Excitable Adam Schiff Just Won’t MoveOn From Collusion

If the hole you’re digging has no gold in it, what do you do? Stop digging that hole. When a company is in a really bad spot, something bad has happened, what do they do? Take their lumps all at once, take the stock hit quickly, and just move on and rebuild. That’s what Target did after the massive data breach years ago, and what many other companies have done. Not Adam Schiff, though

Schiff: There Is ‘Ample Evidence of Collusion in Plain Sight’

Wednesday on CNN’s “Cuomo Prime Time,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) reasserted his previous claims that there was “ample evidence of collusion” between President Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Russians.

Partial transcript as follows:

CUOMO: Let’s deal with your critics. They say Republicans in the White House, actually all of them together, are saying you got it wrong and put you number two on the list second only to Senator Blumenthal as someone who shouldn’t be on TV anymore, who shouldn’t be the chair of a committee, because you were selling something not delivered by Mueller. Your response?

SCHIFF: My response is they were clearly not listening. Because what I’ve been saying now for over a year is two things. One, there’s ample evidence of collusion in plain sight, and that is true. And second, that is not the same thing as whether Bob Mueller will be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the crime of conspiracy. There’s a difference between there being evidence of collusion and proof beyond a reasonable doubt of a crime and I distinguish between the two probably dozens of times. Now, either they weren’t listening or more likely they would rather attack me than talk about how they’re trying to take health care away from millions of people. But nonetheless, I consider it a good day when Kellyanne Conway is going after me.

In other words, it’s all just part of his fever dream

CUOMO: That makes one of us. Let me ask you this. So help people understand the distinction. I know it. I’m a lawyer, I talk about the difference between collusion as a behavior and conspiracy or a crime that can be made on a regular basis. But people will hear that and they’ll say it’s a hedge. We both know that. They’ll say, ‘Oh, you’re trying to have it both ways.’ Make your case.

SCHIFF: Well, let’s look at the evidence. We know that the Russians through an intermediary offered dirt on Hillary Clinton as part of what was described as the Russian government effort to help Donald Trump. They offered that to Don Jr. and his response was not to call the FBI and say, this is what I was approached with, it was not to say, no way, under no circumstances. It was to say, I would love it. If it’s what you say it is, that is dirt on Hillary Clinton, that is highly sensitive, as part of the Russian government’s effort to help our campaign, I would love it. And then he sets up this secret meeting in Trump Tower and he invites the campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, someone very experienced in running political campaigns, who decides that it’s a good idea to take that meeting and Jared Kushner takes that meeting. And then, of course, they conceal it and they lie about it. And in fact, the president himself may have been involved in a drafting of a false statement covering up that meeting. All of that is evidence of collusion.

And the Mueller report found that there was no collusion in any of this. But, hey, if he thinks this is evidence, then he needs to put it on the record in the U.S. House of Representatives. Make an official on the record speech on the House floor. Submit documents into the record.

This is all red meat for their base, though. Whether this will play well with independents and those who could be persuaded to switch their party vote is unknown, but, it will probably hurt Democrats, as they are being shown as sore losers.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

53 Responses to “Excitable Adam Schiff Just Won’t MoveOn From Collusion”

  1. Bill Bear says:

    “And the Mueller report found that there was no collusion in any of this.”

    Porter Good is making shit up — again.

    We really do not know what the Mueller report says about collusion, because it has yet to be released to the public. All we know is that Attorney General William Barr’s letter quotes the report as stating that “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

    Note the wording here. It does not say that members of the Trump Campaign did not conspire or coordinate with the Russian government. It says that this could not be established.

    We also do not know what the report says about any attempts by the Trump campaign to conspire or coordinate with foreign entities other than the Russian government.

    Like all regressives, Porter Good does not live in a fact-based world. When useful facts are not available, Porter Good simply invents them out of whole cloth.

    • formwiz says:

      Legally, it’s the same thing.

      Oh, you’d have loved the show trials back in the 30s.

      “Show me the man, I’ll show you the crime”.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “Legally, it’s the same thing.”

        False. In the US legal system, stating that the commission of a crime could not be established is not the same as stating that it did not occur.

        formwiz is, of course, lying.

        That’s what liars do.

  2. Bill Bear says:

    Direct question to Porter Good:

    What was Donald Trump Jr’s exact, verbatim reply to the email below?

    === begin quote ===

    On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Rob Goldstone wrote:

    Good morning

    Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.

    The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.

    This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump – helped along by Aras and Emin.

    What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?

    I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.


    Rob Goldstone

    === end quote ===


  3. Bill Bear says:

    Here are all the Russian interference efforts that didn’t make it into Barr’s letter


    Special counsel Robert Mueller may not have found the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, but plenty of Americans — wittingly or otherwise — have helped Moscow’s election meddling efforts in recent years. Secessionists, Jill Stein and her campaign, and members of groups organized around gun rights and far-right Christian movements have spent the past few years cultivating ties with those close to the Kremlin and using their platforms to promote Russia-friendly ideas.

    None of these groups were mentioned by Attorney General William Barr, who issued a letter on Sunday confirming that Russia conducted coordinated campaigns to interfere in America’s elections.

