Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
The Library => The SGA => Topic started by: The Six on May 09, 2017, 09:31:25 PM
-
Trump Fires FBI Director James Comey
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-fires-fbi-director-james-comey-n757101 (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-fires-fbi-director-james-comey-n757101)
President Donald Trump fired FBI Director James Comey on Tuesday after senior Justice Department officials concluded that he'd mishandled the investigation of Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.
"You are hereby terminated and removed from office, effective immediately," Trump told Comey in a personally signed letter obtained by NBC News.
-
I'd love him to name Flynn the new director, just to watch the meltdown.
Honestly, I thought Comey should have been relieved of duties long ago.
-
What's funny is how the left is going nuts over this. After the election, they wanted him gone. Just last week Hillary said he is the reason she lost the election.
-
What's funny is how the left is going nuts over this. After the election, they wanted him gone. Just last week Hillary said he is the reason she lost the election.
Chuck Schumer is an absolute disgrace. I want to slap the glasses off his punpkin head.
-
What's funny is how the left is going nuts over this. After the election, they wanted him gone. Just last week Hillary said he is the reason she lost the election.
It's not funny though. Everything is politics on overdrive, and it's horrible for the country.
-
3 people leading the investigation into Trump and his association with Russia...those same 3 people have been fired.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AqLQ-5WMKlw/WA9vX-fnnmI/AAAAAAAAPEY/bSfVGxtBWKEMP96R3dWw5n4YSgQ_XriKgCLcB/s1600/Nothing%2Bto%2BSee%2BHere.jpg)
Watergate II (this one is much more serious and involves more people)
-
3 people leading the investigation into Trump and his association with Russia...those same 3 people have been fired.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AqLQ-5WMKlw/WA9vX-fnnmI/AAAAAAAAPEY/bSfVGxtBWKEMP96R3dWw5n4YSgQ_XriKgCLcB/s1600/Nothing%2Bto%2BSee%2BHere.jpg)
Watergate II (this one is much more serious and involves more people)
Bob Woodward and "deepthroat" had more to do with Nixon than any FBI investigator.
You have a mental illness in that you think you know more than you do. Aim your guns to the correct critiques of Trump. You are chasing a red herring here. Don't believe me? Ask James "no collusion" Clapper.
-
-500 for everyone one of you for not getting the thread title reference
:facepalm:
-
3 people leading the investigation into Trump and his association with Russia...those same 3 people have been fired.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AqLQ-5WMKlw/WA9vX-fnnmI/AAAAAAAAPEY/bSfVGxtBWKEMP96R3dWw5n4YSgQ_XriKgCLcB/s1600/Nothing%2Bto%2BSee%2BHere.jpg)
Watergate II (this one is much more serious and involves more people)
Just got back from Maine. Silly, but pretty good treat.
(https://media.whatscookingamerica.net/2015/05/02225936/WhoopiePie.jpg)
Whoopie Pie
Pie Ingredients
3 cups sugar
1 cup butter
4 eggs
1/2 cup vegetable oil
1 tablespoon vanilla extract
6 cups all-purpose flour
2 cups unsweetened cocoa powder
1 teaspoon baking powder
1 1/2 tablespoons baking soda
1 teaspoon salt
3 cups milk
Directions (for pies)
Preheat oven to 350 degrees F, or preheat a convection oven to 315 degrees F.
In a large bowl of an electric mixer, beat the sugar, butter, and eggs together until well combined. Add the oil and vanilla and beat again.
In a separate bowl, combine all of the dry ingredients. Add half of the dry mixture to the egg mixture and beat or stir to blend. Add 1 1/2 cups milk and beat again. Add the remaining dry mixture and beat until incorporated. Add the remaining 1 1/2 cups milk and beat until blended.
With a large spoon, scoop out 32 circles of batter onto a baking sheet. Bake for 10 to 12 minutes. Let cool.
Spread filling onto 16 circles and place remaining circles on top, to make 16 Whoopie pies.
Filling Ingredients
1 1/2 cups shortening
3 cups confectioners' sugar
1 1/3 cups marshmallow topping
Dash salt
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
1/3 to 1/2 cup milk
Directions (for filling)
In the bowl of an electric mixer, combine all ingredients except the milk and beat well. Add just enough milk to achieve a creamy consistency.
-
3 people leading the investigation into Trump and his association with Russia...those same 3 people have been fired.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AqLQ-5WMKlw/WA9vX-fnnmI/AAAAAAAAPEY/bSfVGxtBWKEMP96R3dWw5n4YSgQ_XriKgCLcB/s1600/Nothing%2Bto%2BSee%2BHere.jpg)
Watergate II (this one is much more serious and involves more people)
Here's a secret, and you may not know this: The investigation into collusion with Russia isn't going to find anything. Because there was no collusion. Democrats are going to drag this along as long as they possibly can. Multiple people (actual people with names, not "unnamed sources") have already said they have not seen any evidence of collusion. Did Russia meddle in the election? Of course. They've been doing that shit for decades. Their plan has far surpassed their wildest dreams.
Comey isn't the FBI. Trump didn't fire the entire agency. He would have been blasted regardless of when he fired Comey. If he did it the second he stepped foot in office, it's because he "didn't want the investigation to move forward". He does it now, and it's the same reasoning. He would have been fired at the conclusion of the investigation, except it was recommended by someone (who by the way spent the past 8 years as part of the Obama administration and was confirmed to his position 94-6) that this guy was a cancer and needed to get gone. Firing Comey doesn't change the investigation at all.
By the way, was hoping to hear back from you in another thread.....
http://www.tigersx.com/forum/index.php?topic=28452.0
-
Watergate II (this one is much more serious and involves more people)
Woodward disagrees.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/05/12/bob-woodward-explains-why-taped-evidence-was-key-in-watergate/?utm_term=.d412c9bf4ce5
Once again, you personify the problem. I think this administration is a dumpster fire in the PR/optics department but it's hard to speak rationally about that when people like you are overextending and hyperventilating that the Republic as we know it is in shambles. Breathe, dude.
-
Breathe, dude.
When he does it's clearly through the mouth.
-
When he does it's clearly through the mouth.
Blake Chortles.
-
Prowler's brain:
(https://pics.onsizzle.com/russia-russia-russia-5208501.png)
-
-500 for everyone one of you for not getting the thread title reference
:facepalm:
We got it. It just wasn't funny or reply-worthy.
-
We got it. It just wasn't funny or reply-worthy.
He speaks for all of us.
-
He speaks for all of us.
I didn't get it.
-
I didn't get it.
He speaks for all most of us.
-
We got it. It just wasn't funny or reply-worthy.
Probably too busy jerking to your wall-sized posters of Bernie.
-
Probably too busy jerking to your wall-sized posters of Bernie.
Speaking of posters...wrong poster.
