Why was FBI director Andrew McCabe fired / given terminal leave?

Well the Prez asked him who did he vote for, maybe Andrew McCabe gave the wrong answer.

McCabe is being interviewed by Mueller ? ? ? Why did Comey get fired . . . ?

It is a politically motivated purge.

At this point, the official story is that he resigned, but no solid reason has been given, that I can find. There is a lot of speculation and conjecture. Anyone that has dealt with me knows that I’m not big on speculation and conjecture. I have a hard time jumping to the idea that he is bailing out before the memo goes public and I have a hard time jumping to the idea that he was fired. I’m still in a wait-and-see mode…waiting for more facts to come out.

He resigned because his loyalty to the Constitution and to his duties as an FBI agent were questioned by the President.

It is hard to do your duty as a sworn Federal Agent when the President questions your ability and loyalty to the country and the Rule of Law, despite a distinguished career.

Seawulf75: He was given Terminal Leave, whatever that means. It is not determined yet if he will get full or any retirement. I assume he will, although its not voluntary regular retirement

Terminal leave just means he’s using PTO/Vacation until his retirement date. It’s pretty standard public stuff and all agencies have a policy on it. In most you can take a lump sum check for your unused vacation, or be paid out normally for that length of time. You can even buy years of service with it in some cases.

Don’t read that as anything indicating wrong doing.

Assistant director, not director.

And he was pushed out because his wife is a democrat.

Trump has repeatedly accused the FBI’s deputy director of political bias and has criticised him because his wife ran as a Democrat in a failed bid for Virginia’s state senate. Maybe the pressure just became too much for him so he got out early. The White House has denied putting any pressure on McCabe but obviously the pressure was there and there may be pressures we are not aware of.

My money is on Trump wanting to place a hand picked stooge replacement.

Trump did tell McCabe his wife was a loser. Not the nicest thing to say about your subordinate’s spouse.

How many top people in the Department of Justice has Trump tried to unload since his inauguration? It is rather alarming how effectively Trump has dumped nearly the entire top tier of Dept. officials. Rosenstein is now the only obstacle remaining to shutting Mueller down. Meantime, the low wattage branch of the GOP is removing all stops in denigrating any and all aspects of Muellers work in the vain attempt to blunt what must surely be devastating revelations as the indictments continue roll out.

Interesting strategy, behaving like a completely terrible person, and then accusing anyone who shows any negative opinions of you to be biased and incapable of doing their job because they think you’re terrible. Hmm.

@Yellowdog Terminal leave means he has enough vacation left to take or are being granted vacation until you reach retirement. All I can find is that he is resigning. I can’t find that he is being fired or that he was put out to pasture. It sounds like he is being forced out, but I haven’t heard one solid fact that supports that.

McCabe could see the writing on the wall. Trumps henchmen (Nunes committee) is attempting to dirty his reputation and Rosienstein in order to save Trump. Next stop is to discredit Mueller and have them all fired. They are in panic mode because Trump said he would testify to Mueller and they know Trump will purger himself and that is all it would take to impeach him also chances are Trump will throw them under the bus in order to save himself. He will probably claim he had no idea anything he did with the Russians or firing Comey was wrong because people in the Republican party told him it was legit to do so. So they are all scrambling like rats on a sinking ship. Rosenstein is retiring. He’s just taking all his unused vacation and sick days before his last day so he doesn’t have to go through this bull.
I hope it frees up his days to testify everything he knows but has kept quiet waiting for his last day.

Part of the purge of competent civil servants in order to put in fawning sycophants who will do as they are told and not what they think is the right thing.

Besides, Trump has no use for the FBI. He is putting together his own spy network using Blackwater’s Erik Prince: Trump White House Weighing Plans for Private Spys

@rojo – has Trump been watching too much S.H.I.E.L.D.?

not unless it is on Fox

just wait until he names his own secret police “hydra”

^He does have a red skull. More orange, I guess. New villian. Orange skull. “Stable genius” super villian.

He will misspell it, too.
Probably “Hydro”

This is in the General section for a reason.

The weaponization and “secret police” tactics (“Hydra”) of Intel is from the Obama/Hillary camp, not Trump.

FISA warrants were issued by the Hillary campaign to spy on the Trump campaign and the Trump transition team and also to frame Donald Trump and members of his campaign team, who are private citizens. Phone texts support this, and a lot of Intel is about to be declassified and made public

Kane, not Trump, told McCabe not to come back to the FBI but Kane is guilty also.

Please stick to the topic of the question if you have any knowledge of what’s going on.

One more caveat here: Trump is decentralizing (to states and private sectors) and deregulating, not tightening up and micromanaging. as dictators do

FISA warrants were issued by the Hillary campaign to spy on the Trump campaign…

Um, The Clinton campaign had no authority and could not “issue” FISA warrants. They did seek out intelligence (“oppo” research) on the Trump campaign as most campaigns do. That is how the whole dossier got created and why it was turned over to the FBI, because there is evidence that Trump is and was being controlled by the Russians.

@Yellowdog Gotta call bullshit on that. Besides the obvious mentioned by @zenvelo above
Trump campaign adviser Carter Page was the target of a secret surveillance warrant since at least 2014, (just to clarify, this is prior to Trump becoming a candidate).

He has been the subject of a FISA Warrant, FISA warrants have to be renewed every 90 days and have to be justified each time prior to approval by a federal judge.

And, just as a matter of interest, if Trump is so lily white and clean what does he have to be concerned about? I love getting to use this argument, conservatives have used this so many times in the past to justify a police state and it feels good to throw it back in their face

@rojo I think the whole subject of this mysterious memo is that the government obtained FISA warrants based on partial information. They withheld the idea that they were acting on information from the opposition dossier that had not been vetted and, as we have seen, contains much that isn’t true and can’t be proven. I haven’t seen this memo so I can’t say for sure what’s in it. Nor can I attest to the veracity of its contents. But that is the story on the street.
But your last statement really brings about some interesting thoughts. I guess first and foremost would be: If the government under Obama was spying on Americans, as the indications seem to be, and that is why the FBI is in potential trouble, wouldn’t that actually be the indications of a police state? And now that the light is being shined, they are trying to keep their actions hidden. If they are so lily white, why should they be worried about any of this?