    According to Barr, Mueller’s report found that Russian operatives reached out to Trump’s campaign, but that no member of the campaign actively colluded with the Russian government. However, Barr wrote that Mueller also “determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election.” Both of these efforts — social media interference, and stealing and disseminating internal Democratic documents and emails — were widely known before the report’s conclusion.

    From fake Facebook pages to networks of Twitter bots, from posing as Romanian hackers to transferring stolen emails to Wikileaks, the details of these operations have been previously reported or described by intelligence analysts. And they’ve already resulted in numerous criminal indictments, for everything from illegally accessing emails to stealing Americans’ identities.

    But those weren’t the only ways the Kremlin tried to put its fingers on American scales in 2016.

    The separatists

    Russian cultivation of American secessionists — for example, groups who look back fondly on the days of the Confederacy or advocate for states separating from the U.S. to form their own country — date back to at least 2014, in the midst of the Kremlin’s attempts to disintegrate Ukraine. Multiple conferences held in Moscow in 2015 and 2016 brought separatists from places like Hawaii and Puerto Rico to Russia, gathering supporters with other secessionists from Italy and Spain. They were hosted and feted by Alexander Ionov, the head of an organization called the Anti-Globalization Movement of Russia (AGMR).

    American secessionists came from two states in particular: Texas and California. Representing the dreams of an independent Texas Republic, representatives from the Texas Nationalist Movement — including Nate Smith, the self-styled “foreign minister” of an independent Texas — made multiple trips to Russia, with the AGMR helping pay for travel. (It’s also worth noting that during 2016, the fake Russian “Heart of Texas” page on Facebook began gaining more followers than the official Texas Democratic and Texas GOP pages combined.)

    Before the 2016 trip, the AGMR began receiving funding from the Kremlin, with Ionov even boasting a signed letter from Russian President Vladimir Putin thanking Ionov for working “to strengthen friendship between peoples[.]”

    From California, the secessionist group YesCalifornia sent Louis Marinelli to Russia in 2016 to stump for Sacramento’s independence. Like the Texans, Marinelli’s travel was covered, at least in part, by the Kremlin-backed AGMR. After the presidential election that year, Marinelli stayed in Moscow and opened a formal California “embassy” in space provided rent-free by the AGMR.

    Fake Russian Twitter accounts had a field day stumping for California secession following the election as well, especially in the aftermath of Trump’s election. One BBC analysis found the explosion in pro-California secession tweets following the election was driven in no small part by fake accounts and bot networks.

    While both movements fizzled — YesCalifornia crumpled under scrutiny of their Russian links, while there’s little interest in Texas secession with Trump in the White House — neither have fully given up their dreams of help from abroad.

    A day after Barr’s letter, YesCalifornia announced it was preparing a “new referendum” for independence, and on Monday one of the leaders of the Texas secession movement posted a Russian “Heart of Texas” image calling for Texas nationhood.

    And plenty of questions still surround links between Russia and the neo-Confederate League of the South, which recently expanded its Russian-language outreach and has its own links to the AGMR — both of which point to the ongoing, outsized interest America’s white supremacists have in Russia.

    Ionov, meanwhile, has been busy. Not only has be apparently gained more cachet in Moscow — he recently had a meeting with the Venezuelan ambassador — but as journalist Dean Sterling Jones recently uncovered, he’s been helping raise money for Russian agent Maria Butina.

    The gun-slingers

    Among all of the Russian operatives thus far identified as part of Moscow’s influence efforts, only Butina has been jailed (she pleaded guilty to conspiring to act as a foreign agent). She’s still awaiting sentencing.

    When viewed against the other influence efforts, Butina’s work stands out among Russia’s influence campaigns: she schmoozed directly with Republican higher-ups and the National Rifle Association’s leadership. She worked chiefly in the U.S., flying across the country to visit or host events, but maintained a direct line to Alexander Torshin, a Russian official who was later sanctioned directly by the U.S. (Torshin’s likewise been accused of overseeing massive money laundering in Europe.) Butina, working closely with Torshin, sought to ingratiate herself with the NRA — a group with outsized influence over Republican policy — with the goal of lifting sanctions on the Kremlin. Butina was very nearly successful.

    But she apparently didn’t count on the blowback. Even while she was hosting multiple Republican congressmen in Feb. 2017, questions started to percolate about who had paid for the NRA’s trip to Russia in 2015 — which featured notable Trump backers like former sheriff David Clarke — or why NRA leaders seemed so close to Butina, despite Russia’s long-standing tradition of frowning upon individual gun ownership. By 2018, investigators had enough material to charge Butina with acting as an unregistered Russian agent.

    The NRA is still in hot water over its Russia ties: Questions still hang about Russian donations the group received, as well as communications and details surrounding the group’s 2015 trip to Moscow. We may soon have answers on both fronts. But given how many headaches the NRA has endured over the past year for its Russia ties, the group may have outlived its usefulness as a potential front for pro-Moscow interests.

    The fundamentalists

    But if the NRA is no longer of much use to the Kremlin, the leaders of America’s Christian fundamentalists appear as eager to cozy up to sanctioned Russian officials as ever. And they, too, wield outsized influence over conservative policy-makers.

