"Pardon me for being boorish but there is a very odd thing absent from the Russian-Trump conspiracy to destroy Hillary and install a traitor in the White House. Why is there no Hillary Dossier? For some very inscrutable reason the Russians decided to provide the Democrats with a salacious "Trump Dossier" of malevolent fabrications designed to discredit him. A unbiased observer would think that the Russians would have provided the Republicans with a Hillary dossier rather than the other way around. If they'd wanted Donald Trump to win. Instead for some strange reason they provided the other side with opposition campaign materials. Imagine if you will what could have been in a Hillary dossier. The Russians wouldn't have had to make anything up. It would have been a stack of pages sky high filled with very real revelations and hard incontestable facts. A blow-by-blow recounting of a very ignoble career of corruption, deceit, and pathological lying. A career of accumulating hundreds of millions by selling political favors and promises. A career of breaking the law in order to keep her enterprises secret from FOIA requests. A career bordering on the criminally insane. The woman even bought the DNC and was its de facto head before the primaries even started thus screwing every other democrat contender by using the DNC to sign bad faith contracts with them. Imagine that coming out in the Russian's Hillary Dossier during the election. And yet if the Russians had been conspiring with anyone to win the Presidential election the fact that there is no Hillary Dossier is like the dog that did not bark of Sherlock story fame. Russian counter-intelligence is famous for it's ability to produce "Elders of Zion" documents for every purpose. The Hillary Dossier would have written itself. The dog barks at everyone. Except Hillary." -thepeoplescube.com
JANUARY 1, 2018 Lindsey Graham calls for special counsel on the Steele dossier By J. Marsolo On Tucker Carlson's show on December 29, Brian Kilmeade interviewed Lindsey Graham, who made some interesting statements about the Christopher Steele "dossier." [E]very prosecutor has a duty to the court to disclose things that are relevant to the request. So any time a document is used to go to court, for legal reasons, I think the Department of Justice owes it to the court to be up-and-up about exactly what this document is about, who paid for it, who's involved, what [his] motives might be. And I can just say this: [a]fter having looked at the history of the dossier, and how it was used by the Department of Justice, I'm really very concerned, and this cannot be the new normal. Hillary Clinton and the DNC through a law firm paid the British ex-spy Christopher Steele for a concoction of discredited anecdotes on Donald Trump referred to as a "dossier" to make it sound important. Graham said the Obama DOJ attorneys who obtained the warrant should have informed the court about the source of the dossier, the fact that Hillary paid for it, and the fact that she obviously had a motive to make Trump look bad. The bottom line is that the court was used to allow spying on the Trump campaign by using opposition research paid for by Hillary that is full of lies. Graham further stated that a special counsel is needed to investigate the Obama DOJ's use of the dossier: I've spent some time in the last couple of days, after a lot of fighting with the Department of Justice, to get the background on the dossier[.] ... I'm very disturbed about what the Department of Justice did with this dossier, and we need a special counsel to look into that, because that's not in Mueller's charter. And what I saw ... bothers me a lot, and I'd like somebody outside DOJ to look into how this dossier was handled and what they did with it. If the dossier was used to obtain the FISA warrant, then any evidence obtained as a result should be suppressed, which means that it cannot be used in any criminal prosecution. For example, if Michael Flynn's guilty plea was procured through evidence obtained, his plea is subject to be vacated. The dossier cannot be the basis for probable cause for the warrant because the information is not reliable. It is difficult to believe that Graham would make such a statement if he did not know that the dossier was used to obtain warrants. The question now is whether Mueller has used or is using information that was developed as a result of the warrant based on the dossier. Senator Graham is calling on Attorney General Jeff Sessions to appoint a special counsel to investigate how the "dossier" was used. This will involve who ordered the dossier, who paid for it, that person's or entity's motives, and who stood to benefit, to which the answer is Hillary, Hillary, and Hillary. It will involve who prepared the request for the warrant and who made the decision to use the dossier information, which means that Strzok, McCabe, Comey, and Loretta Lynch, and ultimately Obama, will have to be questioned under oath.
I don't know. I would be careful about appointing a special counsel *JUST* for the dossier. Too narrow. The dems would love that because they can then argue afterwards- once again- that everything has been investigated a kazillion times while nothing wide and deep was actually done. They need to appoint special prosecutors to investigate the dem connections/corruptions and another one to investigate the FBI. Give both of them the full Mueller treatment- ie. appoint some guy who misses his job as a prosecutor, has nothing else to do, has no time limit on his investigation, has unlimited funds and has the country watching his every move. Let em bust down a few doors in the middle of the night just for entertainment value as Mueller did. Let one of those doors be James Comey, and another three or four his corrupt staff. In regard, to the dossier, no special counsel needed. The House Committee has sent a letter to the Justice Department giving them the last warning that that they need to produce the previously requested documents by January third/Wednesday. In that letter, Nunes gave the Justice Department the warning that if they did not produce "the Department may need to be investigated." Yes, we know that the House has pussied-out on past requests so this is a litmus test for them. The Swamp/ie. Rosenstein is in a tough spot on this now though. If they produce the documents then they know that the FBI is screwed because more of their corruption will be exposed. On the other hand, if they don't cough up the documents, Congress may appoint a special investigator to Muellerize them for years to come. As a rule, I bet on the swamp until shown otherwise. The justice department can play the usual tricks too which is to release documents but to redact 95% of everything in them. But if Congress ever did want to get ballsy, it would be fairly easy to do. The court is just down the street to enforce the subpoena or they could huddle a appoint special investigators directly from congress. Right now, Rosenstein is fully in charge, and Mueller reports to him. But Comey was in charge until he wasn't, and McCabe was in charge until he wasn't and Loretta was in charge until she wasn't. So, Shiite happens. Rosenstein is beginning to sweat bigtime though. Comey is gone, McCabe is going, Holder is gone, and Loretta is gone, and Obama is gone. So anything uncovered related to the dossier, uranium one, the Clinton non-investigation, the dossier, puts him right on the spot because his fingerprints are all over them and if he becomes the fall guy, the higher ups are no longer there to protect him. Christopher Wray, Sessions, Trump are not harmed if FBI dirt comes out other than general damage to the agencies reputation.