I don’t know much about this “mysterious memo” but it seems that Trump is trying to discredit the FBI at a time when he is under investigation by a former director of the FBI. If Trump were completely innocent wouldn’t he be happy to back off and let the investigation take its course?

^That’s what a normal person should garner from this. Trump repeatedly discredits, or fires those who are investigating him. It really isn’t more complex than that. Those ignoring this are not doing themselves, or this country any service. Any true patriot, or even mildly involved citizen, should be appalled.

I’m sorry that the OP doesn’t like it, but bringing up the obvious truth, should not invalidate a response. Flutherites should not be punished for lack of being naive…

@flutherother Let’s put a different spin on things. Let’s say you have powerful enemies that want to discredit and frame you. Let’s say they arrange to have a special investigator appointed to investigate you. Mind you, not any particular aspect of you, but anything he can find. So the SP, who happens to have worked for some of your enemies, gathers a team of people, many of whom have also worked for your enemies and have paid to have and actually helped create, a dossier created, which contains many accusations and allegations, but very little verifiable fact. So you are innocent…you have done nothing wrong. Are you going to be comfortable with that sort of investigation? Then you find out that the FBI, who is supposed to be impartial, has helped propagate this entire fiasco through what appears to be illegal efforts to spy on you and your friends/family/associates. Oh, and as you pointed out…the SP used to be the head of this same apparently tainted FBI. So would you sit back and let things take their course?
If you look at things, Trump really has done nothing to inhibit this investigation. He fired Comey for other reasons. What else? He has spoken out against some of the irregularities and asked those that should to step in to ensure honesty and integrity. Not sure that is out of line either. What else? He asked Sessions to clean house at the FBI. Not really an out of line request given that there is mounting evidence that many have become a secret police force driven by ideology instead of fact. Not a whole lot of anything other than bluster from those that are trying to discredit him. It really does sound like he has sat back for the most part. And what has the investigation found after a year and $10M? Nothing significant. I can say that because if they had found something, Trump would already have charges against him. Yet since the boundaries of the investigation were basically endless, this waste of taxpayer money could go on for the next 4 years. Think that’s a good use of funds?

Occam’s Razor, @seawulf575. Even if we look past the developments which make that explanation a challenging fit, it requires a massive conspiracy between a host of unconnected groups who, many independent of one another, grew concerned over apparent connections between Russian influence and members of the Trump campaign.

This investigation has led to 2 indictments and 2 plea deals so far.

What happens next remains to be seen.

@seawulf575 Your summary of the scenario is full of inaccuracies and falsehoods.

Let’s say they arrange to have a special investigator appointed to investigate you. The SP was appointed in response to the Administration’s interference with the Flynn investigation

Mind you, not any particular aspect of you, but anything he can find. The SP is charged with investigating Russian interference and collusion during the 2016 election, and related crimes.

So the SP, who happens to have worked for some of your enemies, Mueller was appointed FBI Director by GW Bush, and stayed on, as is usual and common when a new President was elected.

gathers a team of people, many of whom have also worked for your enemies the team is of FBI agents, not a team of political operatives.

and have paid to have and actually helped create, a dossier created, which contains many accusations and allegations, but very little verifiable fact. The oppo research raised enough concern by a former British intelligence office that he turned it over to the FBI. The FBI is the authority responsible for investigating espionage crimes against the U.S.. You and I do not know what in the Dossier is verifiable or not.

The story of Carter Page’s FISA warrant is actually quite a juicy one.

It includes the FBI breaking up a group of 10 Russian “sleeper spies” in 2010, and shortly thereafter becoming aware of a 3-person spy ring operating in NY, which they then successfully bug (around 2013). Among the overheard conversations, the spies complained about how difficult it is to get anywhere as Russian spy in the US, because of the good work of the FBI at weeding out foreign operatives. Article. The FBI arrests one of the three spies and successfully brings charges against him. The other two have diplomatic immunity and return to Russia.

The bug is as good as something out of a novel. The FBI “inserted a listening device into binders that were passed to the Russian intelligence operatives during an energy conference, according to a former United States intelligence official. The Russians then took the binders into a secure room where they thought they could evade American intelligence eavesdropping attempts.” With that bug, the FBI also overhears the spies talking about their ongoing process of recruiting an American, known in court documents as “Male-1.” Male-1 is Carter Page. Article.

Carter Page has been under recurring FISA warrants since before his involvement in the Trump administration as a result of his interactions with Russian intelligence operatives, something also pointed out in another thread by another jelly. And it’s those previous connections to Russian operatives that make his involvement in the Trump campaign raise eyebrows. It’s not merely the fact he worked with Trump.

FISA warrant requests must meet a very high standard to be granted. They aren’t given out simply for “spying on Americans.” There needs to be reason:

“The government’s application for the surveillance order targeting Page included a lengthy declaration that laid out investigators’ basis for believing that Page was an agent of the Russian government and knowingly engaged in clandestine intelligence activities on behalf of Moscow, officials said.

“Among other things, the application cited contacts that he had with a Russian intelligence operative in New York City in 2013, officials said. Those contacts had earlier surfaced in a federal espionage case brought by the Justice Department against the intelligence operative and two other Russian agents. [The story I outline above]. In addition, the application said Page had other contacts with Russian operatives that have not been publicly disclosed, officials said. [We don’t know what these are yet.]” Article

@zenvelo What interference with the Flynn investigation? He spoke with Comey who came out and stated he didn’t feel the president was pressuring him or interfering.