    Ever since Putin’s return to the presidency 2012, which coincided with his efforts to turn Russia into a bastion of so-called “traditional values,” America’s religious right has eyed the Kremlin with increasing affinity.

    The World Congress of Families (WCF), for instance, is the foremost bridge between the American religious right and sanctioned Russian officials. The fundamentalist WCF has in the past enjoyed financial support from Russian oligarchs now sanctioned by the U.S. By 2014, even as Russian troops were carving up Ukraine, the WCF’s higher-ups were praising Russia as the “hope for the world,” helping spread support for the Kremlin among America’s evangelical community.

    Just last year, the WCF held its annual conference in Moldova, and it hosted sanctioned Russian official Yelena Mizulina as a featured speaker. Along the way Alexey Komov, the WCF’s Russian representative, has managed to use the WCF as a springboard for growing close to the U.S.’s leading right-wing homeschool movement, the U.S.’s largest Christian film-making organization, right-wing fundraising organizations, and even members of Trump’s cabinet like Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson. The catch? Komov works directly for sanctioned Russian billionaire Konstantin Malofeev.

    These kinds of increasingly warm ties between Christian fundamentalists and sanctioned Russian officials aren’t limited to the WCF. Earlier this month, as ThinkProgress reported, Franklin Graham, arguably America’s leading evangelical, traveled to Moscow for a meeting with sanctioned Russian official Vyacheslav Volodin — a man widely seen as helping steer Moscow’s hard-right turn over the past half-dozen years.

    Not only was it the highest-profile meeting between a religious-right figure and a Russian official specifically sanctioned by the White House, but Graham called the meeting an “honor.” He also claimed that Vice President Mike Pence signed off on the trip.

    The far-left and third-party candidate supporters

    Among all the presidential candidates in 2016, there was only one who actually traveled to Moscow during the campaign: Jill Stein, who attended a lavish gala for a Russian propaganda outlet on her visit.

    In December 2015, Stein memorably sat at a table alongside Putin and former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn at an event celebrating the ten-year anniversary of RT. Stein called her visit “inspiring,” while her visit earned rounds of condemnation from leading Russian environmental activists.

    The visit highlighted the fact that Russian propaganda outlets like RT and Sputnik have targeted their propaganda at America’s political fringe on both left and right. RT even managed to put on the Green Party’s 2016 presidential debate — a debate that other Green Party candidates, concerned about appearing to be supportive of the Kremlin, boycotted.

    And that targeting is ongoing. Kremlin-funded media outlets have been spinning off new projects that downplay links to Russia, as well as recruiting new writers from America’s leading left magazine.

    As 2020 looms, Stein — who once referred to Julian Assange as a hero in the lead-up to the 2016 election — is still mulling another presidential run. Whether she’ll once again select a vice presidential candidate who believes in “false flag” attacks designed to make Russia look bad, as she did in 2016, remains to be seen.

    • formwiz says:

      Oooh, wow, Think Progress, another of Dr Evil’s unimpeachable sources.

      • Bill Bear says:

        formwiz the low-info regressive cannot dispute the facts — so he attacks the source.

        Liars are like that.

  4. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    According to AG Barr (after all the full report is being quashed, at this time) “… investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

    Other commenters here claim that it’s likely TEACH has received the leaked Mueller Report. Is that true??

    Anyway, the Mueller Grand Jury is still active, as are several other investigations of Trump, Trump Inc, the Trump family and the campaign finances. The President of the United States is threatening the investigators with the full force of the United States justice system.

    So there’s evidence of collusion, it’s just that the honorable Mr. Mueller didn’t choose to indict the President at this time.

    Trump/Pence 2020! “Not Yet Indicted!”

    How inspiring.

    • StillAlive says:


      YOu must be very proud that George Soros has spent billions getting LOCAL AG’s put in place including the one in Chicago who just dropped all charges against Smollet. Yeah turns out Michelle Obama’s ex chief of staff called the AG and reminded her of all the money Mr. Soros funneled to her and if she wants to run for reelection she will let Mr. Smollet go.

      YOu must be proud that your side is buying AG’s like the one in NY who is going after Trump personally. You must be very proud of the fact a foreign agent like George Soros with his billions is trying to dismantle the US by installing local and STATE AG such as the woman beating KEITH ELLISON in Minnesota.

      It must be heartening to know you dont really care about blacks, women, jews or unions. You only care about undermining America so your political view is forced upon the rest of America.

      It must be comforting for you as you rail against the Koch Brothers while ingnoring Warren Buffet who guaranteed Obama a victory in 2012, or George Soros or Bill Gates, or Jeff Bezos or T Boone Pickens all spending inordinate amounts of money now to destroy the anti-globalist TRUMP who threatens their MEGA EMPIRES.

      It must be disheartening to you to realize the very corporations you rail against are now in charge of YOUR side of the Political spectrum. I have said before every 60-75 years the parties do a flip flop in their political positions. Its fact.

      The last was FDR taking Teddy Roosevelts Progressive agenda and making it his own forcing the GOP to then take on the Democratic position to oppose him. It was actually Republicans that at one time were embracing Progressivism not Democrats.

