Some interesting quotes:
George joined Professor Mifsud for breakfast in London on April 26, 2016, with the intention of finalizing plans for the foreign policy meeting. It was during this breakfast meeting, however, that Professor Mifsud told George that individuals in Moscow possessed “dirt” on candidate Hillary Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails.”
He told the agents he was unaware of anyone in the campaign knowing of the stolen Hillary Clinton emails prior to the emails being publicly released.
Indeed, while George misled investigators regarding when Professor Mifsud told him the Russians had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton, it was still apparent, despite George’s lie, that Professor Mifsud communicated this information to George prior to the stolen emails being made public.
One of the key misleading narratives pushed by the mainstream media and the coup plotters is to conflate Hillary's missing and bleach-bitted 30,000 emails with the emails of John Podesta and the DNC which were released by Wikileaks.
The missing Hillary emails is what Trump was joking about during the debate with Hillary, that if Russia has them, they should release them. But I am not aware that Hillary's emails have ever been admitted by the FBI or CIA to actually be stolen by anyone or that they have ever been released.
Since the "thousands" of "stolen" Hillary emails have never been publicly released, why is Papadopoulos' own lawyer falsely repeating this phony narrative?
From recent reporting, the Chinese have Hillary's emails. Hillary's emails are on Weiner's laptop and any copy of the disk made by the FBI or the NYPD. Huma apparently had copies in her gmail account.
Some of Hillary's emails have been released by the State Department in response to FOIA and congressional requests, after heavy redaction.
But there have not been thousands of stolen Hillary emails publicly released, notwithstanding the gaslighting by the Special Counsel, the FBI and even Papadopoulos' lawyer.
for later
Weasel Mueller and his Klown Kar Posse are totally unethical and corrupt.
This prosecution is a disgrace to the country.
Since he had no idea of what they were investigating, how could he lie about "material facts?" Where's the mens rea? Or is the law that it is illegal to mislead them about anything, material or not?
Obviously the FOIA emails from the State Dept are damning enough. There are numerous security violations in the forwarding of unclassified but sensitive particularly some stamped NOFORN. The idea that those were forwarded to China (still not confirmed) is extremely concerning considering the roll-up of CIA assets there. Perhaps that's all part of the Mueller distraction.
While some in the room rebuffed George’s offer, Mr. Trump nodded with approval and deferred to Mr. Sessions who appeared to like the idea and stated that the campaign should look into it.
Could this be a problem for the Attorney General? I seem to remember Mr. Sessions stating in his testimony to Congress that he immediately and forcefully rejected Mr. Papadopoulos’ offer. Or maybe this was another Papa lie.
Georgie Boy. They always know what they are after. This interview was a full six months after you were the fake trigger. The CIA file on Misfud needs to be opened. The idea he’s a mystery man is laughable. Jeff Sessions has been chairman of the foreign relations committee. He can talk with and arrange any meetings on an official level without a coffee boy.
>He told the agents he was unaware of anyone in the campaign knowing of the stolen Hillary Clinton emails prior to the emails being publicly released.<
I’m confused. What Emails? The Clinton Emails off the Clinton server, probably hacked by the Chinese and others, were never released. The Emails released were from the DNC server.
I’m confused. I’m just sayin’
GP missed some opportunities by:
1) Repeating the government’s false narrative whereby they conflate “dirt on Hillary” into “Hillary’s emails”.
2) Failing to point out that the FBI knew the dates he supposedly lied about before they asked him. (Asserting that forces the government to refute the claim, which I do not think they can do). So exactly how were they “obstructed” if they already had the timeline? Had the FBI never interviewed him, they would have had the same information they did afterwards.
3) Failing to ask the court to ascertain whether Mifsud had been an agent, informant, or operative of the US or UK, or any contractor thereof, ever, and particularly in this matter.