Napolitano: It's 'Unheard Of' for FBI #2 Official to Request Immunity Before Testifying

[jb914 33]

Here is the summary from the US report, still available at https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

 

"Key Judgments

Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations.

 

We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency.

 

We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.

 

We have high confidence in these judgments

• We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence
• Moscow’s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on Russia’s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on undermining her future presidency.

 

Moscow’s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that blends covert intelligence operations— such as cyber activity— with overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or “trolls.” Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin."

[Dashinka 23,209]

3 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

 

     Both should be investigated and run their course to determine what can be proven or not.  I'm sure the next time a democrat is president and there are allegations of collusion with and/or interference by a foreign entity, you will be 110% behind a full investigation.

 

   Many have been calling for this investigation to end since day one. The same people still want Hillary prosecuted for pizza gate and giving uranium to Russia. Partisanship is great, until you are blinded by it. 

I agree, next time we elect a president, Democrat or Republican, we will also appoint a special prosecutor to investigate any allegation made by the losing side.

[Dashinka 23,209]

3 hours ago, jb914 said:

Here is the summary from the US report, still available at https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

 

"Key Judgments

Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations.

 

We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency.

 

We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.

 

We have high confidence in these judgments

• We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence
• Moscow’s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on Russia’s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on undermining her future presidency.

 

Moscow’s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that blends covert intelligence operations— such as cyber activity— with overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or “trolls.” Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin."

US led?  I thought George Soros was the leader of the Left Wing?

[Dashinka 23,209]

On 6/15/2018 at 3:27 PM, jb914 said:

There seems to be some confusion surrounding two terms here, foreign agent and laundering.

 

1. US citizens and residents are required to register as Foreign Agents if they are representing the interests of a Foreign Government, which Steele was not.

 

Here, Steele's Fusion GPS firm was contracting on behalf of the Clinton Campaign, which is in no way shape or form illegal. All major political parties and presidential campaigns hire contractors to perform research. This would only be comparable to what Meuller is investigating, if the UK had directed an intelligence operation to alter the course of the US Election, which obviously it did not.

 

2. "Laundering" refers to concealing the origins of profits from criminal enterprises so as to make them appear legitimate. Using campaign contributions for political research is not "money laudering."

 

7 hours ago, bcking said:

This continues to somehow go over people's heads. Not just on these forums, but again at certain news outlets.

 

Steele was an independent contractor. The fact that he is British makes no difference. He could have been American, Canadian, Australia, French, or heck he could have been RUSSIAN. But he was independent. There is no evidence to suggest he was working in the interest of a foreign government. He was not a foreign agent.

 

People like Manafort, on the other hand...

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/agent

 

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Foreign

 

Words do have more than one definition.

[bcking 3,157]

5 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

 

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/agent

 

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Foreign

 

Words do have more than one definition.

"Foreign agent" is a specific title. Steele does not meet the definition.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

10 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I agree, next time we elect a president, Democrat or Republican, we will also appoint a special prosecutor to investigate any allegation made by the losing side.

 

  The losing side appointed the special prosecutor? How did they manage that?

 

 

[Dashinka 23,209]

Just now, bcking said:

"Foreign agent" is a specific title. Steele does not meet the definition.

Only in some minds.  I tend to look at entire definitions and make good use of thesauruses.

[Dashinka 23,209]

Just now, Steeleballz said:

 

  The losing side appointed the special prosecutor? How did they manage that?

 

 

Not sure I said that, but nice try.  I do believe I said it was the losing side that created the narratives on baseless allegation that resulted in a special prosecutor being appointed.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

Not sure I said that, but nice try.  I do believe I said it was the losing side that created the narratives on baseless allegation that resulted in a special prosecutor being appointed.

 

  Obviously some on the winning side feel the same way then, or we wouldn't be here. 

 

   

 

   

[bcking 3,157]

9 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Only in some minds.  I tend to look at entire definitions and make good use of thesauruses.

Only in some minds...and in the legal definition. Sorry your using a weak argument in this case.

 

Legally speaking foreign agent has a specific meaning. It is a key reason why there is an investigation into Trump's campaign. No one cares about foreign individuals working for a campaign. What matters is whether a foreign government has agents working to influence the campaign. That distinction is what makes Steele different from the investigation into Trump's campaign.

 

Individual definitions of the words don't apply here.

Edited June 16, 2018 by bcking

[Dashinka 23,209]

Just now, Steeleballz said:

 

  Obviously some on the winning side feel the same way then, or we wouldn't be here. 

 

   

 

   

I am sure there are Washington Insiders on the Right that absolutely hate Trump as well.

[Dashinka 23,209]

Just now, bcking said:

Sorry that is a weak argument in this case. Non-existent really.

 

Legally speaking foreign agent has a specific meaning. It is a key reason why there is an investigation into Trump's campaign. No one cares about foreign individuals working for a campaign. What matters is whether a foreign government has agents working to influence the campaign. That distinction is what makes Steele different from the investigation into Trump's campaign.

 

Individual definitions of the words don't apply here.

Foreign agent has a specific legal meaning, please provide a source.  The term is made up of two words that have multiple meanings and in this case Steele was obviously a foreigner with respect to the US, and he definitely was an agent working on behalf of the Clinton campaign and possibly other entities.  However if you are more satisfied, I will call him a “foreign campaign contractor” which is also against election law hence the payment to him being funneled through Perkins Coie as legal services.

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

Foreign agent has a specific legal meaning, please provide a source.  The term is made up of two words that have multiple meanings and in this case Steele was obviously a foreigner with respect to the US, and he definitely was an agent working on behalf of the Clinton campaign and possibly other entities.  However if you are more satisfied, I will call him a “foreign campaign contractor” which is also against election law hence the payment to him being funneled through Perkins Coie as legal services.

https://definitions.uslegal.com/f/foreign-agent/

 

You can call Steele whatever you like but he wasn't a foreign agent, and therefore not if equivalent concern compared to members of Trump's campaign who potentially colluded with actual foreign agents representing the Russian government.

 

You may think they are the same, in your opinion. But legally it's not the same.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

21 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I am sure there are Washington Insiders on the Right that absolutely hate Trump as well.

 

   Perhaps, and not without good reason. Slick Willie went through the same thing. If you are a jerk to enough people, it does come back to you eventually and you might find the breaks going against you more often than someone who can act civil. 

 

   Many, many people dislike Trump for reasons other than his political affiliation. I am one of those. He may not be a Washington insider, but he's been around long enough and done enough to deserve what he gets. 

 

   I do think the focus has been distorted by the right here too. Is there proof of collusion? Perhaps not. Nothing that has been made public anyway. Is there evidence of collusion though? Certainly there is. Mueller's job is to find out if the preponderance of evidence leads to proof or not. 

[Dashinka 23,209]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

https://definitions.uslegal.com/f/foreign-agent/

 

You can call Steele whatever you like but he wasn't a foreign agent, and therefore not if equivalent concern compared to members of Trump's campaign who potentially colluded with actual foreign agents representing the Russian government.

 

You may think they are the same, in your opinion. But legally it's not the same.

You seem to forget that Steele got his information regarding Trump and Russia from somewhere (I.e. Russian agents) making him a de facto foreign agent of Russia if your theory of Russia trying to spread discord in our election.