The SP is charged with, as laid out in the letter from Rothenstein investigation of any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation. That is a HUGE swath of investigation since it doesn’t specify what the actual focus is. Was it to interfere with the election? Was it to burn Hillary? Basically, if anyone associated with Trump’s campaign EVER talked to a Russian, it is open game. Want the proof of that? Look at the two indictments that have come forth so far. They are for incidents that happened before the people were even involved with Trump…before he ever mounted a presidential campaign. AND for crimes not associated with the presidential campaign whatsoever. So your summary is misleading and erroneous in itself. Mine was actually closer to the facts.
The SP also worked with Hillary on the Uranium One deal. He has associates that are strong Clinton supporters and, in fact, hired no one that wasn’t a Hillary supporter. Yep..totally independent….right.
The whole argument that his investigation is bogus and the FBI is biased comes from those FBI agents he hired. Strzok and his girlfriend in particular are fine examples. To try downplaying it now is disingenuous.
You are right…the dossier is an unknown. We know that the Dems paid for the material. We know that many of the sources involved with the dossier are unknown meaning Steele either didn’t want to name them…ever…or he doesn’t know who they are…someone told someone that told this guy that let Steele know…or they don’t exist. In other words, it contains very little verifiable fact, which is what I said in the first place.

@Soubresaut That is right…it does call for a massive conspiracy. So let’s look at that. FBI agents that hate Trump and in fact have ties to Hillary are working on the investigation. Mueller himself has ties to Hillary. In fact, not one person on his team doesn’t have ties to Hillary. People that helped pay for the Steele dossier are working for Hillary or have ties to Hillary. The FBI associate director that was overseeing the investigation has a wife that got $700,000 in campaign contributions from Hillary. Starting to see any kind of tie here? Any possibility of a conspiracy? If not, you need to get to the eye doctor.

@seawulf575 from your inference above – - -Who do you have “ties to” ?

Mueller probe is investigating the NRA (New Russian Agency) also known as National Rifle Association; money laundering for the Trump campaign.

@seawulf575 The election is over and Trump won. Hillary is history. Now let Mueller complete his investigation so we can see what it has uncovered and we can judge whether it is biased or not. Personally, I think Mueller is a man of integrity and I believe his report will be fair and based on the evidence.

Trump insists there was no Russian interference in the last election but that is not what America’s closest allies believe. Trump’s attitude to the investigation strikes me as odd as it is clearly in America’s best interests to get to the bottom of this.

And all this talk brings up the one big question: What was done to interfere with the election? Remember, Obama and Hillary both dismissed any Russian interference. Obama even made the statement that it would be a fair election and the will of the American people would be heard. Right up until Trump won. So which is it?? No real interference and the will of the people is heard or the Russians somehow altered the vote count? See, the impact of the Russian influence is idiotic to claim. If you are going with the hacked DNC computers, I still challenge that as a prime target for hackers. And any information from the files that were given to Wikileaks wasn’t released in time to sway anyone’s vote. And be honest now…how much of what was released could anyone speak to? The average voter didn’t know anything that was in any of the emails that was released. And here is another thought for all you Hillary adherents: If the material in those emails was so-o-o-o-o damaging that it cost her the election, should they be investigated? I don’t mean the hack, I mean the influence of the material inside. All the dirty tricks that were supposedly the things that were aired out and cost her the election? Face it…Hillary lost and Trump is the president. Good or bad, he is your president. Now you know how conservatives felt for 8 years under Obama.

He’s not my president…...

And he is certainly not mine.

Right wing faction has got their “rubber stamp” to reverse the last 50 years of USA laws in history.

Soon it they will be pumping the resources out of the National Parks, cut back on the VA budget, deport the Navajos, let anyone carry a fully automatic weapon to churches, schools and hospitals.

This argument about “bias” against Trump could stand some looking at. These accusations about some sort of irrational hatred of the man are misinterpretations of reality. If I declare Trump a lying narcissistic ignoramus, neither hatred nor bias is involved. It’s equivalent to calling a bluebird blue. There is no counter argument, and the truth of the matter is so setlled that you will never catch his defenders disputing even one of the 3 pejoratives. This is because to do so instantly places the defender at risk of being cataloged with similar attributes. So would you really want our intelligence and investigative agencies staffed with people who on observing Trump concluded that he is NOT a lying narcissistic ignoramus?

@stanleybmanly a lying narcissistic ignoramus….that describes most of the current congress and all of the past 4 or 5 presidents and their opponents. And it isn’t a crime. And really, is it worth hating someone for? And if that is all you have that makes you so adamantly opposed to Trump, then yes, you have a severe bias and it is an irrational hatred.

which of the 3 pejoratives would you care to dispute? And once again, why is it hatred or bias? Seems to me that if it were unfounded slander, you might have a case.

Okay change the subject again @seawulf575 . . . . back to lying narcissistic ignoramus in the WH.

@seawulf575—what was done by Russia? There were attempts (thankfully unsuccessful) to hack electronic voting systems. There was a wide dissemination of misinformation via bots and Russian operatives through online platforms with a deliberate attempt to sway opinion a particular direction. There was a coordinated hack of the DNC servers and subsequent release of emails with the purpose of skewing opinion (which, whether or not you mind the release of the emails, is illegal). From what I understand, the emails were released strategically through WikiLeaks, which helpfully provided quick “synopsis” that selected specific pieces of text and portrayed them in the worst light possible (I’m not saying content in the emails was without criticism. I’m just saying the people who released them wanted to make sure they hurt the targets). These are the things we know about.

Whether we want to argue over the success of those things, that doesn’t make their attempts any less real, or troubling. It doesn’t lessen the duty of the people in office to try and make sure those things don’t happen again.

What was potentially illegal? Surely you know what the investigation is about by now.

A US citizen, for one, can’t coordinate with a foreign power to influence US elections. A US citizen can’t obstruct justice. A US citizen can’t use political office to trade favors with foreign powers for personal gain. Etc. None of that’s in legal terms, but it’s the gist—at least as much as we know publically. It’s also not an exhaustive list.

Again, whether the US citizen was successful with their attempts doesn’t make the attempts more or less illegal.

It’s still an open question whether those things took place. But there was enough evidence to raise suspicion, and that’s why there’s an investigation. It’s as much for the potential of clearing names as it is for finding people who committed crimes.