      NOW the Right is embracing anti-globalism, is pushing back on large corporations and wanting to PULL OUT OF FOREIGN WARS. The right is embracing Isolationism to a lessor extent than the 40’s national movement before world war 2. All of these are or were democratic positions. The left is now abandoning the UNIONS and the middle class in favor of SJW and Global Warming. The right is embracing unions and inviting them into their fold.

      the right is embracing Blacks and Hispanics who walk away, while the left embraces massive influx of voters because they are losing everything they stand for. They are in a mess right now. You know it and so do they.

      By the end of Trumps second term the Right in this nation will more resemble the party of JFK which was a libertarian based, freedom for all. Remember his ASK NOT WHAT YOUR COUNTRY CAN DO FOR YOU BUT WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR YOUR COUNTRY speech? Freedom and personal liberty which the left is now trying to squelch.

      You know the old GOP who used to really care what you did in the bedroom, now the left wants silicon valley to spy on everyone and dox anyone who they dont like.

      The tide is turning. Neither party will be recognizable in 6 years. This I can promise you.

    • formwiz says:

      That’s right, Jessica, keep that faith. Fatty Nadless and Schiff For Brains may still find something.

      We’ll get the news just in time for election night !

      Other commenters here claim that it’s likely TEACH has received the leaked Mueller Report. Is that true??

      No, I said how did you know he didn’t get a copy? And you, doubtless know it.


  5. StillAlive says:

    @Bill Bear. Do you actually think ANYONE IS READING YOUR WALL OF TEXT?

    From what I could tell in skimming your information your frantically still on the Russian band wagon. There is no doubt the Russians are active in this country. In fact many of us Believe YOU are a Russian Troll.

    HRC sold uranium one to the Ukrainains for donations to her “foundation”. Vladimir Putin then invaded the Ukraine. In 2017 the only aircraft carrier in the Russian Navy nearly sunk when the enormous floating dry dock SUNK and now they are unable to refit the aging AirCraft Carrier. Several EX USSR nations have the means to fix this Carrier but of course that would require destabilizing certain governments in order to invade once again another country to gain access.

    There was a time when left and right was only political enemies. Now people like the far left and the far right and people like you have made them the real enemies hiding behind false flags.

    You See Bill BEAR no one here listens to you or cares what you have to say because we all think your a paid troll doing this to destabilize either the right or America itself

    So unless you really want to have serious debates on real issues, well never mind you really dont. Your hear for one purpose to post 16 hours a day trolling every imaginable post of the OP using the comment section. Regards to your handlers.

    • Bill Bear says:

      “Do you actually think ANYONE IS READING YOUR WALL OF TEXT?”

      Not StillAlive or his fellow regressives, obviously. Facts are to wingnuts as sunlight and garlic are to vampires.

      “HRC sold uranium one to the Ukrainains for donations to her “foundation”.”

      That’s a lie, of course. See below.

      “You See Bill BEAR no one here listens to you or cares what you have to say because we all think your a paid troll doing this to destabilize either the right or America itself”

      Low-info regressives believe a lot of silly things. Apparently, StillAlive feels compelled to add to the list of silly things his kind believes. Whatevs.

      • formwiz says:

        Whiny The Poo goes with the old Lefty adage, throw enough at the wall and something ought to stick.

        Low-info regressives believe a lot of silly things

        Any fool can copy and paste a page-long article somebody gave him.

    • Bill Bear says:

      Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States’ Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?


      RATING: False

      The Uranium One Deal Was Not Clinton’s to Veto or Approve

      Among the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating proposed foreign acquisitions for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can.

      All nine federal agencies were required to approve the Uranium One transaction before it could go forward. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton “never intervened” in committee matters. Clinton herself has said she wasn’t personally involved.

      There Is No Evidence That Uranium Went to Russia

      That a change of company ownership occurred doesn’t mean that 10 to 20 percent of America’s uranium literally went to Russia. Neither Uranium One nor ARMZ (Rosatom’s mining subsidiary) is licensed to export uranium from the U.S. to other countries.

      Some exports did occur, however.

      A 2015 letter from NRC official Mark Satorius to a member of Congress revealed that an unspecified amount of yellowcake (semi-processed) uranium was shipped from a Uranium One facility in Wyoming to Canada between 2012 and 2014 for conversion (additional processing to prepare it for enrichment). A portion of that uranium was subsequently shipped to enrichment plants in Europe.

      The transfers to Canada were legal despite Uranium One’s not holding an export license because the NRC granted such a license to the company that transported it. The transfers to Europe were legal because they were approved by another agency, the U.S. Dept. of Energy. Satorius stressed that the transfers were subject to NRC oversight and all applicable safety and national security regulations:

      Before issuing this license amendment to RSB Logistics Services — or any other export license or license amendment — the NRC must determine that the proposed export is not inimical to the common defense and security of the United States. Under existing NRC regulations, this means that any uranium proposed to be exported to any country for use in nuclear fuel would be subject to the Atomic Energy Act Section 123 agreement for peaceful nuclear cooperation between the U.S. and that other country and confirmed in case-specific, government-to government assurances for each export license. The receiving country is required to commit to use the material only for peaceful purposes (not for development of any nuclear explosive device), to maintain adequate physical protection, and not to retransfer the material to a third country or alter it in form or content without the prior consent of the U.S. The transfer of the U.S.-supplied uranium from Canada to Europe noted above also was subject to applicable Section 123 agreements.

