​Is This Mueller's Main Indictment or is There More to Come?

First a few “minor” news items:

The FBI’s Miami field office was not passed on reports that other branches of the FBI had from acquaintances of Nikolas Cruz that tagged him as dangerous and perhaps planning something. That lack of information sharing within the FBI may have helped lead to the disastrous tragedy in which 17 innocent (and in certain cases incredibly brave) lives where lost.

AG Sessions has ordered an "immediate review" of the FBI and DOJ and how they respond, or fail to respond, to critical information passed on to them. The Attorney General said: This includes more than just an error review but also a review of how we respond. This will include possible consultation with family members, mental health officials, school officials, and local law enforcement.

Representative Adam Schiff was worried this very Friday about what will happen when Miller's probe ends. Does he know something or did he know something beforehand? Because this very Friday ...

Our main item of news. Mueller indicts! The Russians! Is this Mueller's big move? Or is a lot more to come in other words? Let's consider the indictment unsealed today.

13 Russians who went to America and some of whom posed as Americans or as tourists are the specific target of Mueller's indictment. But the main target - politically not legally that is - is something called the Internet Research Agency That operated (and perhaps still is) out of St. Petersburg and with a budget of $1.25 million apparently, using focused, online tactics to interfere in the 2016 elections.

The tactics outlined are hardly a surprise or even that new. Facebook accounts, Twitter accounts, set up to appear as American and even as belonging to a party (mostly the GOP it seems) and whose purpose seems to have been to disrupt the process in general. But it seems Mueller is also in possession of "internal notes" that suggest Clinton, Rubio and others were to be targeted and Trump and Sanders(!) to be supported. Those notes seems to date from early 2016, but the operation got going in 2014. It apparently included bank fraud and identity theft as a means of funding some of its operations.

The tactics also included trying to encourage voters to vote for Jill Stein and discouraging minority voters from voting as well as discouraging Muslim voters from voting for Hillary Clinton. And it supposedly helped to organize both Pro-Trump and Anti-Trump rallies, some after the election. Anti and Pro Trump rallies held in NYC on the same fricking day fall under this category, incredibly.

That sure seems like general disruption, more than anything else, but this indictment will have to be parsed and the evidence argued over before anything can be really concluded as to who the Internet Research Agency was trying to help and who they were trying to hurt.

Deputy AG Rosenstein said this about Mueller's indictment:

There is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charge altered the outcome of the 2016 election.

Some Defendants, posing as U.S. persons and without revealing their Russian association, communicated with unwitting individuals associated with the Trump Campaign and with other political activists to seek to coordinate political activities.

They negated in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump.

So is this the final burial for any collusion charges and a preparation for obstruction of justice charges? Or will Mueller suggest that that is a political matter and therefore up to Congress? We'll have to wait and see. But Adam Schiff sure sounded disappointed and a little anxious earlier today.

Posted by Keeley at February 20, 2018 3:35 PM
Comments
Comment #424591

I believe Mueller has nearly exhausted every dead-end allegation about the president. Perhaps he will level a few indictments against jay-walkers, but that’s about it.

I believe Kelley’s attorneys will file a “plea withdrawal” soon as a new judge has determined that the Mueller team hid information favorable to Kelley.

I find it outrageous that any prosecutor, operating in the name of the people of the United States, would purposely withhold information that would exonerate a defendant.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 20, 2018 5:00 PM
Comment #424592

I just don’t get it.

13 people in Russia gets on the internet and talks shit about our candidates. So what? That’s not illegal.
IRA in St. Petersburg spends 1.25 Million on internet activity to interfere… What does that mean? Again someone in another nation talking shit about our candidates on the internet is not illegal.

Rallies… Since when are rallies illegal? These rallies were organized and populated by Americans. They had every right to organize and protest the candidates whoever they are. It is not illegal. If it is, then people who contribute to PACS for people who they can’t vote for are guilty of the same crimes. If a person in California contributes to a candidate in Alabama how is he not influencing that election?

The only laws that were broken could be immigration laws and fraud, yet the only “crime” being presented in this whole fiasco is being called tampering with the election. Like I said, It was fraud and immigration violations, not election tampering. All of the election activity being discussed were organized and promoted and populated by Americans, and that is legal. Why aren’t they calling it what it is? Because they have to keep the election mantra in the forefront to save face.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 20, 2018 5:13 PM
Comment #424603

So i am knowing of the way to get the unblock proxy youtube here as we want to have the proxy free,

Posted by: kelly at February 21, 2018 2:28 AM
Comment #424617

Indicting foreign nationals who will never be tried is about as desperate as it gets. Guess our friends on the left had better eat that popcorn quick.

