The report that I read just said that there was no 'allegation' of collusion. It didn't say that there was 'no collusion'. I've seen no evidence of collusion personally.
I think that the DOJ is not going to come out and say "OK, there won't be any kind of indictments put directly against President Trump" until the investigation has moved forward even beyond where it already is at. DOJ does not want to say that, as long as they think there is even a small chance that they could still turn up something that directly implicates the President.
So why be impatient? Budgetary concerns? Paul Manafort has certainly been getting his money's worth out of it.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-14-2018).]
I forget, Hillary colluded with <who or whom?> by doing <what?>
Was that some kind of reference or invocation of Uranium One?
As I am following the media coverage of this new package of indictments against 12 Russian GRU intelligence operators, I see that this is now emerging (likely) as Russian interference in some of the elections for the U.S. House of Representatives that were also on the 2016 ballot. Not just social media manipulation, but hacking into some of the voter analytics and opposition research databases and either giving or selling this stolen data through a kind of black market for it, that was going on.
"One man's Deep State is another man's Checks and Balances."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-14-2018).]
On a serious note... not trying to start ***** * here, but I am continually shocked and amazed at how worked up some of the Democrats are getting.
You'd believe, by listening to the news and reading places like Democratic Underground, that our country is literally at the cusp of total collapse and that the world is ending. I've never seen so much emotional anguish by any "group" of people, in my life.
- Unemployment is vastly down in every category. - We are taking in RECORD amounts of tax revenue, while personal Federal income tax is down across the board for every segment of society. - With corporate tax rates down, corporations are growing, which increase the tax base, which has caused the increased tax revenue. - Heathcare costs are beginning to stabilize, and if the indicators are correct, next year will be the first year with almost no increase in cost due to reduced regulations.
I mean... I don't have to do this... keep listing stuff, but the economy is awesome. No US citizen has lost any "rights."
Everything the Democrats are upset about is the perceived loss of power, and the potential that with some of the changes Trump has made, they will continue to lose power in the future: - Census bureau changes that mandate you list US Citizen (which dictates power in numbers of Congressional seats and electoral votes), dramatically reduces California's strength. - Stopping of illegal immigration (which eliminates the potential for new Democrat voters) - Elimination of Federal union mandates (which dramatically cuts a funding line for Democrat politicians)
So... I understand it, but why are non-politicians... normal voters, so outraged?
If this magical Socialist Utopia was to have ever come to be... it would have occurred under President Obama. Instead, under Obama... nearly everything got worse, and those things are being corrected now.
What's more, Trump is actually dealing with issues that all previous politicians were too scared to touch, or perhaps convinced NOT TO by their financiers / lobbyists.
I'm thrilled at the way things are going... absolutely thrilled... Trump is bringing new life to our country, and quickly reversing and dealing with the issues that were making this country increasingly irrelevant.
I forget, Hillary colluded with <who or whom?> by doing <what?>
Democratic party to get the Super Delegates and the nod to run over Bernie. Media, including Presidential Debates.
But I know, you will say it was her party or her campaign managers not her. To which, if there was anything to this Russian thing that tied Trump to it the Democrats would be first to the Media and crowing it from on high (as they have falsely done a few times already). But if there was, I would guess that it would have been his campaign managers not he himself. Still, live the good life drinking that sweet bubble up and eating that rainbow stew. It'd be nice for a little equality as far as assigning blame goes on both sides of the aisle though.
If the bar is marked as the buck stops here with Trump for his campaign, then it should stop with Hillary for her campaign and what it did.
[This message has been edited by Khw (edited 07-14-2018).]
Originally posted by Khw: Democratic party to get the Super Delegates and the nod to run over Bernie. Media, including Presidential Debates.
<snip>
Do you think that involved the intervention of any foreign individuals or groups, or any foreign national intelligence agencies, like, for example, the Russian Federation's military intelligence or GRU?
What happened--and I am not hardly versed in it, at all--could well have involved crimes. Other kinds of crimes.
Investigative and enforcement priorities.
There is not an Infinite Justice.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-15-2018).]
Do you think that involved the intervention of any foreign individuals or groups, or any foreign national intelligence agencies, like, for example, the Russian Federation's military intelligence or GRU?
What happened--and I am not hardly versed in it, at all--could well have involved crimes. Other kinds of crimes.
Investigative and enforcement priorities.
There is not an Infinite Justice.
Ah, so now you want to throw a condition on your question previously unstated and use it to invalidate my statement. The problem with that is simple to clear up.
Let's look at the definition of "collusion" shall we?
quote
col·lu·sion [kəˈlo͞oZHən] NOUN secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.
I see nothing there that indicates it is limited to only interactions with foreign countries. So, sorry that's not going to fly as an excuse to dismiss the activities around the media and the debates. Notice of and working with Clinton as to the questions that will be asked during the debate to blind side Trump and make Clinton look like a luscious rose to the American people? That is at the very least an attempt to defraud the American people and influence the election through a rigged debate.