-
Speaking of posters...wrong poster.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6si8Xp8P-M (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6si8Xp8P-M)
-
Woodward disagrees.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/05/12/bob-woodward-explains-why-taped-evidence-was-key-in-watergate/?utm_term=.d412c9bf4ce5
Once again, you personify the problem. I think this administration is a dumpster fire in the PR/optics department but it's hard to speak rationally about that when people like you are overextending and hyperventilating that the Republic as we know it is in shambles. Breathe, dude.
Spot on. I'm hoping a first step is replacing Spicer. But, Trump doesn't do his PR folks any favors by being as outspoken as he is either. It's simultaneously what I like and dislike about Trump. But then again, I'm sure he feels that he constantly has to be on the offensive due to the backlash he seems to get for any and everything that he does.
-
Woodward disagrees.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/05/12/bob-woodward-explains-why-taped-evidence-was-key-in-watergate/?utm_term=.d412c9bf4ce5
Once again, you personify the problem. I think this administration is a dumpster fire in the PR/optics department but it's hard to speak rationally about that when people like you are overextending and hyperventilating that the Republic as we know it is in shambles. Breathe, dude.
Sadly, people like you and others here can't seem to understand how bad this situation is and how it's not a good thing to give any secret information to the enemy. There are A LOT of people in Trump's admin. that'll be caught up in the investigation, including Trump. Some are saying that he won't finish this year out, that he'll either step down and beg or be drug out kicking and screaming.
-
Sadly, people like you and others here can't seem to understand how bad this situation is and how it's not a good thing to give any secret information to the enemy. There are A LOT of people in Trump's admin. that'll be caught up in the investigation, including Trump. Some are saying that he won't finish this year out, that he'll either step down and beg or be drug out kicking and screaming.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOVioZGnE7E
-
Sadly, people like you and others here can't seem to understand how bad this situation is and how it's not a good thing to give any secret information to the enemy. There are A LOT of people in Trump's admin. that'll be caught up in the investigation, including Trump. Some are saying that he won't finish this year out, that he'll either step down and beg or be drug out kicking and screaming.
Some people said the aliens landed in Area 51 and turned Michael Jackson into a monkey.
Fuck some people.
-
Some people said the aliens landed in Area 51 and turned Michael Jackson into a monkey.
Fuck some people.
Prowler is those people. Believes what he wants. As it suits him. If you don't think like he does then you're just wrong. Rinse repeat every day.
Chad summed it up well above. I thought it was a good middle of the road observation and more than likely true. But it's of no use to the prowler types. Doesn't fit the narrative he sees through his special glasses.
-
Sadly, people like you and others here can't seem to understand how bad this situation is and how it's not a good thing to give any secret information to the enemy. There are A LOT of people in Trump's admin. that'll be caught up in the investigation, including Trump. Some are saying that he won't finish this year out, that he'll either step down and beg or be drug out kicking and screaming.
The guy with more watergate knowledge than anyone on earth. Presenting facts. And you are arguing with it. You know more and better than Bob Woodward. Good. Grief.
-
I don't think Comey is going anywhere...he apparently took notes and I'm guessing some recordings of their conversations. Trump supporters this is what you get when you elect a clown, a shit circus.
-
I don't think Comey is going anywhere...he apparently took notes and I'm guessing some recordings of their conversations. Trump supporters this is what you get when you elect a clown, a shit circus.
You're an idiot.
-
I don't think Comey is going anywhere...he apparently took notes and I'm guessing some recordings of their conversations. Trump supporters this is what you get when you elect a clown, a shit circus.
I am not arguing that Trump is a clown. He may very well be.
But there is not a person that I know that could be any more effective than Trump has been with the bullshit that he has had to deal with. You and your kind are fucking loony. The shit circus is what the media and everyone from Hillary, to John McCain are creating around this administration...
-
I am not arguing that Trump is a clown. He may very well be.
But there is not a person that I know that could be any more effective than Trump has been with the bullshit that he has had to deal with. You and your kind are fucking loony. The shit circus is what the media and everyone from Hillary, to John McCain are creating around this administration...
Yeah, Barack Obama never had to deal with bullshit. "Effective" is not the word I'd use...especially not after seeing him whine and complain in his daily Twitter rants or during a commencement address to the Coast Guard.
The difference here, the bullshit that Trump is having to deal with is of his own accord. Trump is the one that hired Mike Flynn, after being warned by Obama not to, Trump is the one that tired to obstruct justice when he asked Comey to let Flynn go. Trump is the one that have highly classified information to Russia...and the FBI is still investigating Trump and his team in their possible collusion with Russia to hack our election.
-
The difference here, the bullshit that Trump is having to deal with is of his own accord.
There is a whole "resistance" in which fights anything and everything that Trump, or ANY right leaning conservative person tries to do, good or bad.
But I don't know why I even responded to you...you will never try to look at anything objectively...so...carry on with whatever bullshit you want to spew...
-
Yeah, Barack Obama never had to deal with bullshit. Sit down. "Effective" is not the word I'd use...especially not after seeing him whine and complain in his daily Twitter rants or during a commencement address to the Coast Guard.
The difference here, the bullshit that Trump is having to deal with is of his own accord. Trump is the one that hired Mike Flynn, after being warned by Obama not to, Trump is the one that tired to obstruct justice when he asked Comey to let Flynn go. Trump is the one that have highly classified information to Russia...and the FBI is still investigating Trump and his team in their possible collusion with Russia to hack our election.
Gonna throw you a bone here prowler. Hear me out.
But the guy I see today. Isn't the guy I saw on election night. Or at the inauguration. Or addressing congress. You have a team of people up there now that are yes men. They don't know how to corral the guy like some did during the campaign. Or at least keep damaging things to a minimum and learn how to pivot back to issues.
I'd much rather be discussing taxes. And jobs. And energy independence. And the budget. The Russia crap has the country stopped in its tracks. And I don't think anyone in D.C. gives two shits about trying to truly get to the bottom of anything. It's all a show. I think everyone would agree that real policy issues need to take a front row seat instead of on the back burner where they are now.
This all just sucks.
-
There is a whole "resistance" in which fights anything and everything that Trump tries to do, good or bad.
But I don't know why I even responded to you...carry on...
And that's different than what we've seen the last few Presidents go through? Remember, Trump was one of the main "birther movement" guys against Obama.
-
And that's different than what we've seen the last few Presidents go through? Remember, Trump was one of the main "birther movement" guys against Obama.
And Little Marco.
And Lyin Ted.
He made those up too. All by himself.
-
Gonna throw you a bone here prowler. Hear me out.
But the guy I see today. Isn't the guy I saw on election night. Or at the inauguration. Or addressing congress. You have a team of people up there now that are yes men. They don't know how to corral the guy like some did during the campaign. Or at least keep damaging things to a minimum and learn how to pivot back to issues.
I'd much rather be discussing taxes. And jobs. And energy independence. And the budget. The Russia crap has the country stopped in its tracks. And I don't think anyone in D.C. gives two shits about trying to truly get to the bottom of anything. It's all a show. I think everyone would agree that real policy issues need to take a front row seat instead of on the back burner where they are now.
This all just sucks.
