Posted on 04/22/2018 4:57:30 PM PDT by Enchante
But AP quotes her dismissing the dossier as “absolute nonsense” — that claim does not lend support to the conspiracy. She is a wild card.
We don’t know (and Mueller doesn’t know) what she may know.
I’m not expecting much, but when a key actor/witness in the saga dismisses the dossier as “absolute nonsense” AND she is Russian and (possibly) very well connected in Moscow, why the heck would we not want to know all that she knows that is relevant?
You are still only focused on why she wants to stay away from the USA, and not upon whether she has any information that could prove useful. I would like to know why SHE dismisses the dossier as “absolute nonsense” — that is quite interesting, coming from one of the ppl involved in this story. Does she know anything about the process, the origins, about FusionGPS, etc. that would inform her contempt for the dossier?
could this be why they wont interview her?
I don’t place any kind of “faith” in her... I simply want to know what she knows, or what she may “pretend” to know, etc. Even with an agent, sometimes much can be learned from what stories they tell, what they want you to believe etc.
I have no regard for her, as you seem to assume. I simply want to KNOW what really happened, and especially why she in particular dismisses the dossier. You seem to assume you know all. I want to know more.
If she were testifying FOR the value of the dossier, of course, that would be worthless as she could simply be spouting on orders. But the fact that she is taking such a strong stance against the dossier is interesting.
Well, YES, thx, that is one of the aspects I had in mind — her role is of great interest, and HOW she got approved for entry into the USA (when she had been refused entry) may lead to some important strands in this whole affair. WHO in the Dept of State and/or Justice arranged her entry, why, and what communications/influences occurred for that to happen?
more
www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/14/mystery-solved-timeline-shows-how-russian-lawyer-got-into-us-for-trump-jr-meeting.html
preet???
Did Fitzgerald ever interview Armitage in the Valerie Plame case?
interesting
there was another article where they tried to question preet about it i believe he had no comment will look for that one
Dear Susie Sunshine. Much of the federal government cannot be easily fired.
Of the political appointees he did not have the ability to replace all those deserving of dismissal. You cannot find enough people capable of doing the jobs by snapping your fingers. As an example read the writing here.
Bad spelling, bad grammar, bad reasoning.
“Oddly, she thinks Glenn Simpson was “framed” in the FusionGPS role “
If KGB Natalia says Simpson is innocent - that says to me that Simpson is KGB as well !
I think Simpson is “controlled opposition” to Putin. Simpson claims to be “anti-
Putin” but his business representation is for pro-Kremlin interests.
Same as Christopher Steele. He is supposed to be “anti-Putin” as well. Yet he has the biggest pro-Russia lobbyist in DC, Adam Waldman, as a go-between messenger to Senator Mark Warner. And Steel supposedly hs worked for pro-Kremlin oligarch Deripaska.
If these two turn up in Moscow one day, like Burgess and Maclean, I will not be surprised.
“Mueller hasn’t asked to see the DNC server that was allegedly “hacked”. You’d think that would be central to the investigation...They aren’t investigating GPS”
Mueller should goon-raid the DNC HQ , Fusion HQ and their lawyers offices in the dead of night and seize all electronic data files. It is very possible that somewhere in those files there could be a Russian lurking about, or something, however indirectly, connected indirectly to a Russian. He can use one of those crooked judges he has on his payroll to issue the warrants.
She was at the center of certain highly relevant events. A thorough, competent investigator would want to interview her. Of course they would view anything she said with great suspicion and a critical eye, but that does not mean it’s not worth getting her account.
She was part of a set up - that’s what that meeting was.
No kidding. That doesn’t mean she shouldn’t be interviewed by investigators, as thoroughly as possible. Even if every sentence she utters is a lie, one can learn from what stories she tries to tell. Misdirection And deception can tell stories beyond what the perp intends. And she might let slip some real info, whether by accident or on purpose. What part of “thorough investigation” do some ppl find hard to grasp?
I hadn't noticed that. Maybe they haven't contacted her because they already know she'll throw cold water on the conspiracy.
It's a sad state of affairs but I don't trust Mueller and I don't trust the AP.
Unfortunately, in my my initially naive experience, when someone you know well personally tells you "trust me", that is also a cause for concern.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.