Let's move on from Clinton and instead look at Obama and the funding his government gave to try to defeat Prime Minister Netanyahu from winning the election in Israel. But that's probably okay in your eyes right? Is it? Is it okay for a Democrat US President to try to influence the election of the leader of another foreign country? If it is, then it's okay for Putin to do the same. If it's not, then where is the outrage and investigation into Obama's collusion?
The reality is as I stated in my last post though. It's been over a year and a half that it's been being investigated. From the investigation there has been a few indictments of people that in the grand scheme are really nobody. IF there WAS ANYTHING that tied to Trump, it WOULD be known by now and shouted from the roof tops by every liberal news agency out there. Instead, we get false story after false story and an investigation that is dragging on and on, not because there is any hope of actually finding a link to Trump, but so the investigation will still be open during the next election cycle so Democrats can try to use it to energize their base and try to rally a backlash. It won't matter that there was no collusion, the investigation is still open so they can spin it as "if there was nothing to be found it would be closed". The saddest part is that so many people out there that have been lied to by their party. The people who had their party tell them "no, you can't have the guy you all turned out and voted for, you are getting Hillary Clinton". Yeah those people who after the insertion of Hillary despite their support for Bernie. Those people who were so upset over it that they now claim to be Independent instead of Democrat. Those people? They are lying to themselves. They claim to be woke and are Independent voters but voted for HRC. They claim to be Independent, but still get all their news from the same democrat funded and democrat leaning news sources. They flood social pages with all the anti Trump propaganda out there proving the lie of their Independence. I have seen it time and time again. Push them and they will finally break down and express their seething hate for Trump. He could do everything the way HRC would have and they would STILL hate him. So no, they are not fooling anybody. They are not winning people over with all the BS lies they post everywhere. The only person they are fooling is themselves.
The only person you are fooling on Trump colluding with Russia is yourself.
[This message has been edited by Khw (edited 07-15-2018).]
First, for Khw, and especially for Rickady88GT, who started this Topic:
Two crooks emerged to take the oath They slithered out from the undergrowth A bottle blonde woman and a blonde haired man It looked like sh*t had hit the fan
I voted for the biatch and that's a fact But now we're seeing a second act Is the POTUS a stooge for the GRU? Some say it's false, others say true
I was trying to channel the timeless poetry of Robert Frost, although it probably morphed into the Rap/HipHop music genre.
I have no comment on the previous message from Khw, because I have not read the previous message from Khw. I am not against my reading it, but I don't know when that happens, or even IF that happens. I think it's more likely than not that I will try to kick the tires on it and maybe take it out for a spin in the not too distant future. It would be helpful (I think) to anyone who would try to read it, if Khw were to revisit that final "mega-paragraph" and parcel it out into two or more paragraphs of more tractable length.
I think there is a strong possibility that a report will be made public, before or during September, from the DOJ, about the Special Counsel's investigation of the 2016 election campaign, about the voting and also about the President's conduct during the transition period and since his first day in office.
The President will be singled out in this report for criticism. His efforts to personally lobby the former FBI director James Comey and other federal officials for leniency in the case of Michael Flynn will be called out as "improper." I think that the other federal officials that will likely be referenced in this same way will include the former NSA director, Admiral Mike Rogers, the current Director of National Intelligence Dan Coates, and the former CIA director (now Secretary of State) Mike Pompeo.
The President will be singled out for improper conduct in this matter, but the report will not characterize it as the kind of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" that would warrant a consideration of a Bill of Impeachment against the President by the House of Representatives.
Because this (I suspect) is "what's on tap", it is kind of a reason for DOJ to not release any public remarks about the President at this time, vis-à-vis the Special Counsel's investigation.
The DOJ (so I suspect) does not want to parcel out its remarks about the President, vis-à-vis the Special Counsel's investigation, in two or more parts. One part now, and another part later. That would be kind of reminiscent of the way in which the Hillary emails investigation was handled.
The DOJ does not have the slightest respect for the opinion by the President's pro bono defense attorney and media clown, Rudy Giuliani, that there should now be a public statement that the President was not involved in any conspiracy ("collision") in concert with foreign entities or nations to violate Federal Election laws.
Also, because the investigation has not progressed all the way to the moment when that statement can be released with full confidence.
Just two more words, here. A name, actually.
Roger Stone.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-15-2018).]
I have no comment on the previous message from Khw, because I have not read the previous message from Khw. I am not against my reading it, but I don't know when that happens, or even IF that happens. I think it's more likely than not that I will try to kick the tires on it and maybe take it out for a spin in the not too distant future. It would be helpful (I think) to anyone who would try to read it, if Khw were to revisit that final "mega-paragraph" and parcel it out into two or more paragraphs of more tractable length.
Not much better entertainment than watching Ronald write mentally ill, disjointed, sh*t like that and then try to give khw grammar advice at the same time.
First, for Khw, and especially for Rickady88GT, who started this Topic:
I guess that this is a lot like debating who will win an election, in that I only stated the fact that Trump has not been found to be working with Russia over the election. Then you came back with what you "think" will happen? I am not going to go there, the facts are good enough.