People trying to smear the investigation are afraid of what the results might be—which I think says more about what they believe is the truth than anything. Shamefully, they’re so insistent that they’re trying to bring down the reputation of entire agencies in their effort.

@Soubresaut so you list all these things Russia did. And can you specifically recall any of the “dissemination of information”? Did you see any that swayed your vote? Do you know anyone who was swayed by it? The hack of the DNC servers. Again…can you tell me anything that was in those emails? Can you say they affected your vote or anyone else’s vote that you know personally?
And Russia may or may not have done all these things. But there has been nothing tying Trump to any of it. That’s the point. I agree with you that obstruction of justice is illegal. It hasn’t happened. I agree with you that trading political favors for personal gain is illegal which is why the honest investigation into Hillary should be done. But again…there is no tie to Trump. You can hint at it, make accusations, throw out allegations all day long, but there is no proof of any of it. How do I know? Because with as many people looking for it for the past year, you can bet it would have been found already.
You see it as people trying to smear the investigation. I see it as an investigation that was way too broad and having no set goals. What you have is a situation that is upside down to what reality should be. In a normal, sane world, when a crime is committed, you do an investigation to get all the facts. What we have here is an investigation without any proof of crime, designed to see what it can dig up. So let’s put it into more personal terms. How would you feel if the cops showed up at your house with a warrant to search. Nothing saying what to search for, nothing showing what crime you may have committed that is being investigated, and no end date for that warrant. Just to allow them to dig around your house and your affairs until they turn up something that they can then charge you with. Sound like that would be a fair deal?

Working with a Foreign power in an election . . ./

@seawulf575 is not OKAY ! even if your GUY won.!

@seawulf575—you may very well be right that Trump and his associates (the ones not already indicted) did no wrongdoing. You may be wrong. The fact is, neither you nor I know yet—though we certainly have our opinions. What we do know is that there was enough pointing to “something may be going on here” to warrant an investigation. We know that this conclusion was not unique to our government—other governments warned our government when they got similar intel that led to similar concerns. We know that many various details which come from diffuse sources (some of them from the horses’ mouths) that seem to support the initial concern. And I could go on.

As for the blank warrant scenario. Unless this is an extreme scenario (though I don’t know if that would make a difference, honestly), the warrant isn’t blank. It has specific things that the police will be looking for in my house. If, however, they happen across other illegal material while they’re conducting a reasonable search for that evidence, they are usually allowed to take it—that other illegal material being “in plain sight.”

Mueller’s investigation isn’t boundless. It’s broad, but it’s not boundless: “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated” and “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” The first part is literally the question that brought the investigation into being. The second part is, from what I understand, nothing out of the ordinary. And, if we go with our search warrant analogy, it would seem to be in the vein of the “in plain sight” rule—though that’s probably an imperfect comparison.

And if Mueller’s team does step out of bounds? Well, then the affected parties should deal with that through the proper channels—which would be to challenge it in court. (Manafort’s lawyers were trying to do exactly that at one point, I believe… or at least threatening to, anyway).

Trying to block and stymie an investigation because you personally feel it’s unfair is still obstruction. And trying to convince all your watching neighbors that there’s “nothing to see here” and “the police are out to get me” doesn’t do anything to challenge the legality or legitimacy of the investigation—it’s the political show, an attempt to turn public opinion against the processes of law that are suddenly confronting you.

Finally, as I mentioned above—even if the Russian attempts were less than not effective; even if, when news got out that the Russians were trying to turn the electorate away from Clinton and towards Trump, it completely backfired —people took umbrage at the idea someone was trying to manipulate them, and purposefully voted the opposite… How does that change the fundamental issue that they tried to interfere, and they probably will again, and the next time they may be better prepared? And how does that lessen the illegality of actions US citizens may have taken to coordinate on that effort? (It doesn’t; though it probably improves our response to a nation to the threat.)

I’ve probably taken up enough space on this thread… I cede the floor.

You 2 are off on the wrong tangent. Frankly, the REAL issue isn’t about whether or not the Russians successfully handed Trump the Presidency.
To claim that Trump is being persecuted since he would have won without Russian interference is like saying that an attempted bank robbery is no crime if the perps don’t escape with the loot.

And then there’s the ludicrous circular logic about the investigation of Trump being a Trumped up witch hunt. The reasoning? Since he hasn’t been indicted yet, he must be innocent. Gimme a break! With half the White House hobnobbing with Russian gangster government officials, and the apparent fact that you can’t hold a job in the Trump administration unless you’ve attended clandestine meetings with thugs in Moscow. Meantime, the Commander and Chief here at home faces the revelation that his real estate empire amounts to little more than a scam for laundering looted Russian rubles. The Attorney General forced to recuse himself for cozying up with Russian operatives. 2 indictments and 2 guilty pleas SO FAR of folks at the VERY TOP of the Trump Presidential effort. Biased witch hunt?

Is it legal to form a shell corporation, with campaign funds, to pay someone off? Let’s make up an imaginary name for this person. Oh let’s see… Stormy Daniels. What if a candidate did that?..

Honestly, the more Trump squirms, the more I believe he thinks that they have something on him. And why would an innocent man ask about pardoning himself?

You have to be a special person to be willing to overlook everything that’s in plain site, but claim there is a vast conspiracy that there is NO evidence of in play by the other side.

Does anyone think Kennith Star’s team didn’t say snide things about Bill, during his investigation? Having a negative opinion about someone, doesn’t make you incapable of gathering facts, and acting on them.

As far as Trump claiming innocence, and conspiracies against him, with no accountability for his actions. Go to your local prison. You’ll hear this story there too… Sometimes, it’s true. Usually not…

If you smell smoke it is a good idea to check if there’s a fire. If Trump says ” there’s no fire folks it’s all fake news” I would advise checking anyway.

@flutherother I’d call out a three alarm.