Posted by: dbs at February 21, 2018 11:02 AM
Comment #424620

Two more guilty pleas:

Richard Pinedo pleaded guilty to selling identities online to Russians. He claimed he did not know who was purchasing the identities. Still, it is good to prosecute anyone who had anything to do with illegal activities that helped the Russians.

Alex Van Der Zwann pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. This one is really interesting because Zwann is a London based lawyer and son-in-law of a Russian oligarch, but he was in DC, so they nailed him. Almost nothing is known about this, other than Zwann lied about an e-mail, and he is a lawyer who copped a plea, so obviously he does not want to do jail time.

Speaking of jail time, Rick Gates, #2 in the Trump campaign, almost certainly turned in Zwann as part of a plea bargain. It should be out any day. The plea includes 18 months in jail, and giving back all the money he made laundering money.

RF,
Presumably you are referring to Flynn. This conspiracy theory will go nowhere. You should no better than to fall for it.

WW,
The Russians interfered with our election. What they did is illegal, and they have been indicted. And once again, the Russians were spending over $1 million per month on just that one troll farm.

It appears you do not know what was stated in the indictment. Do you need a link? Quotes?

Posted by: phx8 at February 21, 2018 12:07 PM
Comment #424625

“Presumably you are referring to Flynn. This conspiracy theory will go nowhere. You should “no” better than to fall for it.”

Will I do “no” know better than you apparently do phx8. Would you like a link? It has nothing to do with conspiracy, just the law.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 21, 2018 6:27 PM
Comment #424627

What do I see when I read the indictment? First I will admit I didn’t read all of it. What I did read made me ask questions. I couldn’t get past the questions. Saying they interfered in the election isn’t an answer. As far as what was described as illegal that influenced the elections, it was the same as what any PAC would do. Whatever polls or rallies or advertisements that happened were orchestrated by Americans.

The crimes they committed were to enter the U.S. under false pretenses and document forgery, perhaps perjury among others. I’m not saying they didn’t commit any crimes. I’m saying the phrase “interfering in our election” is not a crime, not the way they describe it happening. They describe the actions of the PACs to be the crime. They will look like fools if they try to say that activity is illegal. There must be something else. They’re not calling it what it is because they must perpetuate the myth they’ve been supporting for over a year. It also calls into question the immigration issues that made it possible and the hypocrisy in singling out Russians when enforcing immigration law.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 21, 2018 6:38 PM
Comment #424628

Sure do hope our Pal phx8 can explain this “fake news”.

Russia? What Russia? Trump is polling BETTER than Obama at the same point in his presidency despite scandals, staff turnover and a special counsel

“Trump’s job approval number stood at 48 per cent on Wednesday in a Rasmussen Reports tracking poll. Fifty-one per cent disapprove.

On February 21, 2010, Obama’s was 45 per cent, with 54 per cent opposed to his work in the Oval Office.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5419079/Trump-polls-better-Obama-point-presidency.html


Posted by: Royal Flush at February 21, 2018 6:51 PM
Comment #424632

From the indictment:

“1.The United States of America, through its departments and agencies, regulates the activities of foreign individuals and entities in and affecting the United States in order to prevent, disclose, and counteract improper foreign influence on U.S. elections and on the U.S. political system. U.S. law bans foreign nationals from making certain expenditures or financial disbursements for the purpose of influencing federal elections. U.S. law also bars agents of any foreign entity from engaging in political activities within the United States without first registering with the Attorney General. And U.S. law requires certain foreign nationals seeking entry to the United States to obtain a visa by providing truthful and accurate information to the government. Various federal agencies, including the Federal Election Commission, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S> Department of State, are charged with enforcing these laws.

2.Defendant INTERNET RESEARCH AGENCY LLC (“ORGANIZATION”) is a Russian organization engaged in operations to interfere with elections and political processes. Defendants MIKHAIL IVANOVICH BYSTROV, MIKHAIL LEONIDOVICH BURCHIK, ALEKSANDRA YURYEVNA KRYLOVA, ANNA VLADISLAVOVNA BOGACHEVA, SERGEY PAVLOVICH POLOZOV, MARIA ANTOLYEVNA BODVA, ROBERT SERGEYEVICH BOVDA, DZHEYKHUN NASIMI OGLY ASLANOV, VADIM VLADIMIROVICH PODKOPAEV, GLEB IGOREVICH VASILCHENKO,IRINA VIKTOROVNA KAVERZINA, and VLADIMIR VENKOV worked in various capacities to carry out Defendant ORGANIZATION’s interference operations targeting the United States. From in or around 2014 to the present, Defendants knowingly and intentionally conspired with each other (and with persons known and unknown to the Grand Jury) to defraud the United States by impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful functions of the government through fraud and deceit for the purpose of interfering with the U.S. political and electoral processes, including the presidential election of 2016.”

