Robert Mueller, Former F.B.I. Director, Is Named Special Counsel for Russia Investigation

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-h...eport-linked-to-russia-was-a-state-department

 

Huge

The White House has begun leaking confidential sources to try and discredit Mueller.

They just can't stop commiting crimes.

 

Why did Mueller include this in his report? He knew Kilimnik was a State Department asset yet only referred to him as a tie to Russian Intelligence. This had absolutely nothing to do with the reason Manafort was prosecuted.Why are we finding more and more ways the Mueller report was misleading?

Quote from the Hill article.

This is just plain laughable. We are still waiting to hear the first crime he committed. The boomerang is now coming back around. The people who started this entire hoax are being outed. Mueller is slowly being discredited for writing a deceptive report with glaring exculpatory omissions.

 

Quotes from the article:

Three sources with direct knowledge of the inner workings of Mueller’s office confirmed to me that the special prosecutor’s team had all of the FBI interviews with State officials, as well as Kilimnik’s intelligence reports to the U.S. Embassy, well before they portrayed him as a Russian sympathizer tied to Moscow intelligence or charged Kilimnik with participating with Manafort in a scheme to obstruct the Russia investigation.

Kasanof’s and Purcell’s interviews are corroborated by scores of State Department emails I reviewed that contain regular intelligence from Kilimnik on happenings inside the Yanukovych administration, the Crimea conflict and Ukrainian and Russian politics. For example, the memos show Kilimnik provided real-time intelligence on everything from whose star in the administration was rising or falling to efforts at stuffing ballot boxes in Ukrainian elections.

Those emails raise further doubt about the Mueller report’s portrayal of Kilimnik as a Russian agent. They show Kilimnik was allowed to visit the United States twice in 2016 to meet with State officials, a clear sign he wasn’t flagged in visa databases as a foreign intelligence threat.

 

What Mueller said seems accurate. I don't know why the article takes issue with something that was true about Kilimnik.

I don't know what to tell you if you think Trump committed no crimes. Mueller clearly lays out what qualifies as the crime of obstruction of justice. He then lays out all of the evidence. The evidence clearly shows that Trump committed obstruction of justice.

You've put on your emperor-with-no-clothes glasses, I guess.

 

Can you post a link to the Hill article?

 

Some are waiting for Trump to get this ass thrown into jail before they accept the possibility of trump's criminal behavior. Of course, the chosen few will hang on to the "witch hunt".

 

So slow that in a 1000 years 10% of the historians will come around to your thinking.

 

Mick Fry posted the link in post #9001.

 

One more quote, from the end of the article. As Solomon concludes:

"A few more such errors and omissions, and Americans may begin to wonder if the Mueller report is worth the paper on which it was printed." ​

 

Those that said they would wait for the mueller report and honestly consider it... on this very board... a few of them are straight liars.

 

That explains why I didn't see it. Is it the John Solomon editorial? If yes, it isn't an article but an editorial with someone that is not only way biased but has questionable "reporting". His attempts to push the Uranium One "scandal" being just one example.

 

It was debunked in post #9012. It didn't take too long.

 

Fake news?

 

Felix Sater was also a source at different points for the US government, but also viewed as having ties to Russia. If Trump was working through Sater to get help from Russia (he was with Trump Tower Moscow I believe) does the mean that it’s automatically a setup to frame Trump by Obama??

Of course not. I fail to see why Kilimnek being allowed to travel to the US and the fact that he’s been a source before to the State department, as any type of proof of a setup.

If Obama’s intelligence office wanted to setup Trump it just makes no sense that they wouldn’t have released all of this damaging info BEFORE the election.

 

A lot of posts here remind me of the youtubers who posted videos "debunking" how Trump mocked a reporter with a physical disability. Which he clearly, obviously, WTF-are-you-talking about? did.

President Gaslight and his troll army march on. Don't believe your eyes. Your ears. Certainly not your healthy brain.

 

The pivot from exoneration to not being worth the paper it’s printed on? I guess that’s an admission of how bad the report really is.

 

Fake, ill-informed, inaccurate, misleading... You can choose to characterize it however you'd like.