@stanleybmanly As I have previously mentioned, the investigation is bogus not because they haven’t found anything, but because it is upside down on logic itself. It is a hunt to see if they can find anything at all on Trump. It isn’t looking at how to stop Russia in the future. It isn’t responding to any particular charge…there are no specific charges. If the investigation had been: We have evidence that Trump sold secrets to Russia or We have evidence that Trump paid for the Russians to hack the DNC (again…a really ridiculous target), and the investigation focused on that, I would suggest it was an okay investigation. It isn’t. It is based no murky, hints and innuendos and set with no real boundaries other than to dig something up. And I have stated that it is a huge waste of money since after a year of Mueller and his team looking AND the MSM trying to dig something up, there still isn’t anything other than some decade old crimes committed by those other than Trump and that showed no indication it had anything to do with the election. So to continue it is a farce and yes, a pathetic witch hunt.
The AG recusing himself was the right thing to do. I wouldn’t call it cozying up with Russian operatives…I would call it having met with Russians and realizing it could be construed as being corrupt to stay in charge of the investigation. It was the honest thing to do. If it wasn’t, there would have been charges against him already. Now, let’s compare that to the previous AG who met with Bill Clinton privately while there was an ongoing investigation into Hillary. Honest? The right thing to do? Did she recuse herself from anything? No, no, and no. I find it funny that when someone does the right thing, you want to try making it into something nefarious and yet cannot see when someone actually is nefarious.

@flutherother Funny how you don’t have that same attitude about Hillary.

@MrGrimm888 Funny you should bring up Kenneth Starr and his team. Did you know that many of his investigation team was registered Democrats? Did you know that he did that specifically to avoid what Mueller is having to deal with today? But no, don’t let that fact affect your rant of feeling.
You throw out an innuendo of a shell corporation using campaign funds to pay someone off. The proof? Here’s a thought…if that was true, and Trump did it, don’t you think Mueller wouldn’t have already found it and used it? That would be enough to get Trump thrown out, which is, after all, the goal of his witch hunt.
I would say you have to be a very special person to avoid looking at all the dishonesty surrounding this investigation for the mere fact that you hope they find something on Trump. I will ask again…what have they found? I heard months ago from all of you that Mueller was on the brink of touting out all sorts of indictments that would have Trump out of office. Not a peep so far. If he has the proof and is just sitting on it, I would suggest that is nothing but political motivation…to roll it out at the optimum time. If a crime was committed by Trump, he needs to have charges brought so he can answer to them. If that isn’t happening, there either isn’t anything to charge or it will be brought out when the Dems tell him it is best politically. I’m going with the former. And these pathetic answers that they will eventually find something only confirms my assertation that the whole investigation is open-ended and is nothing but a witch hunt…and you all know it. Are counting on it, in fact.

Here’s how I see it. Mueller is conducting an investigation so thorough and methodical that it no longer matters whether or not he is fired. I think the magnitude and extent of the crimes uncovered will exceed anything in the history of the country. And I’m not alone. The right has belatedly come to recognize the probable outcome of this investigation, and has switched on an all out preemptive stampede. But it is too late. Mueller (a life long Republican) is sytematically sewing a net so tight that few snakes will escape.

Oh I hope so.

You can gauge the magnitude of what’s to come from the degree of outright panic on display from the people conducting “the other” investigations.

I once knew a Japanese exchange student who denied that the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor in alliance with Adolph Hitler, and insisted that the Americans’ dropping the atom bombs on Japan was completely unprovoked.

Gradually, she came to accept that the rest of the world accepted that the Japanese DID bomb Pearl Harbor, and was having a great deal of mental stress dealing with it. However, after seeing a popular film on Pearl Harbor, she couldn’t handle its reality and went right back into vehemous denial for the next several years I knew her.

Stanleybmanly, the ENTIRE Mueller investigation, and the FISA warrants, are based on a Dossier which we now know was paid for by Hillary Clinton and was political in its motivation, not based on Intel. Hillary Clinton paid Christopher Steele through Fusion GPS to write a dossier in coordination with RUSSIANS, Had there been no Dossier, there would be no FISA warrants granted, and no Mueller investigation, according to the FBI director.

The ONLY Russia connection in the Russia Trump Collusion story are the Russians Christopher Steele colluded with at Hillary Clinton’s behest.

@stanleybmanly You are consistent, I will give you that. You say Mueller is sewing a net so tight that few snakes will escape. I thought that sounded familiar so I went back to look. 3 months ago you gave us this jewel: ” Mueller is stitching a net around around the entire Trump crowd, and there has never been a more greedy, sleazy and completely inept a bunch of criminals to make Mueller’s job a picnic.” 3 months have gone by and you are still singing the same song. And still nothing has happened except Mueller has wasted millions of taxpayer dollars. Now it is looking, based on the Nunes memo, like his entire investigation may be based on information that was obtained with bogus warrants. Even if he comes up with something, any halfway decent lawyer could contest, successfully, that it is inadmissible. Since it looks like the FBI didn’t follow protocol when getting the FISA warrants on Page which led to this entire investigation, all information gathered from those warrants is bogus.

I read what the more cnservative members of our little tidal pool write and how this is all a big conspiracy and I think “Wow! And you guys give me hell because I think that 9/11 was an inside job at worst and at best known to be coming and assisted by Cheney, Rove, Bolton and Rumsfeld”.

Nothing has happened? 4 Trump cronies have been either indicted or convictecd thus far with the likelihood that Pence, Trump Jr. and Kushner are next under the ax. I really wonder sometimes exactly which fantasy world you occupy. Time will tell which of us is delusional.

@rojo I don’t give you any grief over 9/11. I have never heard your views before, but now that I have, I tend to agree with them. Again…too much evidence against the official story.

@stanleybmanly yes, yes, I know….all sorts of hell is coming. You have been saying that for months. And so far the biggest offenders are guilty of acts when they worked for Hillary and long before they joined Trump. It really is sad how the facts really don’t matter to you…only unsubstantiated innuendo and wishes, I guess.