“6.Defendant ORGANIZATION had a strategic goal to sow discord in the U.S. political system, including the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Defendants posted derogatory information about a number of candidates, and by early to mid-2016, Defendants” operations included supporting the presidential campaign of the -candidate Donald J. Trump (“Trump Campaign”) and disparaging Hillary Clinton.”

RF,
The prosecution is obligated to provide exculpatory evidence to the defense. No one hid anything from Flynn.

“Judge Emmet Sullivan, it turns out, issues a standing order to produce exculpatory evidence for every case brought before him.”

https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/02/new-right-wing-conspiracy-theory-michael-flynn-about-to-go-free/

Another conspiracy theory bites the dust. It wasn’t even a good one.

And you should know better than to pay attention to Rasmussen. Most Trump approval polls put him between 35 - 45%. Gallup has him at 37%.

Posted by: phx8 at February 21, 2018 8:28 PM
Comment #424633

RF,
Oh. It gets better. A group of 170 Democrat & Republican historians rank the presidents. They just came out with the most recent one. Obama ranks as 8th best. Trump was dead last, 45th.

Last week Gallup polled on the approval rating for Obama. He came in at 63%. The latest Gallup poll, just to make sure we compare apples with apples, put Trump at 37%.

WW,
The Russians sought to influence our election in order to advance their own interests. Part of strengthening their position involved weakening the US position. They accomplished that by sowing discord, and by mid-2016, by attacking Hillary Clinton and promoting Trump. The Russians calculated Trump would be the best for their interests and the worst for American interests.

Americans who wittingly cooperated with the Russians were treasonous. The Trump campaign initially said they had no contact with the Russians. That was a lie. They had dozens of contacts, meetings, and e-mails. All that came to light thanks to the MSM.

Not one member of the Trump campaign contacted the FBI. Not one. And every time Trump declared the Russian interference a “hoax” perpetrated by the MSM, he was lying. Every time. Trump knew. He was briefed by the IC. His lie undermined the security of the United States, and to this day, he has done nothing about the Russians. Nothing.

Posted by: phx8 at February 21, 2018 9:22 PM
Comment #424634

Is Rosenstein lying also when he said no U.S. citizen knowingly collaborated with this?

Michael Moore had contact with these Russians when he participated in the rallies and protests. What about the media splashing the anti-Trump rally on the news hour after hour? Are they guilty of Treason also? They are the most investigative entity in our country and they didn’t know about these Russians?

Why was this all discounted by Obama before the election? Trump brought it up and it was poo pooed by Obama and ridiculed by Hillbilly. Why would he even bring it up if he was knowingly a part of it?

Don’t tell me lying to the public is treasonous, phx8. I’d hate to have to line up and shoot every politician since George Washington for treason. Actually, I think he was telling the truth. The hoax he was talking about was the claim that Russia hacked and sent the DNC’s emails to WikiLeaks. I think those emails were leaked by someone in the DNC.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 21, 2018 9:50 PM
Comment #424637

“Now, there is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.”
Rod Rosenstein

“Is Rosenstein lying also when he said no U.S. citizen knowingly collaborated with this?”

“In this indictment” means no one mentioned in the indictment collaborated.

“Why was this all discounted by Obama before the election?”
I have no idea what this refers to.

“Trump brought it up and it was poo pooed by Obama and ridiculed by Hillbilly.”

Again, no idea.

“… Don’t tell me lying to the public is treasonous.”
Lying is treasonous when the purpose is to undermine American democracy in order to obtain power and advance and the interests of an adversarial state at the expense of the US. Trump lies constantly. Not only has he done NOTHING about the 2016 attack on our election, he is doing nothing about ongoing attacks RIGHT NOW, or the expected attacks on our elections in the 2018 midterms.

Posted by: phx8 at February 21, 2018 11:08 PM
Comment #424644

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/06/23/even-democrats-wanted-obama-to-speak-out-much-sooner-about-russia/

President Barack Obama knew in August that Russian President Vladimir Putin was waging an extraordinary cyberwar on the U.S. presidential campaign, both to discredit the election and try to help Donald Trump win. The Obama administration did not publicly acknowledge all of this until after the election, in December.
Top members of the Obama administration have since defended that decision as the best of bad choices.

Geesh, phx8, acting stupid doesn’t really work well for someone who thinks they know it all.

Lying is treasonous when the purpose is to undermine American democracy in order to obtain power and advance and the interests of an adversarial state at the expense of the US

Where is your condemnation of Hillbilly for lying? Quit being an ignorant hypocrite, phx8.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 22, 2018 9:49 AM
Comment #424646

https://youtu.be/XsFR8DbSRQE

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 22, 2018 9:52 AM
Comment #424647

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/02/what_constitutes_treason.html

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 22, 2018 10:08 AM
Comment #424649
It appears you do not know what was stated in the indictment. Do you need a link? Quotes? Posted by: phx8 at February 21, 2018 12:07 PM

At catholic funerals, there is usually a reading:

The souls of the righteous are in the hand of God…

Later in that chapter:

For those who despise wisdom and instruction are doomed.
Vain is their hope, fruitless their labors,
and worthless their works.
Their wives are foolish and their children wicked,
accursed their brood.