I can't disagree with any of that. I hope that one day we can put this whole Russia shit behind us. But it seems like nearly everyday something else pops up, like Trump closed meeting with Russia and leaking highly classified Intel to them, or Comey coming out and saying that Trump tried to get him to stop looking into Mike Flynn (his Russia connection was in the closed meeting with Trump).
-
And Little Marco.
And Lyin Ted.
He made those up too. All by himself.
Trump insinuated that Ted Cruz's dad was somehow involved in the JFK assassination.
-
I can't disagree with any of that. I hope that one day we can put this whole Russia shit behind us. But it seems like nearly everyday something else pops up, like Trump closed meeting with Russia and leaking highly classified Intel to them, or Comey coming out and saying that Trump tried to get him to stop looking into Mike Flynn (his Russia connection was in the closed meeting with Trump).
I honestly don't think the guy knows the rules. Or nuances of all this. It's why you assemble a veteran team of guys to help with that. From chief of staff on down. The fact that Gorka, Bolton, Guliani and Gingrich aren't remotely involved on some type of advisement is bewildering - whether one agrees with them or not on policy. The best decision obama ever made was aligning with axelrod. I don't like the guy but he knew how to drive the train.
-
I honestly don't think the guy knows the rules. Or nuances of all this. It's why you assemble a veteran team of guys to help with that. From chief of staff on down. The fact that Gorka, Bolton, Guliani and Gingrich aren't remotely involved on some type of advisement is bewildering - whether one agrees with them or not on policy. The best decision obama ever made was aligning with axelrod. I don't like the guy but he knew how to drive the train.
Yup, he surrounds himself with "yes men", like you stated earlier. That wouldn't be that big of problem if the person in charge knew the rules, knew what he was doing every single day, knew that one single wrong tweet could cause A LOT of problems. But, when he surrounds himself with the likes of Bannon and his son-in-law Kuscher, Conway, Spicer, etc., etc., etc., etc. There is a problem. Especially when it has been reported that there is still a lot of fighting going on behind closed doors (loud enough to cause the interns to turn up all of the TVs so that the reporters couldn't hear what they were screaming about).
-
Good read by Ben Shapiro. Who also has a great podcast.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447698/trump-character-flaws-insecurity-arrogance-harm-agenda
by BEN SHAPIRO
May 17, 2017 4:00 AM
@BENSHAPIRO
The president’s character flaws are getting in the way of his agenda. This week, President Trump proved once again that character matters. Trump failed miserably on all fronts — not because of his political principles, which were never philosophically conservative, but because Trump is a deeply flawed man, and thus an even more flawed leader. His obsession with others’ perceptions led him to fire FBI director James Comey — who should have been fired, by all rights, months ago — for the sin of failing to respect Trump’s bizarre theories about Obama-era “wiretapping.†Meanwhile, in an act of extreme arrogance, Trump appeared on national television and proceeded to destroy the supposed rationales for the Comey firing. His pathological insecurities then led him to tweet about “tapes†of Comey, which he then refused to allow his communications team to sweep under the rug.
There is no 8-D underwater quantum chess.
There is only Trump.
And as the so-called law of the lid states in business, the upper limit of a president’s competence can never be superseded by that of his subordinates. And Trump’s competence is tied directly to his character defects.
But many Republicans overlooked character as an argument against Trump, and they continue to do so today, although it is his character that leads him to jump on rakes. According to an April 2017 poll from the Deseret News, 57 percent of Republicans now say it would not matter to them if a candidate for president “had an extramarital affair in the past.†That compares with 42 percent of Republicans back in 2002. That number also includes 53 percent of white Evangelicals. Why? Because of President Trump, of course. It’s obviously silly to argue about whether this has been a principled stand by Republicans. It isn’t, any more than it is principled opposition rather than political convenience driving Democrats’ sudden turn against adultery among politicians (just 47 percent of Democrats said adultery wouldn’t matter to them, as opposed to 69 percent who said the same thing in 2002).
But it does point to a bet conservatives made in the 2016 election: that success equals character. Trump’s business career became, for many conservatives, an all-purpose fall-back argument in behalf of his character. Because conservatives believe in a meritocracy, they tend to believe that those who are successful are not cheats, liars, or scoundrels in the private sector.
To understand conservatives’ willingness to overlook Donald Trump’s personal problems, it’s important to understand the context in which Trump’s fans saw him: as a real-estate magnate. Real estate takes a certain level of expertise. It takes fluency with numbers. It takes willingness to structure “the art of the deal.†It requires patience and the ability to grapple with learning curves — adaptability. Success in real estate means careful planning years in advance and a willingness to pull the trigger on big moves. It requires a certain level of character, too: Your reputation in real estate helps determine whether good deals will ever materialize. Those who begin as real-estate sharks don’t have decades-long careers, in the main.
Trump, his conservative defenders said, was a real-estate mogul — the most powerful real-estate mogul in America. That made him, by inductive reasoning, a decent person, despite his adulterous liaisons.
But many conservatives refused to acknowledge the two points about Trump that should have given them cause for concern, even if they believed the somewhat flawed meritocracy-character link. First, Trump didn’t earn his magnate status; Trump inherited a massive amount of wealth from his father and, by most available estimates, has significantly underperformed the real-estate market. Second, and more important, there is at least one area of meritocracy where conservatives discard the supposed character-success link: in the entertainment industry. Conservatives have always understood that talent for entertaining and quality of character may actually be inversely linked: You’d be hard-pressed to find a conservative touting Kim Kardashian’s success as proof of her good character. Trump is an entertainer. He acts like an entertainer. He obsesses about his ratings, he spends hours on his hair, he agonizes over public perceptions of his successes and failures. He cannot bear to be out of the spotlight, and he feels personally threatened by those who occupy it more than he does for any period of time.
Conservatives wouldn’t pretend that Paris Hilton would make a good president because she’s so successful in her other ventures. Yet many conservatives told themselves a story whereby Trump was more Warren Buffett than Paris Hilton, so they could continue to maintain the positive image of his character. But he isn’t. And not all aspects of character are created equal when it comes to governing.
Some bad men govern well; others govern poorly. It’s fair to argue that personal fidelity to one’s spouse has little to do with governing ability. Some Americans made that argument in the 1990s; others went with the character argument and maintained that you can’t trust a person who commits adultery. Obviously, Bill Clinton provided proof both ways: He could govern decently, but he was a pathological liar.
Trump’s flaws, however, differ from Clinton’s. He has the same need for love from the world at large — a love that drove Clinton away from ideology and toward a governing centrism, and which will likely move Trump in the same direction. But unlike Clinton, Trump is also deeply arrogant about his own abilities, which means that he micro-manages rather than delegating; he’s also spontaneous where Clinton was calculating, which means he makes more unforced errors; Trump hates details whereas Clinton loved them, which means Clinton was fluent with his policy proposals. None of this cuts in favor of Trump’s success.