Stanley: I respect your presence on Fluther but the entire premise of the Mueller investigation has been debunked. It is only a matter of time until it is disbanded and people start going to jail. I realize there will be a lot of denial, perhaps for years, about the reality of this situation. Hillary through Fusion GPS is the only one who dealt with Russia to effect the outcome of an election.

The Democrats illegally obtained a FISA warrant (THREE warrants, actually) to spy on an opposition party, and once elected in spite of the propaganda, overthrow a duly elected president.

@Yellowdog okay so when the Interpol releases the photos of Trumpo with a 14 year old in the Ukraine (the photo was obliviously was Photoshopped because my hands aren’t that small per the WH) was that Hillary’s fault or Barry’s ? ? ?

@Tropical_Willie and that has to do with Russia interfering with our election how, exactly?

@Yellowdog Thank you, and I return the compliment to you and the other sparse sprinkling of conservatives with the courage to stick it out here. I genuinely feel badly for you, because your duly elected President (along with his retinue) is about to be uncovered and exposed to the
world as the most egregiously corrupt and criminal individual ever to take the oath of office.

Honest to God, I can’t believe you and Seawulf, as one by one the Tump mob is indicted and marched off to jail RIGHT BEFORE YOUR EYES.

^Why believe your eyes, when someone can tell you what to think?..

Put all your political bias at the door. No matter what side of the isle your politics sit, getting to the bottom of this should matter more. Your hate for Trump, or Hillary, cannot cloud your vision. Follow the trail of Information that’s factual as things come to light. Once all is out for us to see, we can determine for ourselves based on full evidence and not based off media bias. Don’t be sheep!

@WeThePeople4change Well said. Thanks.

@stanleybmanly I have addressed this before. Most, if not all, of the four that have been indicted for crimes committed before they joined with Trump. To tie them to Trump and hold him accountable for these crimes if a huge stretch. I can’t get to that place without proof which seems to be missing. And let me point out one other fact that you have wrong…none of the “Trump mob” have been sentenced to jail. Not one. So if they have been marched off to jail before your eyes, you need to refocus on what you are seeing. As @MrGrimm888 just said…why believe your eyes, when someone can tell you what to think? Start looking at facts instead of rhetoric and innuendo.

Most, if not all, of the four that have been indicted for crimes committed before they joined with Trump. To tie them to Trump and hold him accountable for these crimes if a huge stretch

Flynn (The National Security Advisor, described as “the chief in-house advisor to the President of the United States on national security issues”) admitted guilt in lying to the FBI regarding his conversations with Russia immediately after Donald Trump was elected.

George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy advisor for the Trump campaign, admitted guilt in lying to the FBI about his contact with Russian officials during the campaign.

How in the world are you going to make that about anything other than the Trump campaign and Russia?

Flynn lied to the FBI, that is a fact. He admitted to it. But none of his lies dealt with Russia collusion on the election. It is not unusual for transition teams and even candidate’s teams to meet with foreign governments to discuss things. It is not illegal. It is done by pretty much by every campaign. Hillary’s campaign reached out to various governments as well. Papadopoulos was a mid to low level stooge that had asperations of importance. He was probably trying to set up meetings that never happened. So again…how is this dealing with Russia collusion into our election or even Trump?
Part of the problem surrounding all these things is that there is so much innuendo being passed off as fact by the MSM that many people believe what they are told. We need to take what we hear on TV and run it through the filters. Are the stories dealing only with facts or with interpretations, suppositions and beliefs? Fact: there have been 4 indictments coming from the Mueller investigation. Fact: None of them pointed directly to collusion with the Russians to interfere with the election. Pretty much anything beyond that is speculation. And because of that, I don’t see how you can make anything about Trump colluding with the Russians at all. The facts don’t support that conclusion. That isn’t to say there might be facts that haven’t come to light, but right now, the proof isn’t there. Think about it…if you were Trump and someone took you to court on charges of colluding with the Russians and these were the only facts they had…do you think there would be any chance of being found guilty? I would be astounded if a court even heard the case.

Here is an article that more fully explains both what is in the Steele Dossier and what has and has not been subsequently corroborated. I recommend anyone that is actually interested, no matter which side of the line you fall on, take the time to read it. It is from Slate and is dated Sept 11, 2017 so it is a little behind and subsequent events over the past few months have lent even more credence to the document.
It also explains about the information provided being “raw reporting” and both what that actually is and what is done with such information, things like being used as a basis to expand investigations further. Which could certainly include requesting FISA warrants to collaborate and flesh out the initial report. Please take the time to read.

@seawulf575 Fact: there have been 4 indictments coming from the Mueller investigation thus far. Fact: Papadopoulos’ was working for the campaign when he learned about the “dirt” the Russians had on Clinton and arranged a meeting to get it. The Russians were working to defeat Clinton. Trump campaign associates met with the Russians to get this information and lied about doing it. Sounds like collusion to me.Direct collusion Gates and Manafort, both Trump campaign officials, are charged with working as unregistered agent for the Russians and Russian associates and subsequently money laundering a substantial amount of cash from Russians for the Russians. Direct connections,. Flynn, also an unregistered agent, met with Russians and lied about it to cover it up. Could have been charged with four counts, was charged with one. Trump campaign probably knew he was “dirty” and hired him in spite of. Certainly knew he was when told by Yates but kept him on for two weeks anyway.

You are correct that “Pretty much anything beyond that is speculation” And that is why we have the investigation because it certainly appears that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. The facts DO most certainly point to that conclusion and why the investigation needs to continue.

Saying that, because you don’t have all the facts in you should not continue investigating is like saying because you do not have proof that Bonnie & Clyde robbed the bank you should not look for that proof. It makes no sense.

Please take the time and opportunity to read that Slate link I provided above.

@seawulf575 – so some questions for you then. At least we’ve moved away from denying anything at all happened, right?

Why would someone admit to a crime? Someone who definitely has not only counsel, but high quality counsel?