Posted by: ohrealy at February 22, 2018 11:09 AM
Comment #424654

WW,
You linked a video of Obama from 2012. The Russians annexed Crimea and invaded Ukraine in 2014. Obama went ahead with a missile defense deployment in Romania in May 2014 which angered the Russians.

As for treason, there is a constitutional & legal definition, and there is a colloquial one. When it comes to Trump, I am using the latter. He has been compromised by the Russians and it is painfully obvious.

“Where is your condemnation of Hillbilly for lying? “

Actually, HRC is one of the more honest politicians out there. Out of all the 2016 presidential candidates, she was ranked 2nd by fact checkers for being most honest. Trump was the most dishonest by far.

Today Trump spouted some of the stupidest things I have ever heard. He was repeating NRA talking points. He actually pushed the idea of arming teachers in schools. It is easily the stupidest idea I have heard in 2018, but hey, the year is young.

Posted by: phx8 at February 22, 2018 10:51 PM
Comment #424663

Why doesn’t it surprise me that you would ignore the constitution’s legal definition of law and “choose” the informal one.

Someone ought to fact check factcheck. I guess you don’t care if Hillbilly was hiding behind little girls when she was getting shot at by snipers in Bosnia.

If a Democratic brought up arming teachers you would be all for it, phx8. Don’t lie.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 23, 2018 10:38 AM
Comment #424664

Has anyone attempted to search for a Democratic who supports arming teachers or eliminating gun free zones in schools?

I did, and I can’t find one story where a Democratic endorses the elimination of the free target zones. Not one.

Why is that? Don’t they think for themselves? Does someone draw a line between Democratics and Republicans and say all Democratics will endorse or oppose this option? Is this a perfect example of the media presenting an illusion of a united opposition to free target zones? I find many stories about Republicans opposing these free target zones. Why is there not one Democratic who has a common sense approach to the safety of children in schools?

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 23, 2018 11:27 AM
Comment #424665

“If a Democratic brought up arming teachers you would be all for it…”

Absolutely not. I taught high school English & World History. I am also an expert marksman with a pistol, although I only fired one that one time. Growing up I spent summers around guns. There was a gun rack over the bed, and the junk drawer by the front door was full of ammo. Having said that, I do not like guns, I do not own one, and I would urge anyone to consider the implications of owning one. It is a matter of moral development. And arming teachers is, in all seriousness, one of the worst ideas I have heard in a long time.

In 1996 Australia suffered the Port Arthur massacre.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)

They passed gun control laws and they have not had a massacre since.

The first step in a solution is obvious- reinstate the assault weapon ban that was allowed by Republicans & Bush to lapse in 2003.

Posted by: phx8 at February 23, 2018 11:53 AM
Comment #424670

Assault weapons have been banned since WWII. Perhaps if the law wasn’t a complete lie it would have a chance. It also didn’t work, so why would you be supporting it?

As far a Democratics who oppose more gun laws, I think I found one!

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/18/conor-lamb-pennsylvania-special-election-profile-217018

Lamb, the Democratic candidate in a neck-and-neck special election on March 13, has to hope the people of Pennsylvania’s 18th Congressional District will likewise listen to what he has to say before judging him by his party affiliation.
Posted by: Weary Willie at February 23, 2018 1:03 PM
Comment #424671

“The first step in a solution is obvious- reinstate the assault weapon ban that was allowed by Republicans & Bush to lapse in 2003.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States

So, since scary looking rifles obviously aren’t the problem, what would ‘the second step in a solution’ be, Phx8?

Posted by: kctim at February 23, 2018 1:04 PM
Comment #424672

Good luck with not judging him by party affiliation!

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 23, 2018 1:05 PM
Comment #424674

Passage of the 1993 Assault Weapons Ban resulted in doubling the number of school shootings in the US. That, by any stretch of the imagination is not a success. Why would you want to reimpose a law that initiated a 100% increase in school shootings during it’s term?

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 23, 2018 1:32 PM
Comment #424675

It was 1994. My bad. Free target zones became legal in 1994, not 1993.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 23, 2018 1:39 PM
Comment #425202

Thanks to all the articles that you serve. I must recommend your website to friends. Good Luck
Islamic Jadu Tona
Muslim Kala Jadu

Posted by: Joyadelfin at March 8, 2018 5:16 AM
Comment #430900

nice

Posted by: kanchipuram sarees at September 3, 2018 1:21 AM
Post a comment