Conservatives are now dealing with Trump in one of three ways: praying, as Speaker of the House Paul Ryan is, that Trumpian foibles won’t poison too much of the agenda; practicing outright sycophancy, as his entire White House staff appears to be doing; and calling out Trump when he makes mistakes. Prayer isn’t going to work, at least barring a miracle; sycophancy merely reinforces Trumpian mistakes. The only question is whether Trump has enough character to acknowledge when he’s made a mistake, if anyone is willing to speak honestly to him. So far, the answer isn’t looking good. Character still matters in the presidency.
Age 70 is a little late to be getting started in developing some, but if Trump wants to have a successful presidency, he’d better start now.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/house-majority-leader-to-colleagues-in-2016-i-think-putin-pays-trump/2017/05/17/515f6f8a-3aff-11e7-8854-21f359183e8c_story.html?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.307923475bce
Paul Ryan might not like to see this in today's Washington Post. Question, which is worse? The deed or the cover-up?
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/house-majority-leader-to-colleagues-in-2016-i-think-putin-pays-trump/2017/05/17/515f6f8a-3aff-11e7-8854-21f359183e8c_story.html?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.307923475bce
Paul Ryan might not like to see this in today's Washington Post. Question, which is worse? The deed or the cover-up?
Fuck the fucking Washington post
-
Good read by Ben Shapiro. Who also has a great podcast.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447698/trump-character-flaws-insecurity-arrogance-harm-agenda
I don't really agree with much of that.
-
I don't really agree with much of that.
Why? They are facts. Proof is in the pudding. Why don't you like pudding? It's not tomatoes.
Ben Shapiro is conservative btw and has defended Trump more than he's critiqued him. But he's also willing to point out obvious problems.
-
Why? They are facts. Proof is in the pudding. Why don't you like pudding? It's not tomatoes.
Ben Shapiro is conservative btw and has defended Trump more than he's critiqued him. But he's also willing to point out obvious problems.
"Facts" is stretching it. Shapiro is still giving an opinion.
And we are not "stopped in our tracks". Trump is still moving forward. Some of the things that need doing are not just "push button" issues. While all of this other (Russian BS) stuff is going on, business as usual is still taking place. He's been in office less that 4 months. We are moving long well against staunch media opposition!
-
Why? They are facts. Proof is in the pudding. Why don't you like pudding? It's not tomatoes.
Ben Shapiro is conservative btw and has defended Trump more than he's critiqued him. But he's also willing to point out obvious problems.
They were not facts.
They were perceptions. Opinions. Conjectures.
Opinions:
president’s character flaws
Trump is a deeply flawed man, and thus an even more flawed leader.
His obsession with others’ perceptions led him to fire FBI director James Comey — who should have been fired, by all rights, months ago — for the sin of failing to respect Trump’s bizarre theories about Obama-era “wiretapping.†Pure speculation as to the reason
Trump’s competence is tied directly to his character defects
it is his character that leads him to jump on rakes
I'm not going to go on. This is one guy's take. I don't agree with it.
-
So you guys are ok with the status quo and think there are no issues to try and remedy?
I'm not even saying trump has caused a lot of these things. But I am saying I think he's made a lot of them much much worse than they should have been. Taking away twitter would be a good start.
I don't think many would argue that his temperament hasn't caused many of his reactions to these things.
-
"Facts" is stretching it. Shapiro is still giving an opinion.
And we are not "stopped in our tracks". Trump is still moving forward. Some of the things that need doing are not just "push button" issues. While all of this other (Russian BS) stuff is going on, business as usual is still taking place. He's been in office less that 4 months. We are moving long well against staunch media opposition!
Shapiro is not the MSM. He is not anti trump even. Andrew Napolitano (a trump supporter and constitutional lawyer and ex judge) wrote a very similar piece on foxnews yesterday. I think they want to help. They just know that you have to be able to point out issues when they exist. Real ones. Not fake ones.
-
Taking away twitter would be a good start.
Yes, yes, yes.
His comments to Comey about the "tapes" this week was beneath the office of the President.
-
Shapiro is not the MSM. He is not anti trump even. Andrew Napolitano (a trump supporter and constitutional lawyer and ex judge) wrote a very similar piece on foxnews yesterday. I think they want to help. They just know that you have to be able to point out issues when they exist. Real ones. Not fake ones.
But it is still an opinion on the "perception" of issues.
And if the MSM was not hammering these perceptions, there would be no major issues.
This is all whiny stuff that "seems" to be issues. But the duties of the president are STILL getting done. The only hangup is with the left...and those who are tired of hearing about this every day. The MSM is beating the public into submission.
Trump's character has already been on trial. We still don't care!
-
Trump's character has already been on trial. We still don't care!
The cult of Paterno/Saban.
Yikes.
-
The cult of Paterno/Saban.
Yikes.
Snowflakitis.
Yikes.
-
So you guys are ok with the status quo and think there are no issues to try and remedy?
I'm not even saying trump has caused a lot of these things. But I am saying I think he's made a lot of them much much worse than they should have been. Taking away twitter would be a good start.
I don't think many would argue that his temperament hasn't caused many of his reactions to these things.
No. I'm not satisfied.
I want the witch hunts on every network other than Fox, the vulgar rants from every pissed off crybaby on television, the nancy pants protests, the organized "resistance", the leaks of lies from frightened DC lifers, the exhortations of dethroned emperors and empresses to disrupt and over throw the political process, the crocodile tears of Chuck Schumer and all the rest of that to BACK THE FUCK UP.
I think his "temperament" has been restrained, quite honestly. If I had all those hyenas surrounding me and trying to tear me to pieces I'd be a much meaner motherfucker than he is. I'd tear some shit up.
I'd like to see what the man can do when he's not consistently having to defend himself from lies, half-truths, diversions, gotchas and bullshit. I think that's why the majority of the people in this country voted for him. I think that's what we all wanted.
I, for one, am getting tired of it. I'm tired of hearing the idle, ignorant chatter of far too many lunatics like Prowler who know nothing but the headline they read -- and with 99% of the media on the attack, every headline is demeaning.
-
Yes, yes, yes.
His comments to Comey about the "tapes" this week was beneath the office of the President.
That bar is so low due to the bowing and scraping and racist meandering of his predecessor I don't think anything much is beneath it now.
-
That bar is so low due to the bowing and scraping and racist meandering of his predecessor I don't think anything much is beneath it now.
Oh, I had plenty that I thought Obama did that was beneath the office, too, so I understand what you are saying.
-
This all just sucks.
^^^^^^^
-
The cult of Paterno/Saban.
Yikes.
Sadly this is what America is becoming.
https://youtu.be/RxHp8Hughd0
-
Sadly this is what America is becoming.
https://youtu.be/RxHp8Hughd0
You are dumber than a hemophiliac fucking a porcupine
-
You are dumber than a hemophiliac fucking a porcupine
Now that's funny.
-
You are dumber than a hemophiliac fucking a porcupine
Now that's funny.
And Oh so TRUE!
-
You are dumber than a hemophiliac fucking a porcupine
I'm surprised I didn't see your retarded ass on the clip...unless in one of those clips you were inside the podium, face banging the little Cheeto and I just didn't see ya.