Would that happen if there wasn’t something in it for them? Either the charge they admit guilt for is a lesser charge than they can be reasonably charged for, or they are faced with inescapable evidence of a crime.

Can you think of other scenarios? But you maintain that there is only the charge that was admitted to in both cases. That would seem to ignore evidence to the contrary and what we know of the justice system.

A slow drip of indictments is not the goal, a total revelation of facts is the goal.

If those facts don’t show additional criminal activity, by Trump and others, then great. We can move on and don’t have to worry about an ongoing and very public argument about how we elect officials and how those official govern.

But you’re ignoring evidence in order to maintain a view that is only backed by the fact that we don’t have a final release of findings yet.

@Rojo, so by that logic, Clinton is guilty of collusion as well since she paid for the Steele dossier which used Russian contacts to get dirt on Trump.
Gates and Manafort were both charged on things that happened between 2006 and 2012. Long before they were working with Trump. Again…previous crimes that had nothing to do with the Trump campaign. In a court of law, these connections would be tossed as irrelevant. You can want them to tie to Trump, but they really don’t. For them to actually tie to Trump, there would have to be solid proof that they maintained their ties to Russia, that they used those ties on behalf of Trump, and that they got something substantial that could actually be tied to interference in the election. That is a long stretch from where we are…in facts.
Flynn did lie…he admitted it. But no real reason has been given. It is just as likely that Trump didn’t know about it up front. As to when Yates told Trump, I would say that two weeks might be the right amount of time. Time to get to the facts of what is what. If it were my campaign, I would do the same. The alternative, what you seem to expect, is that at every accusation you would have to drop someone from your team without question. Think about that and how unrealistic it is.
The facts, to me, don’t point towards collusion. 4 indictments, 2 of which had nothing to do with Trump and 2 which really point to nothing other than dishonesty by two people. Nothing they were indicted for actually pointed to any substantial fact that would have said the Trump campaign did anything untowards with Russia. So let me ask…how long do you think this silliness should go on before we call it a day and admit that the entire Trump/Russia collusion narrative is nothing but a political witch hunt?
I have read the Slate link you gave and none of it changes a single thought in my mind. It is still a lot of innuendo and supposition which is based, by the articles own admission, on information provided by the Russians that are seeking to disrupt the US. Or did you miss that tie? Every thing in that dossier should have been treated exactly as what it is…political smear. To give it credibility is to do exactly what Russia was trying to do…disrupt our government.

@funkdaddy I can think of a dozen reasons why someone would admit to a crime. The top among them is that they are guilty and they know the proof points towards that. But if you cut a deal, you can get a better settlement out of any charges than you might if you forced a contested trial. Gates and Manafort and Flynn lied to the FBI. It is an admitted crime. But the point I’m making is that you are trying to take lies Gates and Manafort made years before they worked for Trump and convert that into some obscure tie to Trump. Flynn also lied and while he was working for Trump. But again…there is no proof that his lies led to any sort of collusion. If there was proof, that would already have come out or else Mueller is a complete imbecile, which I don’t believe. Mueller is looking for one of two things…either a smoking gun that will take down Trump, which the aforementioned proof would have given him, or a series of little crimes committed by Trump that could be added up to something. But in the end, these little things would not add up to collusion with Russia. It would add up to the same sort of dirt you could get on most of our elected officials if you dug deeply enough. I think the difference you (and many of the others) and I are having is the term “evidence”. Evidence is facts. Facts are things you can prove. Right now, there are not enough Facts, not enough evidence, to show the Russia collusion accusations. And my strong feeling is that after a whole year of looking into this with the media, the congressional panels and the Mueller team, if the evidence hasn’t surfaced by now, it doesn’t exist. So the whole Mueller investigation then falls back to being a witch hunt. It was an upside down investigation that was created not to investigate a specific charge, but to dig up anything that could be used. That is political witch hunting almost by definition.

@seawulf575 thank you for at least taking the time to read the article, many don’t bother.

Collusion is collusion and if you want to lock Clinton up, as well as Trump, then be my guest but please remember that the digging was initiated by conservatives.
Trumps working with the Russians goes way back, so it is entirely logical to start your investigation many years prior to 2016. Recall that networks are developed, they do not spring into existence over night. Manafort and Gates are old associates and partners with Trump and again, “solid proof” of connections requires investigation. This is what Mueller is doing and should be allowed to do unhindered. And, while you feel that the fact that Mueller has not made any connection public then there either isn’t one or Mueller is an imbecile but since you have already dismissed the second option you leave yourself only the first; my opinion is that the very fact that “nothing” is getting out about Muellers investigation is proof that he has both integrity and intelligence. He is not going to give clues, hints or allegations out without having his case completed and for this he should be commended, not vilified.

You and I part on the Flynn investigation on several points. First while you assume no reason was given, I assume that a reason was given but we are not privy, yet, to that information. Another consideration is that while Mueller could have charged Flynn with four separate counts he only charged him with one. Why? My gut feeling (and it is only that) is that because the other three were dropped as part of a plea deal and that Mueller would not do this if there were not something, some information, of value to his investigation. Also, while you assume that no-one in the Trump administration knew of his past dealings before Ms. Yates pointed them out I believe the same past dealings had a lot to do with why Trump hired him in the first place so, and again, until the Mueller investigation is complete and the conclusions put forth we will have to agree to disagree.

As to the length of the investigation, I cannot give you a definitive time frame other than to say let it run the length of its course. Without conflict or hindrance We are talking about a couple of serious accusations here regarding the interference by another country into the workings of our own and we deserve both to know the truth of the matter and, more importantly, to understand how it was accomplished in order to prevent further attacks in the future.

If there was proof, that would already have come out or else Mueller is a complete imbecile, which I don’t believe. Mueller is looking for one of two things…either a smoking gun that will take down Trump, which the aforementioned proof would have given him, or a series of little crimes committed by Trump that could be added up to something.

This is where you don’t understand what’s going on.

The point isn’t to take anyone down. The point is to find the truth.