      Additionally, a small amount of that exported uranium was, in fact, sold to other countries. According to a 2 November 2017 article in The Hill, Uranium One officials acknowledged that approximately 25 percent of the yellowcake exported for conversion was subsequently sold via “book transfer” to customers in Western Europe and Asia (yellowcake being a fungible commodity, that doesn’t necessarily translate to a physical transfer of the product, however).

      To date, there is no evidence that any of this uranium made its way to Russia. An NRC spokesman cited by FactCheck.org in October 2017 reaffirmed Satorius’s assurances that “the U.S. government has not authorized any country to re-transfer U.S. uranium to Russia.” NRC officials also say they’re unaware of any Uranium One exports from the U.S. to foreign countries since 2014.

      The Timing of Most of the Clinton Foundation Donations Does Not Match

      Of the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, the lion’s share — $131.3 million — came from a single donor, Frank Giustra, the company’s Canadian founder. But Giustra sold off his entire stake in the company in 2007, three years before the Russia deal and at least 18 months before Clinton became secretary of state.

      Of the remaining individuals connected with Uranium One who donated to the Clinton Foundation, only one was found to have contributed during the same time frame that the deal was taking place, according to The New York Times — Ian Telfer (also a Canadian), the company’s chairman:

      His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012. Mr. Telfer said that his donations had nothing to do with his business dealings, and that he had never discussed Uranium One with Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. He said he had given the money because he wanted to support Mr. Giustra’s charitable endeavors with Mr. Clinton. “Frank and I have been friends and business partners for almost 20 years,” he said.

      In addition to the Clinton Foundation donations, the New York Times also cited a $500,000 speaking fee paid to former president Bill Clinton by a Russian investment bank in June 2010, before the Uranium One deal was approved:

      The $500,000 fee — among Mr. Clinton’s highest — was paid by Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin that has invited world leaders, including Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, to speak at its investor conferences.

      Renaissance Capital analysts talked up Uranium One’s stock, assigning it a “buy” rating and saying in a July 2010 research report that it was “the best play” in the uranium markets.

      The timing of Telfer’s Clinton Foundation donations and Bill Clinton’s Renaissance Capital speaking fee might be questionable if there was reason to believe that Hillary Clinton was instrumental in the approval of the deal with Russia, but all the evidence points to the contrary — that Clinton did not play a pivotal role, and, in fact, may not have played any role at all. Moreover, neither Clinton nor her department possessed sole power of approval over said transaction.

      • StillAlive says:

        Ukraine oligarch ‘top cash contributor’ to Clinton Foundation prior to Kiev crisis
        Published time: 22 Mar, 2015 14:44

        Where is the outrage.

        As far as the Uranium one scandal.

        Understanding the Uranium One “Scandal” By the Canadian Press. I always never use conservative sources but rather your own bought and paid for leftist journals to prove my point.

        September 6, 2005: Former U.S. President Bill Clinton and Canadian billionaire Frank Giustra appear together in Almaty, Kazakhstan. The stated purpose of their trip was allegedly humanitarian, where they were to help HIV/AIDS patients gain access to certain drug therapies. Interestingly, Kazakhstan, a nation of 15.4 million, did not have an HIV/AIDS problem as pointed out by Peter Schweitzer. In fact, only about 1,500 people in Kazakhstan needed such treatment.

        Kazakstan, however, has rich natural resources estimated at $5 trillion, including uranium.

        Interestingly, the Almaty trip was also organized, in part by Sergi Kurzin, who once worked for the former federal fugitive Marc Rich, who was pardoned by Clinton on his last day as President.

        Giustra, at the time of that trip, was the head of UrAsia Energy Ltd. During this trip, Giustra reportedly met with Kazakhstan officials to securing uranium mining contracts.


        February 2007: The head of Kazatomprom, Mukhtar Dzhkishev, meets with Bill Clinton at his Chappaqua residence to work out a new business deal with Frank Giustra.

        Also that same month, Uranium One buys UrAsia Energy Ltd for $3.1 billion. However, this was not a typical purchase, but a reverse merger. Giustra and his associates maintained a 60% controlling interest in UrAsia Energy Ltd. Giustra and associates announce a recurring commitment to donate $100 million and half of future profits to the Clinton Foundation. The deal would ultimately result in an estimated $145 million in contributions to the Clinton Foundation.

        Even an idiot can connect the dots. SNOPES uses the cover that Clinton could not approve the deal because more than her has to vote. Like Obama can’t tell his underlings how he wants a vote to go for his good Friend HRC?

        Yeah you keep quoting SNOPES as your rebuttal for Uranium one. I guarantee that if an impartial non deep state FBI investigated this HRC and Bill Clinton would be in jail the rest of their lives but no one wants that of an Ex puppet of the Russian government.

        • Bill Bear says:

          “Like Obama can’t tell his underlings how he wants a vote to go for his good Friend HRC?”