-
Good read by Ben Shapiro. Who also has a great podcast.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447698/trump-character-flaws-insecurity-arrogance-harm-agenda
Erick Erickson off the Lucitania as well. This is exactly what I tried to warn about in the primaries and general election…
https://townhall.com/columnists/erickerickson/2017/05/19/no-more-benefits-of-doubt-n2328785
-
Erick Erickson off the Lucitania as well. This is exactly what I tried to warn about in the primaries and general election…
https://townhall.com/columnists/erickerickson/2017/05/19/no-more-benefits-of-doubt-n2328785
You were wrong then. You're wrong now.
Don't you get tired of it?
The basis of that piece is that President Trump should resign because
A) democrats are throwing a media-fueled hissy fit
B) he's being the same bombastic person the majority of the country elected
That's bullshit.
-
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447746/donald-trump-self-inflicted-wounds-conservative-cognitive-dissonance-untenable (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447746/donald-trump-self-inflicted-wounds-conservative-cognitive-dissonance-untenable)
Writer for law of liberty.org too libruhl I guess…
-
You were wrong then. You're wrong now.
When Trump is impeached, Dems sweep 2018, and Chelsea Clinton is elected in 2020 to take over as Commander-In-Chief for WWIIII, you will stick to this.
-
When Trump is impeached, Dems sweep 2018, and Chelsea Clinton is elected in 2020 to take over as Commander-In-Chief for WWIIII, you will stick to this.
Now you are being bombastic and little like Prowler.
During the election, you were Prowler's twin. When Trump won, you realized you whiffed. Now that you smell a little blood, you are back in the tank with Prowler. Look up, The Fonze is about to go over you...AGAIN!
-
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447746/donald-trump-self-inflicted-wounds-conservative-cognitive-dissonance-untenable (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447746/donald-trump-self-inflicted-wounds-conservative-cognitive-dissonance-untenable)
Writer for law of liberty.org too libruhl I guess…
Nope. Just missing the point.
We can't give in and pillory the man because the democrats and Hollywood fucks didn't get their way and are throwing tantrums.
Every bit of the "controversy" and shit is spawned from a viewpoint that refuses to see Trump through any other lens than the one they demand must fit. They fucking LOST. They're STILL lost.
I'm absolutely disgusted by what I see coming from the left. I'd be perfectly happy at this point with a war that drives all of them out of this country. Every last one. Let Chuck Schumer and Stephen Colbert lead the parade the fuck right on out. Take John McCain with them.
-
And while we are here?
I am equally disappointed and sickened by the status quo DC lifers so terrified by the democratic onslaught that they are willing to betray the very populace that turned out in overwhelming numbers to support Trump.
The media is lying about his level of support. They did not get their way so they are disrupting and obstructing the political process and performing what is, in effect, a coup.
This isn't what I signed up for. This isn't why Trump was elected. You can't overthrow the motherfucking government because things didn't go your way. But that's what the democrats with help from the liberal media is doing. And you're backing it.
There's a section in that National Review article that sums it up neatly. It talks about Trump "substituting his personal instincts for nearly 23 decades of accumulated mores.."
EXACTLY. That's why he won. The country is tired of the 23 decades of the same non-productive bullshit. He was elected to get things done and break the stranglehold that the status quo inflicts on us. He destroyed a field of 'seasoned' politicians content to talk incessantly while saying absolutely nothing. He broke the consummate career politician's back. And he did it by NOT adhering to the same old 'mores' and patterns, by rejecting the establishment, by doing things his way.
Why in the fuck would you or anybody else now expect him to become what he campaigned against? To reject the very same instincts that got him where he is today when all of the fuckholes bitching now said he had no chance and was doing it wrong. Of course he listens to his instincts and not the politi-speak being shoveled his way. He should.
The crying fucks can go straight to hell.
I support pretty much everything he's done so far.
-
I support pretty much everything he's done so far.
Dude needs to get off of twitter and stop trying to fight the media at every turn. I understand they need fighting, but let someone else do it.
-
Dude needs to get off of twitter and stop trying to fight the media at every turn. I understand they need fighting, but let someone else do it.
I'm talking about actual work. Policy. Orders. Direction.
It's all going the way it should.
If Obama had economic numbers like Trump has generated? CNN would be pumping him for a Nobel in economics. Same if he had made the deal with China. He'd be championed for his responses to Syria and NK.
EVERYTHING Trump has done is ignored by the media as they pursue bullshit leaks and Russian ghosts. It's a campaign designed to demean the man. I hope he's strong and stubborn enough to outlast this storm of yellow journalism.
-
I'm talking about actual work. Policy. Orders. Direction.
It's all going the way it should.
If Obama had economic numbers like Trump has generated? CNN would be pumping him for a Nobel in economics. Same if he had made the deal with China. He'd be championed for his responses to Syria and NK.
EVERYTHING Trump has done is ignored by the media as they pursue bullshit leaks and Russian ghosts. It's a campaign designed to demean the man. I hope he's strong and stubborn enough to outlast this storm of yellow journalism.
I agree on policy. If he would ignore the media instead of giving them a "yo mama"...then things would run much smoother...
-
I agree on policy.
Now just look what you did. You made a snowflake cry.
-
Now just look what you did. You made a snowflake cry.
I haven't seen anyone here bitch about policy. Ineptitude and corruption, or in the very least the appearance of corruption (compacted by the aforementioned ineptitude) are the focus of any criticism I've seen here.
I'm not counting Prowler's copypasta, but even most of that falls under those categories as well.
-
I'm talking about actual work. Policy. Orders. Direction.
It's all going the way it should.
If Obama had economic numbers like Trump has generated? CNN would be pumping him for a Nobel in economics. Same if he had made the deal with China. He'd be championed for his responses to Syria and NK.
EVERYTHING Trump has done is ignored by the media as they pursue bullshit leaks and Russian ghosts. It's a campaign designed to demean the man. I hope he's strong and stubborn enough to outlast this storm of yellow journalism.
I'll spell this out for you slowly.
T.R.U.M.P.
H.A.S.
N.O.T.
D.O.N.E.
A.N.Y.T.H.I.N.G.
O.T.H.E.R.
T.H.A.N.
S.I.G.N.
E.X.E.C.U.T.I.V.E.
O.R.D.E.R.S.
T.H.A.T.
H.E.
B.A.R.E.L.Y.
R.E.A.D.S.
Anyone that can scribble their name, can do just about as much as Trump has done in his first 100 days.
-
I'm absolutely disgusted by what I see coming from the left. I'd be perfectly happy at this point with a war that drives all of them out of this country. Every last one. Let Chuck Schumer and Stephen Colbert lead the parade the fuck right on out. Take John McCain with them.
Funny, I never saw you cry and complain every single time the "Right" were going after Obama for every little thing he did wrong, in their eyes...much less, call for an all out extermination. Oh that's right, you're Party over Country, my mistake. Seems like you'd enjoy living in North Korea more than here.