There will be one report of findings, at the very end of the investigation. Typically there would be nothing at all before that report. The things that have come out so far have come out because they had to. The Manafort and Gates proceedings needed to happen before they became impossible either due to time constraints or the fear that evidence would be destroyed. The plea deals were made public once the became official.

If no charges are made, that’s best. But any charges made will be airtight. That’s how federal courts work, their conviction rate is over 90%.

—2012 United States Attorneys Report

Of the 87,709 defendants terminated during Fiscal Year 2012, 80,963, or 93 percent, either pled guilty or were found guilty. See Table 3. The rate of conviction remained over 90 percent, as it has since Fiscal Year 2001.

Again, there won’t be a slow trickle of charges as they’re found. There will be one report.

The fact that there isn’t a slow trickle of information isn’t evidence that there isn’t a crime, it’s evidence that the investigation is ongoing.

Let’s put it this way, which side would you bet on? More convictions coming from the investigation, or none?

If none, why discredit the investigation and intelligence community?

@funkdaddy that may very well be the public reason…to get to the truth. But let’s be honest…if he really were interested in getting to the truth, he wouldn’t have staffed his team entirely with Hillary adherents and supporters. Because much of the truth might come back to Hillary. Who paid for the dossier that was compiled working with the Russians? Wasn’t the dossier compiled before the election? Isn’t that Russian collusion? Yet he won’t go that direction with the investigation. Because his charge isn’t to find out about Russian collusion, it is to find dirt on Trump.
As for one report at the end of findings, if that were true, then why have 4 people already been indicted? Facts prove you wrong, OR Mueller isn’t playing by the rules.
I’ll put my money on more convictions because he has an open-ended investigation. Go find something is the gist of it. It isn’t limited to anything…crime, person, timeframe….nothing. It has no defined end point. That is the problem with this investigation. There wasn’t a specific crime it was investigating. It was opened up to start an investigation and to act on whatever was found. Based on that alone, it is already discredited. It is a bogus foundation for a fair investigation. Works great as a witch hunt, though. Add to that the documented bias of the investigative team and you have real integrity issues. And if Mueller is doing such a fair and balanced investigation, why didn’t he find the bias of his own investigators? Why didn’t he dig into the collusion from Hillary for using Russian informants to interfere in our election? The list goes on and on of questions that are brought into question when it starts coming to his investigation. As for discrediting the intelligence community, are you really suggesting that the intelligence community should have no oversight whatsoever? The recent events as documented in the Nunes memo came from the congressional intelligence oversight committee. They were doing what they are supposed to do. They were reviewing actions of the FBI and found glaring discrepancies. That brings up another question: Why didn’t Mueller find those same discrepancies? It was at the core of his investigation. Guess that wasn’t on the charter either. But the FBI agent, Strzok discredited himself. Comey discredited himself with the failure to bring charges against Hillary by creating the “intent” aspect of the law which it specifically denies. If the Nunes memo has truth to it, then Comey, McCabe, Yates, and Rothenstein all have discredited themselves. Funny how when unusual activity that has far more direct evidence is brought forward, but it involves those that are opposing Trump, you are all okay with ignoring it. Meanwhile you want to stretch innuendo and assumption to a point of impeachment.

@rojo, see…that is where you and I differ. I wouldn’t start an investigation way back in history. I would start with what is known today and start working backward. You make far fewer assumptions at that point. By starting an investigation all the way back to when Trump may have first worked with people in Russia as a starting point, you start with the assumption that he is guilty and try to find proof of it. If you start with the question of “did the Russians interfere with our election?” Then you start asking the pertinent questions: What did they do to interfere? Why did they interfere? and How did they interfere….did they have inside help or was it entirely outside our nation. Each of those questions become verify/refute steps. Did they interfere? Yes or no and proof. On and on. That is how I would run the investigation…if it was actually an honest investigation. If someone handed me the Steele dossier in my investigation I would start with looking into the background of the thing…Why was it compiled? Who paid for it? What are the sources? Etc, etc, etc. In the end, you may be taking something to court and you would want a solid case. A solid case is predicated on the preponderance of evidence and being able to show a solid time line and logic chain to the investigation. Otherwise, every jump in logic or assumption that was made would weaken your case.
As for Flynn, he plead guilty to one charge. You make an assumption: he cut a plea deal. Maybe there wasn’t solid evidence for the other charges. Maybe they didn’t happen. Maybe it was part of plea deal.
As for whether anyone in the Trump campaign party knew about Flynn, I’m not making that assumption. They may have. It seems unlikely to me since to put someone you know lied to the FBI into a top position on your team is foolishness. I can’t picture someone doing that. My discussion about waiting 2 weeks was strictly that it doesn’t seem nefarious, It seems that it might be a reasonable length of time.
As for the length of time for the investigation, I would support your conclusion to let it runs its course…if it had a specific crime it was investigating. It isn’t. The charter for this (what he was tasked with from Rothenstein) is very, very vague. It doesn’t have a set end point it is looking or. So realistically, this investigation could go on for the next 20 years and come up with nothing more than it has already. Meanwhile, it is costing the taxpayer at least $10M/yr.

Who paid for the dossier that was compiled working with the Russians? Wasn’t the dossier compiled before the election? Isn’t that Russian collusion?

But look at Hilary! (c)

That’s as good a time as any to stop. Might I recommend less arguing, more research on the terms though? Collusion is a perfect place to start.

I feel it relevant to remind everyone that the investigation is incomplete. Hillary may get dragged in too.

In the mean time, a person who may have colluded with essentially an enemy, has control over one of the world’s largest nuclear weapons stockpiles, and the world’s most powerful military. If that prospect doesn’t mean that an investigation is needed, I don’t know what does. Hillary isn’t going anywhere. As a tax payer, I am glad that the investigation is prioritizing eliminating the POTUS as a suspect. If it were up to me, Trump would be relieved of ALL military command, until the investigation clears him. That may not sound fair, but this is an issue that could destroy the world.

This is not a political party issue. At least McCain has the guts/fortitude, to speak against the war on our intelligence community….