          Like StillAlive can’t provide a single crumb of evidence for this whackadoo claim?

          Of course he can’t.

          • formwiz says:

            In all fairness, Zippy and the Beast weren’t running the show in ’07.

            Howsomever, since the Demos had control of both Houses, arranging something for her would hardly have been out of the question.

      • formwiz says:

        Snopes is hardly the most reliable of sources, although, we do have someone who says differently.

        According to the Gray Lady, <a href=cash flowed to Clinton Foundation.

        Embarrassing, non?

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      SA typed: because we all think your (sic) a paid troll

      We all think you’re afraid to debate issues. We all think you’re an unpaid protector of all things Trump, and you dismiss all arguments with “paid Russian troll!!”.

      Please make an argument.

      • StillAlive says:

        You want me to prove something? Why? Have I asked you to prove you are a paid troll?

        Why are you answering for Bill Bear? We all know your a troll. The question is are you paid and by whom. Why else would you be here for 16 hours a day posting 100’s of messages that literally no one reads.

        I post 5 or 6 a day. You post a 100. I got to work leaving you the last word. You sit behind your computer and keep pounding out nonsense. Whose the troll?

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          SA typed: You post a 100.

          Days ago, when you made a similar claim about me, I analyzed the thread and found The Wiz commented the most, and you had more column inches than anyone else.

          It’s my observation that you’re (not your) not interested in debate or argument but only wish to deter others from doing so.

          SA typed: Whose (sic) the troll? (Who’s = who is)

          I must admit that I do occasionally fall into the Con Man trap of namecalling and ridicule, which is really all Con Men want to do – fight, ridicule, bluster and bloviate – always to distract from debate, evidence and facts. But I mostly try to make arguments refuting Mr. TEACH’s (and std Con Man) talking points.

          • formwiz says:

            Occasionally? Who here calls everybody white nationalist?

            I analyzed the thread and found The Wiz commented the most, and you had more column inches than anyone else.

            And we should care why?

            It’s my observation that you’re (not your) not interested in debate or argument but only wish to deter others from doing so.

            The only difference between the bunny suit and the bear suit is the length of the screed pasted.

      • formwiz says:

        No, we don’t think it, we know it.

        And Trump needs no protecting, he does awfully well by himself – notice the miserable week the Lefties are having?

        Anytime you want to debate, instead of state some Lefty position and call anybody who disagrees names you think are oh, so devastating, let us all know.

        We’ve proven global bull’s nonsense, we’ve shot holes in your argument about Euro healthcare, so you give us Alinskyite rimshots. When you’re ready to grow up, we’ll be here.

  6. Bill Bear says:

    “You want me to prove something?”

    That’s not what Elwood said.

    He said: “Please make an argument.”

    No one expects low-info regressives to have any factual evidence for their claims. As pointed out earlier, StillAlive and his kind are allergic to facts.

    But they are also utterly incapable of even constructing a cogent, rational argument, with or without facts.


    “…posting 100’s of messages that literally no one reads.”

    See? No logic there — since StillAlive clearly did read Elwood’s message.


  7. Kye says:

    We can’t really blame either Elwood or Traitor Bill as they are just mindless robots of 60 years of very successful communist propaganda in our schools, media and entertainment industries. It’s really not their fault they can’t consider any other view but the one which has been pounded into their heads for decades. And it’s not their fault they project every fault and flaw of their own onto any poor soul who would haplessly tell them in any way they are wrong. Projection is their main tool next to name calling.

    I also love the way Traitor Bill accuses anyone who disagrees of being “afraid” of whatever he’s peddling. That’s why so many of their epithets end with “phobe”. Because they are afraid they project that others are too not realizing just BEING a conservative means you’re not afraid of anything or anyone. That would be the definition of the “people will die!” leftists and “the world will end in (fill in the blank) years” progressives. Conservatives don’t need “a village” or “safe spaces”. We don’t do therapy and wear pink pussy hats nor do we need to beat old men, burn cars or smash windows to “prove” we’re tough. We just are.

    The condition and elected members of todays’ Democrat-Communist Party have sunken so low that people like Occasional-Cotex and Cameltoe Harris are making the previous idiots, Mazzi Waters and Sheila Jackson/Lee look like statesmen. They lost a presidential election and failed at a coup attempt. What’s next? They have spent years crying at the sky and calling everybody who disagress with them misogynists, Islamophobes, fagophibes, transophobes, blackophibes, hispanophobes, and just raaaacists in general with the occasional white supremacist thrown in for emphases.

    Now they want sixteen year old’s, non Americans, illegals and felons to vote along with their usual crop of out of staters, dead people and multiple ballot fixers. Plus eliminate the electoral college, redo the Senate, have a national popular vote, stack the Supreme Court, make DC a state, make Puerto Rico a state and have a national motor-voter law. I guess they really, really do want to fundamentally transform America. Into a banana republic run by teenage communists. Khmer Rouge come to mind? The Killing Fields?

    Add in the black faggot hoaxer/criminal Jussie, Babs Streisand defending Michael Jackson’s pedophilia, and Avenatti getting locked up for fraud/theft/bribery and who knows what else, and the dozens of “news” and “media” people who promoted three years of lies about Trump as well as the ongoing mega-hoax of man made global warming and that’s the DemCom party! And it’s only March!