-
I haven't seen anyone here bitch about policy. Ineptitude and corruption, or in the very least the appearance of corruption (compacted by the aforementioned ineptitude) are the focus of any criticism I've seen here.
I'm not counting Prowler's copypasta, but even most of that falls under those categories as well.
Ineptitude? Probably.
Corruption? Media driven.
-
Ineptitude? Probably.
Corruption? Media driven.
or in the very least the appearance of corruption (compacted by the aforementioned ineptitude)
-
How's this for the appearance of corruption?
President Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office this month that firing the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, had relieved “great pressure†on him, according to a document summarizing the meeting.
“I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,†Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.â€
Mr. Trump added, “I’m not under investigation.†(Ummm, yes he is, regardless of how many times he states otherwise. Also, it's now considered a criminal investigation...meaning every rock will be turned over from before or during the campaign to anything current. Special Counsel Robert Mueller is extremely thorough)
The conversation, during a May 10 meeting — the day after he fired Mr. Comey — reinforces the notion that Mr. Trump dismissed him primarily because of the bureau’s investigation into possible collusion between his campaign and Russian operatives. Mr. Trump said as much in one televised interview, but the White House has offered changing justifications for the firing.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html?smid=tw-share&referer=http://m.facebook.com/
-
Unbelievably, the NYT did include Sean Spicer's statements that things in better perspective.
Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, did not dispute the account.
In a statement, he said that Mr. Comey had put unnecessary pressure on the president’s ability to conduct diplomacy with Russia on matters such as Syria, Ukraine and the Islamic State.
“By grandstanding and politicizing the investigation into Russia’s actions, James Comey created unnecessary pressure on our ability to engage and negotiate with Russia,†Mr. Spicer said. “The investigation would have always continued, and obviously, the termination of Comey would not have ended it. Once again, the real story is that our national security has been undermined by the leaking of private and highly classified conversations.â€
-
Also, it's now considered a criminal investigation
How is it now considered a criminal investigation? And which federal statute did Trump violate?
-
How is it now considered a criminal investigation? And which federal statute did Trump violate?
It's not. He's like a bammer fan sitting around waiting on the hammer to fall on AU. Ain't happening but it gives him hope!
-
How is it now considered a criminal investigation? And which federal statute did Trump violate?
Robert Mueller said...that's how. Obstruction of Justice is criminal. Mueller isn't just investigating Trump, he and his team are also investigating everyone associated with him.
-
Robert Mueller said...that's how. Obstruction of Justice is criminal. Mueller isn't just investigating Trump, he and his team are also investigating everyone associated with him.
"It ain't juss $cam, its that whole damn barner athletic department that's gonna go down..."
-
Robert Mueller said...that's how. Obstruction of Justice is criminal. Mueller isn't just investigating Trump, he and his team are also investigating everyone associated with him.
Looking into a charge versus the charge actually having happened are two different things.
-
Looking into a charge versus the charge actually having happened are two different things.
Not in their mind. Just the other day a dimorat screamed that Trump is guilty until proven innocent...
-
Not in their mind. Just the other day a dimorat screamed that Trump is guilty until proven innocent...
Wonder if those people would like the same logic afforded to them on their best court room visit.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-intelligence-chiefs-to-push-back-against-fbi-collusion-probe-after-comey-revealed-its-existence/2017/05/22/394933bc-3f10-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.56d48807ef63
Oh look...more obstruction of justice coming from Trump. His arrogance and ignorance are second to none, that's going to be his downfall.
-
Damn it, Prowler. This article is the biggest piece of shit, equal only in credibility to the daily shitfest printed by al.dot I am a gay twerker that has no balls!!!! I also have no idea how to use the quote function to post stories, so I annoy the piss out of others. I like male genatalia in and around my mouth., you've ever posted. Look at the "sources". Dude...really. Just stop!
"according to current and former officials."
"according to two current and two former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private communications with the president."
"a former senior intelligence official said of the request to Coats."
Do you not get that they don't have to reveal their source? They have no source. Why would you post this? Really! Why would you post this?
-
Damn it, Prowler. This article is the biggest piece of shit, equal only in credibility to the daily shitfest printed by al.dot I am a gay twerker that has no balls!!!! I also have no idea how to use the quote function to post stories, so I annoy the piss out of others. I like male genatalia in and around my mouth., you've ever posted. Look at the "sources". Dude...really. Just stop!
"according to current and former officials."
"according to two current and two former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private communications with the president."
"a former senior intelligence official said of the request to Coats."
Do you not get that they don't have to reveal their source? They have no source. Why would you post this? Really! Why would you post this?
You do realize this is the same paper that broke the Watergate scandal right? This isn't some National Enquire, local hometown news rag. This is the media that Trump wants everyone to believe is fake, not because they lie, but because they don't kiss his tiny ring finger (Faux News kisses it, he loves them...and they're being dragged down with him).
-
You do realize this is the same paper that broke the Watergate scandal right? This isn't some National Enquire, local hometown news rag. This is the media that Trump wants everyone to believe is fake, not because they lie, but because they don't kiss his tiny ring finger (Faux News kisses it, he loves them...and they're being dragged down with him).
You're a fucking idiot.
-
You're a fucking idiot.
You just insulted idiots everywhere.
I wonder why no mention from Chowler on the statements from John Brennan?
-
You just insulted idiots everywhere.
I wonder why no mention from Chowler on the statements from John Brennan?
Sources say he's a Muslim convert. Is that true ?
-
Interesting piece by Gregg Jarrett at foxnews. Yeah, I know, Fox. But, if he's right....
Robert Mueller is tasked with finding a crime that does not exist in the law. It is a legal impossibility.
As special counsel, Mueller can engage in all manner of spectacular jurisprudential gymnastics. However, it will not change the fact that colluding with Russia is not, under America’s criminal codes, a crime. It’s just not there.
Maybe it should be. Perhaps someday Congress will pass a law criminalizing such conduct in political campaigns. But for now, there is not a single statute outlawing collaboration with a foreign government in a U.S. presidential election. Or any election, for that matter.
Why, then, are so many people who are following the Trump-Russia saga under the mistaken impression that collusion is a crime? Principally, because it is a loaded word with an historic criminal connotation.
“Collusion†became a prominent part of the legal lexicon when Benjamin Harrison occupied the White House and Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890 outlawing collusion in some business practices. Specifically, price fixing and other anticompetitive activities became a criminal offense under Section 1 of the Act. Almost overnight, the word “collusion†was converted into a legal pejorative.
But collusion is only criminal in an antitrust setting. It has nothing whatsoever to do with elections. Yet that has not stopped politicians, pundits and journalists from either misunderstanding the concept and/or misconstruing its application to the Trump-Russia hysteria that has reached a deafening pitch.
Both the Department of Justice and the FBI seem equally oblivious.
Mueller’s Marching Orders
Under the law granting him legal authority (28 CFR 600), a special counsel is charged with investigating crimes. Only crimes. Nothing else. He has limited jurisdiction. Any other wrongdoing uncovered in the investigation which does not rise to the level of a criminal offense cannot even be made public by the special counsel. That is the law.
