation was hindered, Mueller says no it wasn't. Mueller is contradicting your claim. Either Mueller is lying or the article is.

 

That's the article's choice of words, are you claiming the Trump campaign didn't delete communications like the article and the Mueller Report says? No where in your clip or transcript (where Mueller is being cross examined by Team Trump) is this particular charge brought up.

You are more than welcome to get bogged down into semantics, but you haven't posted anything that contradicts Mueller's Report or the article. Trump team deleted communications and had information sharing with the Russian backed associates.

 

as opposed to what? its obviously not a quote

I have no idea. if they did, Mueller didn't think it was a big deal and didn't hinder his investigation. your article wants me to get rid of ad blocker, so wont read it.

 

That the article wrote the headline and wasn't using a legal terminology.

LOL. Then go look at the Report and see where it claims it. Mueller answered Trump's team narrow question, but wasn't explicitly asked about it by Trump's team.....

Essentially you are admitting you've never read the Report otherwise you would know about the deleted communications and refusing to answer questions.....

"But if they did, it's no big deal"

 

I don't think anything major comes of this. Barr, like Mueller, plays for both sides

 

keep hope alive

 

"New York Times Manipulates FBI Lawyer’s Guilty Plea To Hide Real Spygate News":

https://thefederalist.com/2020/08/1...awyers-guilty-plea-to-hide-real-spygate-news/

excerpt:

A New York Times reporter who won a Pulitzer Prize for his role perpetrating the Russia collusion hoax was tasked with framing the news that a former top FBI lawyer was to plead guilty to deliberately fabricating evidence against a Donald Trump campaign affiliate targeted in the Russia probe. The resulting article is a case study in how to write propaganda.

Adam Goldman broke, and cushioned, the news that former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was to plead guilty to fabricating evidence in a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant application to spy on Trump campaign affiliate Carter Page.

His job was to present the news as something other than an indictment of the FBI’s handling of the Russia collusion hoax, to signal to other media that they should move on from the story as quickly as possible, and to hide his own newspaper’s multi-year participation in the Russia collusion hoax. One intelligence source described it as an “insult” to his intelligence and “beyond Pravda,” a reference to the official newspaper of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union. Here’s how Goldman did it.

***
All of which to say, in a story about malfeasance on Carter Page’s FISA warrants, Goldman doesn’t mention the dossier until the penultimate paragraph of a 30-paragraph story.

These are just a few of the ways Goldman manipulates the story to protect the Russia collusion hoax he participated in. Because they were co-conspirators in the hoax, too many in the corporate media are serving as obstacles to holding the FBI and other powerful government agencies accountable for their actions.
​

more at the link