    Watching the two crude, corrupt, communist California congressmen, Schiff and Swalwell, refuse to concede the collusion issue proves my point more convincingly than any argument I can make. The fact that Californians elected both of these guys, is an indictment of the judgment of Californians, but they are so far gone by now, that they may be beyond hope.

    I’m for ejecting California from the Republic. In lieu of that executing all elected government officials could suffice at least till we see what the ass holes re elect. Are there any Patriots left in that party or are they all Traitor Bill and Elwoods now?

    • Bill Bear says:

      “We can’t really blame either Elwood or Traitor Bill as they are just mindless robots”

      And Kye demonstrates — yet again — that he lacks the cognitive skills to construct a fact-based argument. He can only attack people — not discuss ideas.

      • formwiz says:

        Well, if you ever have an idea you can call your own, we’ll discuss it.

        • Bill Bear says:

          And formwiz demonstrates — yet again — that he lacks the cognitive skills to construct a fact-based argument. He can only attack people — not discuss ideas.

          • formwiz says:

            As I have beaten you until you are blue in the face, it cite my arguments.

            Your “facts” always seem to evaporate on any kind of examination.

          • david7134 says:

            Bill or jeff,
            Formwiz runs circles around both of you in his arguments. Just having a liberal point of view does not mean you are intelligent, in fact neither of you understand your positions and can not articulate the pros and cons of policy.

            Both of you are liars,
            Because that is what liars do.

  8. Dana says:

    No worries: if it was on Cuomo Prime Time, then nobody saw it! https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_yahoo.gif

    CNN promoted Chris Cuomo from the morning show, New Day, to his 9:00 PM prime time slot, and he has been very consistent in attracting a third of the viewers that Fox News’ Sean Hannity does, and less than half of the audience that Rachel Maddow draws on MSNBC during the same time slot.

    Mr Cuomo, the brother of Governor Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) has been on his All Trump Derangement Syndrome, All The Time kick ever since Election night, and I guess that, with CNN’s salaries, it’s making him rich, but that network policy — it ain’t just Mr Cuomo — has dragged CNN to the bottom of the cable ratings. It’s below HGTV, it’s below romance movie reruns on the Hallmark Channel, its even below the Hitler History Channel and its shows about how space aliens visited earth in the distant past.

    But, it seems as though Mr Cuomo and Schiff-for-brains aren’t the only ones who insist that there simply must be collusion, despite the fact that a two-year, multi-million dollar investigation, with experienced legal minds — most of whom hate President Trump — and the FBI and subpoena power behind them, couldn’t find it. Messrs Bear and Dowd are just as eaten up with TDS as Mr Cuomo, and they’ll be screaming it to high heavens, demanding impeachment right up until noon on January 20, 2025, when President Trump leaves office.

  9. Bill Bear says:

    Direct question to Dana:

    What was Donald Trump Jr’s exact, verbatim reply to the email below?

    === begin quote ===

    On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Rob Goldstone wrote:

    Good morning

    Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.

    The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.

    This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump – helped along by Aras and Emin.

    What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?

    I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.


    Rob Goldstone

    === end quote ===


    • david7134 says:

      It is over, what do you think your little message means? Are you so stupid that you can not understand the last 2 years? I think you are. Now, why don’t you spend time on the next investigation which is going to be Hillary and Obama. I am sure you want to have them in jail.

  10. formwiz says:

    Since the article doesn’t have it, why would Dana?


  11. Bill Bear says:

    formwiz wrote:

    “As I have beaten you until you are blue in the face, it cite my arguments.”

    formwiz misses the point (of course). I cannot cite any arguments he has made, because he does not make arguments. He blusters, he lies, he bloviates, and he evades — but he does not make actual arguments.

    “Your “facts” always seem to evaporate on any kind of examination.”

    False. formwiz denies the facts and hurls personal attacks rather than discuss the facts. That doesn’t mean that the facts do not exist — just that formwiz refuses to discuss them.

  12. Bill Bear says:

    david7134 wrote:

    “Formwiz runs circles around both of you in his arguments.”

    david7134 is lying, of course. formwiz does not make arguments. He spews personal attacks, he lies, he evades, and he changes the subject when inconvenient facts are presented — but he does not make arguments.

    • david7134 says:

      Bill, or jeff,
      That is correct!!! I don’t argue with you as it is beneath me. I am superior to you and you told you that many times. Now you understand. So why would I lower myself to exchange comments with you when you can’t understand even that basic details?? But as I have noted, you are lying, that is all you have. And that is what liars do.

  13. Bill Bear says:

    “I don’t argue with you as it is beneath me.”

    False. david7134 is incapable of constructing a rational, adult, fact-based argument.

    david7134 is lying — again.

    That’s what liars do.

  14. Bill Bear says:

    Schiff recites long list of Trump’s Russia contacts after Republicans call for his resignation


    A group of House Republicans on Thursday called on House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) to resign from his post because he has repeatedly expressed concerns that President Donald Trump may have colluded with America’s political adversaries. In response, Schiff shot back with a detailed list of all of the times that Trump associates have had contact with Russians, admonishing his colleagues for normalizing that conduct, even if it stops short of a criminal conspiracy.