So what crime is Mueller instructed to investigate? Let take a look.
In his order appointing Mueller as special counsel (Order No. 3915-2017), Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein directed him to investigate “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trumpâ€.
But wait. If Mueller is supposed to look for evidence of a crime that is not, by legal definition, a crime…then isn’t the special counsel being asked to do something that is manifestly unattainable? Doesn’t the impossibility of his assignment render the exercise futile? The answer is yes.
The only conceivable crime is a tangential one. If it could somehow be shown that someone in the Trump campaign aided and abetted the hacking of the Democratic National Committee or the campaign of Hillary Clinton, then perhaps a criminal charge might be made. But as Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz told Fox News, “I’m sure that didn’t happenâ€.
How can he be so sure? Common sense. There is no evidence the Trump campaign had the technical expertise to hack anything. Knowing about a computer theft or even verbally encouraging it is not enough under the law. It requires an overt act that assists in the commission of the crime. It appears that no one, including the Trump campaign, even knew about Russia’s hacking efforts until after they were accomplished and made public.
Any Related Matters
Rosenstein’s order to the special counsel authorizes him to investigate “any other matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.†This is the usual all-encompassing phrase which allows a special counsel to run rampant in an almost limitless direction to dig up dirt on potential targets.
As I pointed out in a recent column, Mueller’s probe will inevitably morph into an investigation of President Trump’s meeting with James Comey and his subsequent firing of the FBI Director. Amid partisan accusations of obstruction of justice, the special counsel will surely examine whether the president corruptly attempted to influence, obstruct, or impede the due administration of the law, as the law defines it. (18 USC 1501)
If the president told Comey he hopes former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn can be cleared because “he’s a good guy,†it is not enough to sustain an obstruction charge. Hoping or wishing for an outcome is not the same as influencing, obstructing or impeding. Nor is firing the FBI Director. As Comey himself admitted, the president has the constitutional authority to fire him for any reason or no reason at all.
Furthermore, the term “corruptly†is specifically defined under18 USC 1515(b) as “acting with an improper purpose, including making a false or misleading statement, or withholding, concealing, altering, or destroying a document or other information.†The president’s actions do not come close to satisfying the requirements of acting corruptly.
The most recent accusation is that President Trump asked two of his top intelligence officials, Daniel Coats and Adm. Michael Rogers, to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election. If Rogers and Coats had no such evidence of collusion, then asking them to tell the truth is not illegal. But at this point, we do not know what exactly occurred during those alleged conversations.
What we do know is that collusion in a political campaign is not, by itself, a crime.
How, then, is it possible to obstruct the investigation of a crime… which is not a crime?
Gregg Jarrett is a Fox News Anchor and former defense attorney.
-
Interesting piece by Gregg Jarrett at foxnews. Yeah, I know, Fox. But, if he's right....
Robert Mueller is tasked with finding a crime that does not exist in the law. It is a legal impossibility.
As special counsel, Mueller can engage in all manner of spectacular jurisprudential gymnastics. However, it will not change the fact that colluding with Russia is not, under America’s criminal codes, a crime. It’s just not there.
Maybe it should be. Perhaps someday Congress will pass a law criminalizing such conduct in political campaigns. But for now, there is not a single statute outlawing collaboration with a foreign government in a U.S. presidential election. Or any election, for that matter.
Why, then, are so many people who are following the Trump-Russia saga under the mistaken impression that collusion is a crime? Principally, because it is a loaded word with an historic criminal connotation.
“Collusion†became a prominent part of the legal lexicon when Benjamin Harrison occupied the White House and Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890 outlawing collusion in some business practices. Specifically, price fixing and other anticompetitive activities became a criminal offense under Section 1 of the Act. Almost overnight, the word “collusion†was converted into a legal pejorative.
But collusion is only criminal in an antitrust setting. It has nothing whatsoever to do with elections. Yet that has not stopped politicians, pundits and journalists from either misunderstanding the concept and/or misconstruing its application to the Trump-Russia hysteria that has reached a deafening pitch.
Both the Department of Justice and the FBI seem equally oblivious.
Mueller’s Marching Orders
Under the law granting him legal authority (28 CFR 600), a special counsel is charged with investigating crimes. Only crimes. Nothing else. He has limited jurisdiction. Any other wrongdoing uncovered in the investigation which does not rise to the level of a criminal offense cannot even be made public by the special counsel. That is the law.
So what crime is Mueller instructed to investigate? Let take a look.
In his order appointing Mueller as special counsel (Order No. 3915-2017), Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein directed him to investigate “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trumpâ€.
But wait. If Mueller is supposed to look for evidence of a crime that is not, by legal definition, a crime…then isn’t the special counsel being asked to do something that is manifestly unattainable? Doesn’t the impossibility of his assignment render the exercise futile? The answer is yes.
The only conceivable crime is a tangential one. If it could somehow be shown that someone in the Trump campaign aided and abetted the hacking of the Democratic National Committee or the campaign of Hillary Clinton, then perhaps a criminal charge might be made. But as Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz told Fox News, “I’m sure that didn’t happenâ€.
How can he be so sure? Common sense. There is no evidence the Trump campaign had the technical expertise to hack anything. Knowing about a computer theft or even verbally encouraging it is not enough under the law. It requires an overt act that assists in the commission of the crime. It appears that no one, including the Trump campaign, even knew about Russia’s hacking efforts until after they were accomplished and made public.
Any Related Matters
Rosenstein’s order to the special counsel authorizes him to investigate “any other matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.†This is the usual all-encompassing phrase which allows a special counsel to run rampant in an almost limitless direction to dig up dirt on potential targets.
As I pointed out in a recent column, Mueller’s probe will inevitably morph into an investigation of President Trump’s meeting with James Comey and his subsequent firing of the FBI Director. Amid partisan accusations of obstruction of justice, the special counsel will surely examine whether the president corruptly attempted to influence, obstruct, or impede the due administration of the law, as the law defines it. (18 USC 1501)
If the president told Comey he hopes former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn can be cleared because “he’s a good guy,†it is not enough to sustain an obstruction charge. Hoping or wishing for an outcome is not the same as influencing, obstructing or impeding. Nor is firing the FBI Director. As Comey himself admitted, the president has the constitutional authority to fire him for any reason or no reason at all.
Furthermore, the term “corruptly†is specifically defined under18 USC 1515(b) as “acting with an improper purpose, including making a false or misleading statement, or withholding, concealing, altering, or destroying a document or other information.†The president’s actions do not come close to satisfying the requirements of acting corruptly.
The most recent accusation is that President Trump asked two of his top intelligence officials, Daniel Coats and Adm. Michael Rogers, to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election. If Rogers and Coats had no such evidence of collusion, then asking them to tell the truth is not illegal. But at this point, we do not know what exactly occurred during those alleged conversations.
What we do know is that collusion in a political campaign is not, by itself, a crime.