Russia probe grand jury looks like ‘a Black Lives Matter rally,’ says witness The federal grand jury handing down indictments for special counsel Robert Mueller doesn’t appear to include any supporters of President Donald Trump, according to one witness who recently testified before the panel. “The grand jury room looks like a Bernie Sandersrally,” my source said. “Maybe they found these jurors in central casting, or at a Black Lives Matterrally in Berkeley [Calif.]” Of the 20 jurors, 11 are African-Americans and two were wearing “peace T-shirts,” the witness said. “There was only one white male in the room, and he was a prosecutor.” Mueller was not present. https://pagesix.com/2018/01/02/russ...like-a-black-lives-matter-rally-says-witness/
You think Robert Mueller is a decent human being and fair-minded prosecutor? You may want to think again ---- ---Mueller was in charge of the Anthrax investigation in the 2000s and fully ignored the signs that pointed to Al-Qaeda including the fact that terrorists were learning to fly cropdusters. Instead , he focused on Steven Hatfil, an American bio-weapons expert and the FBI repeatedly harrassed and pushed him. Turns out, he was not guilty and subsequently won a 5.8 million dollar settlement with the DOJ. Then, he turned towards Bruce Ivins, an American biodefense researcher and harrassed him until he finally committed suicide. What's more, one of the 911 hijackers had likely been exposed to anthrax and this was stated by Johns Hopkins. Mueller totally ignored this and instead focused on Americans who had nothing to do with it. Mueller is a vicous bastard. --Finally he hired Andrew Weissman who cost thousands of people at Arthur Andersen their jobs by misleading the jury. The Supreme Court voted 9-0 to overturn the Arthur Andersen decision-- From Wikipedia-"In a follow-up case in U.S. District Court, Weissmann also was successful at arguing that auditing firm Arthur Andersen LLP had covered up for Enron. In that case, which resulted in the destruction of Andersen, he convinced the district judge to instruct the jury that they could convict the firm regardless of whether its employees knew they were violating the law.[3] That ruling was later unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States. In the court's opinion, Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote: "The jury instructions failed to convey the requisite consciousness of wrongdoing. Indeed, it is striking how little culpability the instructions required."[4] By the time of that ruling, however, Andersen had already ceased to exist, as its clients had left it after the indictment was announced." Folks, the people investigating the president are vicious non-feeling people who care not a wit about justice. They need to be fired posthaste.
As you can see from the story here even Robert Mueller agrees that a sitting president cannot be indicted. You Libprogs that argued otherwise have no clue what you are talking about and probably don't care. You just want things to fit your doublespeak. https://nypost.com/2018/05/16/giuliani-mueller-admitted-his-team-cant-indict-trump/ Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team admitted it cannot indict President Trump, Rudy Giuliani said Wednesday. “All they get to do is write a report. They can’t indict. At least they acknowledged that to us after some battling, they acknowledged that to us,” the president’s lawyer and former federal prosecutor told CNN. Giuliani cited Nixon-era Department of Justice guidelines that prevent special investigators from indicting sitting presidents. “The Justice Department memos going back to before Nixon say that you cannot indict a sitting president, you have to impeach him. Now there was a little time in which there was some dispute about that, but they acknowledged to us orally that they understand that they can’t violate the Justice Department rules,” said Giuliani, who also served as New York City’s mayor until 2002. “We think it’s bigger than that. We think it’s a constitutional rule, but I don’t think you’re ever going to confront that because nobody’s ever going to indict a sitting president. So, what does that leave them with? That leaves them with writing a report.” Mueller’s team has considered challenging the guidelines as it investigates potential collusion with Russian meddling in the 2016 election — but the team told Giuliani verbally that Mueller decided he has to “follow the Justice Department rules,” Giuliani said. The special counsel can still make recommendations to Congress, which has the power to bring charges against a sitting president. In a separate interview, Giuliani told Fox News that Mueller has stonewalled the president’s team on five information requests, which has in turn delayed Trump’s lawyers from deciding whether Trump will sit for an interview with Mueller. “This case is essentially over,” Giuliani said. “They’re just in denial.”