0 Members and 23 Guests are viewing this topic.
None of that "evidence" is new information. While the resident Libs absolutely lose their mind whenever this is brought up. But if the "evidence" is that of COLUSION with Russia on the part of the Trump campaign. Then there's more then enough evidence to investigate the DNC and the Clinton Campaign for colluding with Russia as well. S The Clinton's and their fake foundation were clear financial benefactors from multiple Russian entities to the tune of millions of dollars. There's also evidence to roll in the Ukraine and the Ukrainian government helping the Clinton Campaign and the DNC. Of course in the case of the Ukraine, all the pro Lib publications have fallen all over themselves to "prove" that there's nothing to that. It's amazing the amount of explaining that's occurred over the last two decades to protect the Clinton's. Everyone's coughing up lungs with smoke inhalation, but amazingly the ProgLib media just never seems to find that fire when it comes to the Clinton. Then of course there's the dossier, the use of paid foreign nationals who used Russian sources . . . and now the growing evidence that Clapper-Comey-Brennan concocted a scheme to ensure the dossier would make it into the public domain via a "legitimate" news source, CNN. In the case of Clapper-Comey-Brennan ProgLibs have done an historical 180 and are now all-in on leaders of entities that they used to despise (and still do if a 'Pub is President) . ProgLibs willl no doubt clamor to a whole new sub-set of the usual suspects who will attempt to explain in great detail how there's nothing to any of that. Clapper sure does get all jumpy, though.
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on May 02, 2018, 06:01:50 AMNone of that "evidence" is new information. While the resident Libs absolutely lose their mind whenever this is brought up. But if the "evidence" is that of COLUSION with Russia on the part of the Trump campaign. Then there's more then enough evidence to investigate the DNC and the Clinton Campaign for colluding with Russia as well. S The Clinton's and their fake foundation were clear financial benefactors from multiple Russian entities to the tune of millions of dollars. There's also evidence to roll in the Ukraine and the Ukrainian government helping the Clinton Campaign and the DNC. Of course in the case of the Ukraine, all the pro Lib publications have fallen all over themselves to "prove" that there's nothing to that. It's amazing the amount of explaining that's occurred over the last two decades to protect the Clinton's. Everyone's coughing up lungs with smoke inhalation, but amazingly the ProgLib media just never seems to find that fire when it comes to the Clinton. Then of course there's the dossier, the use of paid foreign nationals who used Russian sources . . . and now the growing evidence that Clapper-Comey-Brennan concocted a scheme to ensure the dossier would make it into the public domain via a "legitimate" news source, CNN. In the case of Clapper-Comey-Brennan ProgLibs have done an historical 180 and are now all-in on leaders of entities that they used to despise (and still do if a 'Pub is President) . ProgLibs willl no doubt clamor to a whole new sub-set of the usual suspects who will attempt to explain in great detail how there's nothing to any of that. Clapper sure does get all jumpy, though. Then investigate or stop being a whiny batch of betas. Good lord its like an annoying mosquito.
Quote from: Dugout DickStone on May 02, 2018, 11:13:52 AMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on May 02, 2018, 06:01:50 AMNone of that "evidence" is new information. While the resident Libs absolutely lose their mind whenever this is brought up. But if the "evidence" is that of COLUSION with Russia on the part of the Trump campaign. Then there's more then enough evidence to investigate the DNC and the Clinton Campaign for colluding with Russia as well. S The Clinton's and their fake foundation were clear financial benefactors from multiple Russian entities to the tune of millions of dollars. There's also evidence to roll in the Ukraine and the Ukrainian government helping the Clinton Campaign and the DNC. Of course in the case of the Ukraine, all the pro Lib publications have fallen all over themselves to "prove" that there's nothing to that. It's amazing the amount of explaining that's occurred over the last two decades to protect the Clinton's. Everyone's coughing up lungs with smoke inhalation, but amazingly the ProgLib media just never seems to find that fire when it comes to the Clinton. Then of course there's the dossier, the use of paid foreign nationals who used Russian sources . . . and now the growing evidence that Clapper-Comey-Brennan concocted a scheme to ensure the dossier would make it into the public domain via a "legitimate" news source, CNN. In the case of Clapper-Comey-Brennan ProgLibs have done an historical 180 and are now all-in on leaders of entities that they used to despise (and still do if a 'Pub is President) . ProgLibs willl no doubt clamor to a whole new sub-set of the usual suspects who will attempt to explain in great detail how there's nothing to any of that. Clapper sure does get all jumpy, though. Then investigate or stop being a whiny batch of betas. Good lord its like an annoying mosquito.I don’t investigate. This is a blog, Dug
It is not clear how long the wiretap has been authorized, but NBC News has learned it was in place in the weeks leading up to the raids on Cohen's offices, hotel room, and home in early April, according to one person with direct knowledge.At least one phone call between a phone line associated with Cohen and the White House was intercepted, the person said.
He was only gonna destroy evidence of obstruction.
The leaked questions special counsel Robert Mueller wants to ask Trump in a prospective deposition are, if accurate, a sign that Mueller has spun out of control on Rosenstein’s watch. The questions suggest a free-floating investigation of the president’s motives, undertaken by a subordinate of the president. This is unlike any special-counsel investigation we’ve ever seen and represents a significant distortion of our system.****These queries grow out of an obstruction-of-justice probe centered, as far as we can tell, on Trump’s exercise of the legitimate powers of the presidency. Mueller is out to prove that Trump had ill intentions. But this is an inherently problematic inquiry that involves a subordinate second-guessing the president on highly political questions.It’s doubtful a president can be guilty of obstruction of justice in exercising his official duties, precisely because passing judgment on the lawful acts of a president is not a matter for prosecutors or the courts, but for the political process. It’s another matter if a president has engaged in actual criminal conduct, like suborning perjury or bribing witnesses, but there’s no indication Mueller is investigating anything of that nature.What makes Mueller different from previous special counsels is that his predecessors were investigating specific alleged crimes. As my National Review colleague Andrew McCarthy has repeatedly pointed out, Rod Rosenstein mentioned no crimes in his initial order to Mueller, a violation of the special-counsel regulations. He said only that Mueller should investigate COLUSION and anything related. (Rosenstein followed up 10 weeks later with a more specific memo to Mueller giving him more detailed authority.)