How, then, is it possible to obstruct the investigation of a crime… which is not a crime?
Gregg Jarrett is a Fox News Anchor and former defense attorney.
TL;DR...... you slut.
-
Just read the first 2 paragraphs.
-
Just read the first 2 paragraphs.
You've been working out haven't you ?
-
You do realize this is the same paper that broke the Watergate scandal right?
I literally laughed out loud. "You guys know that this is the same paper that broke a story 45 years ago, right??"
-
I literally laughed out loud. "You guys know that this is the same paper that broke a story 45 years ago, right??"
What if I told you that Russians were our ally and the Japanese were our enemy in a war not long before that too. Must mean the they are now too!!
-
Robert Mueller said...that's how. Obstruction of Justice is criminal. Mueller isn't just investigating Trump, he and his team are also investigating everyone associated with him.
Please show me where Robert Mueller said this.
Trump hasn't obstructed shit. Just a week or so ago, in his testimony, McCabe flat out said there had been no attempt to obstruct the investigation. He also said the investigation had not been affected by the firing of Comey.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/11/acting-fbi-chief-mccabe-says-russia-probe-continues-despite-comey-firing.html
"The work continues despite any changes in circumstances," McCabe said. "There has been no effort to impede our investigation to date. You cannot stop the men and women of the FBI from doing the right thing, protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution."
-
Please show me where Robert Mueller said this.
Trump hasn't obstructed shit. Just a week or so ago, in his testimony, McCabe flat out said there had been no attempt to obstruct the investigation. He also said the investigation had not been affected by the firing of Comey.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/11/acting-fbi-chief-mccabe-says-russia-probe-continues-despite-comey-firing.html
Criminal Investigation...
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/18/robert-mueller-takes-russia-case-as-criminal-inves/
Obstruction of Justice (part 1)
https://www.google.com/amp/www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2017/05/trump-asked-comey-drop-flynn-investigation-reports-170516232708411.html
Obstruction of Justice (part 2)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-intelligence-chiefs-to-push-back-against-fbi-collusion-probe-after-comey-revealed-its-existence/2017/05/22/394933bc-3f10-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?pushid=592365508a38f24c0000000c&tid=notifi_push_breaking-news&utm_term=.8313dd901852
Go back to your Faux News... :facepalm:
-
Criminal Investigation...
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/18/robert-mueller-takes-russia-case-as-criminal-inves/
Obstruction of Justice (part 1)
https://www.google.com/amp/www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2017/05/trump-asked-comey-drop-flynn-investigation-reports-170516232708411.html
Obstruction of Justice (part 2)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-intelligence-chiefs-to-push-back-against-fbi-collusion-probe-after-comey-revealed-its-existence/2017/05/22/394933bc-3f10-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?pushid=592365508a38f24c0000000c&tid=notifi_push_breaking-news&utm_term=.8313dd901852
Go back to your Faux News... :facepalm:
You fucking idiot.
You quoted a terrorist network.
-
You fucking idiot.
You're talking to the mirror again.
-
Fucking hell. Let me again copy/pasta the first "source" I read and where I quit reading everything you posted.
"according to a source familiar with the contents of the memo".
Just stop! Let it play out. Whatever happens, happens. But the crap you've been posting for months is no more credible than my 16 year old telling me his teacher didn't assign them any homework. And don't come back with, "You do realize this paper reported the Kennedy assassination."
-
Fucking hell. Let me again copy/pasta the first "source" I read and where I quit reading everything you posted.
"according to a source familiar with the contents of the memo".
Just stop! Let it play out. Whatever happens, happens. But the crap you've been posting for months is no more credible than my 16 year old telling me his teacher didn't assign them any homework. And don't come back with, "You do realize this paper reported the Kennedy assassination."
WTF! Kennedy was assassinated? I bet the damn Russians put nuclear missiles in Cuba now. I got to move off Pensacola Beach now.
-
Criminal Investigation...
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/18/robert-mueller-takes-russia-case-as-criminal-inves/
I see nothing from Mueller saying anything about a criminal investigation.
Obstruction of Justice (part 1)
https://www.google.com/amp/www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2017/05/trump-asked-comey-drop-flynn-investigation-reports-170516232708411.html
Obstruction of Justice (part 2)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-intelligence-chiefs-to-push-back-against-fbi-collusion-probe-after-comey-revealed-its-existence/2017/05/22/394933bc-3f10-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?pushid=592365508a38f24c0000000c&tid=notifi_push_breaking-news&utm_term=.8313dd901852
Go back to your Faux News... :facepalm:
"According to some people". Therein lies the problem. The majority of the shit you believe is from "unnamed sources". All the while, there are plenty of people who have put their names on the record as saying they have yet to see one shred of evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. But hey, let's ignore those people and go with unnamed sources. If Trump broke the law and obstructed the investigation, then Comey also broke the law by not reporting it. But again, McCabe testified just the other week that there has been no attempt to impede the investigation. Yet another name on the record vs. "anonymous sources".
-
Just when I think Prowler can't get any fucking dumber...he posts a link from Al-fucking-jazeera as proof of something...
Aljazeera.
-
Just when I think Prowler can't get any fucking dumber...he posts a link from Al-fucking-jazeera as proof of something...
Aljazeera.
They are legitimate now, right? I mean ever since the creator of the internet said so:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/al-gore-al-jazeera-honest-goodness-news
-
You're talking to the mirror again.
Want to make sure I get this on the record. You implying foxnews is a terrorist network?
-
Just when I think Prowler can't get any fucking dumber...he posts a link from Al-fucking-jazeera as proof of something...
Aljazeera.
That's what came up first on Google search, there are plenty of other sites, it just takes 2 seconds to look for yourself.
Back to the Russian investigation...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/05/26/senate-intelligence-committee-requests-trump-campaign-documents/?utm_term=.e88390ddc9d7#comments
-
That's what came up first on Google search, there are plenty of other sites, it just takes 2 seconds to look for yourself.
Back to the Russian investigation...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/05/26/senate-intelligence-committee-requests-trump-campaign-documents/?utm_term=.e88390ddc9d7#comments
Moron you are.
-
Moron you are.
^Corky^
-
That's what came up first on Google search, there are plenty of other sites, it just takes 2 seconds to look for yourself.
Back to the Russian investigation...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/05/26/senate-intelligence-committee-requests-trump-campaign-documents/?utm_term=.e88390ddc9d7#comments
I guess the only ones that show up on your Google searches exclude all of the people that have gone on record saying they have seen no evidence of collusion. You must have some sort of "anonymous sources only" option set. This is part of what is wrong with people today. Some would rather believe "anonymous sources" rather than people from both sides of the aisle saying they have not seen any evidence of collusion.
As for the linked story, I don't even understand the point of the story. I suppose we're going to get a play-by-play every time anything is requested? No shit they're going to ask the campaign for any Russia related documents or emails. Isn't that what all of this is about? I hope that stuff wasn't stored on Hillary's email server, though. That thing is a black hole for email.