"FBI makes public FISA warrant for surreptitious surveillance and eavesdropping on Trump campaign aide Carter Page" Tom Winter and Phil Helsel for NBC News; July 21, 2018.
quote
The FBI on Saturday made public redacted documents related to the electronic surveillance of former Trump campaign aide Carter Page, who was at the center of a controversy over how the FBI sought the secretive warrant.
The documents released Saturday appear to discount claims made by some Republicans that the FBI failed to properly disclose sources of information used to seek the FISA [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] warrant, and it shows that authorities used other sources of information besides the [notorious] Steele "dossier" in the [FISA] application, which was granted by a judge.
"FBI makes public FISA warrant for surreptitious surveillance and eavesdropping on Trump campaign aide Carter Page" Tom Winter and Phil Helsel for NBC News; July 21, 2018. continued online at NBC News https://www.nbcnews.com/pol...-aide-carter-n893466
Cut & Paste leftist troll, Ronald once again displays his mental illness.
He *could* have easily provided a link to the actual 400+ pages of the FISA warrant application that was finally released by a court ordered FOIA lawsuit, but that would mean once again showing that lying leftist liars continually lie.
The FACTS tell a completely different story than what Ronald and his fellow leftist liars want you to believe.
I think Zero Hedge has a good and fair analysis that's worth reading, but again, I urge everyone to read the actual FISA application to verify and see for yourself.
"If it weren’t for President Obama we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set up a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today including Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation.
President Obama is responsible for that. It was he who tasked us to do that intelligence community assessment in the first place."
.............Former CIA Director, James Clapper on CNN, July 21, 2018
The rats are beginning to jump ship.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 07-22-2018).]
To fund the Mueller investigation, it cost the taxpayers, $2 million dollars a day to fund it.
You don't think they want to keep this gravy train going? Staying in nice hotels, meal, travel cost and etc... All paid for by taxpayers.... For what? Russians buying Facebook ads?
According to the New York Times, the Mueller investigators are now working on a scenario in which President Trump is not merely accused of committing obstruction of justice, but rather, of literally being obstruction of justice. They're looking at the totality of his Twitter messages and public statements, starting with his first day in office.
Just thought I'd check in with this bon appetit from a pillar of that same mainstream media that "gets no respect" (by and large) on the Pennock's game board.
"This is really no respect ... "
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-27-2018).]
It's important to note that mentally ill Ronald is just a "windsock" showing which way the wind of the leftist blogs and propaganda is blowing at the moment.
He's a cut & paste troll.
Note how the narrative is now turning to "obstruction".
That is because the leftist fantasy of "collusion" is evaporating so a new narrative is needed.
It's all about keeping the sheep like Ronald dreaming that they will get rid of President Trump somehow, some way.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 07-27-2018).]
At the center of "Russia-gate"... a Thousand Burning Suns.
White House Counsel Don McGahn hates Trump's TV defense lawyer and spox Rudy Giuliani "with the intensity of 1,000 burning suns."
Backing up about a week here. This was from July 31, in Vanity Fair.
quote
Inside the [White House] West Wing, Rudy Giuliani’s recent wacko media appearances have attracted the wrong kind of notice. “Trump thinks he’s saying too much,” one Republican close to the White House told me.
"The Judge In Paul Manafort's Trial Seems Like A Real Piece Of Work"
Here's some of his latest courtroom interactions from behind the bench:
quote
"Lawyers on both sides need to rein in their facial expressions," [Judge Thomas S] Ellis said Wednesday morning. "It's been reported to me that lawyers on both sides upon leaving the bench, roll their eyes, communicating to those who are watching them, essentially, 'Why do we have to put up with this idiot judge?'
quote
The most heated moment of the debate, however, took place when [Judge] Ellis got perturbed by [federal prosecuting attorney] Andres not looking up at him while speaking. “Look at me! Don’t look down,” Ellis demanded. Then, when Andres responded that he was looking at a relevant document, the exchange grew testier. “You looked down as if to say ‘that’s B.S.!’” Ellis said. “I’m up here!”
quote
Tensions at the Paul Manafort fraud trial grew so heated Monday that the judge suggested that one of Robert Mueller's prosecutors was crying during a discussion out of the jury's earshot, according to a transcript of the proceedings. "I understand how frustrated you are," U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III said during the discussion. "In fact, there's tears in your eyes right now."
When [federal prosecutor] Greg Andres protested that he didn’t have tears in his eyes, the judge shot back: "Well, they're watery."
I've heard that President Trump is watching the day-to-day media reporting of this trial closely.
All distribution rights reserved. A product of Rosenstein-Mueller Entertainment, Ltd.
This is some of the most pathetic, bottom of the barrel hate speach propaganda that I have heard in a while. Even tabloids would not pay for this kind of smut. I am truly disappointed in you this time Ronald. Of all the nothing burgers you have posted about Trump, this is the lowest. And I truly mean this is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the news World. It is like people complaining about the shape of the Judges eyebrows during a divorce hearing. Of all the things in this World that are going wrong Ronald, this is what you are interested in? Disappointed