    “I have always said that the question of whether this amounts to conspiracy is another matter,” Schiff said during the heated exchange. “But I do not think that conduct, criminal or not, is okay — and the day we do think that’s okay is the day we will look back and say, ‘that is the day America lost its way.’”

    Reading a letter signed by nine Republican committee members calling for Schiff to step down as chairman, Rep. Mike Conaway (R-TX) had claimed moments prior that Schiff’s “willingness to promote a demonstrably false narrative is alarming.”

    “The findings of the special counsel conclusively refute your past and present assertions and expose you of having abused your position to knowingly promote false information,” Conaway said, referring to a four-page summary of special counsel Robert Mueller’s still-secret report, released Sunday.

    “Having damaged the integrity of the committee and having undermined the faith of the United States government and this institution, your actions both past and present are incompatible with your duty as chairman of this committee,” Conaway continued.

    The letter came on the heels of Trump calling for Schiff to resign not just his post on the House Intelligence Committee, but also his seat in Congress.

    Attorney General William Barr’s summary of the special counsel’s report relayed that Mueller concluded there is not enough evidence to conclude Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia. But the nine Republicans who signed onto the letter presumably don’t know exactly what evidence Mueller outlined in his report, which is reportedly over 300 pages long and has not yet been publicly released.

    As Schiff pointed out during the exchange on Thursday, there are still many questions about Trump’s ties to Russia that remain unanswered. Schiff cited a number of examples of possible connections between Trump associates and Moscow that he believes his Republican colleagues have not taken seriously.

    We know Russia interfered in the 2016 election. Will anything be done to stop it in 2020?
    Attorney General William Barr confirmed Russia’s efforts in his Mueller investigation summary this week. So far, little is being done to prevent a repeat.

    For instance, the president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., confessed in 2017 to meeting with Kremlin-tied Russians knowing they wanted to offer dirt on his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton at Trump Tower. That meeting was attended by the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner — who is now a White House adviser — and his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who has since been convicted of a number of crimes in two different federal courts after he lied to Mueller’s office about his relationship with long-time business associate Konstantin Kilimnik, who the FBI says had close ties to Russian intelligence. Manafort was also found to have shared polling data with Kilimnik.

    Trump himself confirmed the purpose of that meeting was to obtain damaging information on Clinton from the Russians in a last year.

    During a campaign stop in 2016, Trump also called on Russia to hack the Clinton campaign’s emails. Russian intelligence officers did in fact hack Clinton’s campaign chair John Podesta’s emails shortly after that statement and released them through the website WikiLeaks. People within the Trump campaign’s inner circle reportedly knew about the WikiLeaks release in advance and discussed the Clinton dirt with Russian Twitter account known as Guccifer 2.0. (John Podesta is a founder of the Center for American Progress. ThinkProgress is an editorially independent news site housed at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.)

    Kushner also reportedly discussed with Russia’s former U.S. ambassador Sergey Kislyak the possibility of creating secret communication back channels between Moscow and Trump’s transition team so they could discuss policy issues.

    Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn misled the FBI about conversations he had with Russia’s ambassador surrounding lifting sanctions on Russia.

    Trump also allegedly lied about the timeline surrounding a billion-dollar project his organization planned to complete to build a massive skyscraper in Moscow that was still ongoing through his campaign. Trump’s personal attorney and fixer Michael Cohen, who was found guilty of lying to the House Intelligence Committee last year and has since cooperated with Mueller, has accused Trump of a number crimes related to his business empire.

    “You might say that’s all okay. You might say that’s just what you need to do to win. But I don’t think it’s okay. I think it’s immoral, I think it’s unethical, I think it’s unpatriotic, and yes, I think it’s corrupt and evidence of collusion,” Schiff concluded.

    Since Barr’s summary memo was made public Friday, Republicans in Congress have ignored still-unanswered questions about what details the full Mueller report includes, whether evidence suggests the president may have committed any other crimes beyond the purview of Mueller’s probe, and how to respond to the Russian attacks on America’s election system.

    Instead, White House officials and Republican members of Congress have responded to the summary memo by making political attacks on Democrats, including by telling media stations to question their credibility before booking them.

    • david7134 says:

      And your point. Is it wrong to do business withRussians? If so why did Hillary give our uranium to them.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “Is it wrong to do business withRussians?”

        Schiff is not referring to “doing business”. He is referring to Trump and his campaign seeking assistance from the Russians to sway the results of an election — which is a federal crime.

        “If so why did Hillary give our uranium to them.”

        Never happened. david7134 is lying.

        That’s what liars do.

  15. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Who said this today?

    “In the 700-page summary of the two million pages of raw evidence, there is undoubtedly some evidence of a conspiracy and some evidence of obstruction of justice, just not enough evidence—I’m thinking the way I believe Congressman Schiff is thinking—according to Attorney General Barr, not enough evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard.”

    … if “there were no evidence of conspiracy and no evidence of obstruction, the attorney general would have told us so,” adding that Barr didn’t, so “there is something there”…

    Judge Napolitano on FOX.

Pirate's Cove