Ex-Nat. Security Chief Flynn pleads guilty

First topic message reminder :

ABC News wrote:Flynn pleads guilty, reaches deal on charge of lying to FBI

MATTHEW MOSK, ADAM KELSEY and VERONICA STRACQUALURSI
December 1, 2017

Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, once a member of President Trump’s inner circle of advisers, has pleaded guilty in a deal with the Special Counsel investigating foreign meddling in the 2016 elections in which he admits to lying to the FBI about his back-channel conversations with the Russian ambassador.

Flynn’s plea signals the former top adviser to President Trump is now cooperating with Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team. A brief statement released by Mueller’s team Friday morning does not say what information Flynn has provided the government as part of the deal, but people familiar with the agreement told ABC News Friday he has made a decision to assist investigators.

The general told confidants about his decision to plead guilty in the last 24 hours, according to people close to Flynn, who say the former adviser feels President Trump has abandoned him and has agreed to answer questions about the president or anyone else.

Flynn was charged with lying to the FBI about the nature of his conversations with then-Russian ambassador to the United States Sergey Kislyak during the presidential transition. Those conversations led Russian officials to temper their response to increased U.S. sanctions, according to the charging documents. The charge means Flynn could face up to 5 years in prison.

Flynn becomes the latest and most-senior Trump associate to face charges in Mueller's probe and is scheduled to appear in court at 10:30 a.m. He has already been processed at the FBI Washington Field Office, according to FBI officials, where he was fingerprinted and photographed.

Flynn's lawyer meets with members of special counsel's team, raising specter of plea deal

Kushner met with special counsel earlier this month, conversation focused on Flynn

Flynn had initially resisted cooperating with the investigation, according to people close to the retired general, but he has been facing mounting legal debts and plans to sell his house to help defray costs.

He only recently learned the full scope of the charges he could potentially face. Last week, Trump lawyers received calls from Flynn’s lawyer Robert Kelner, alerting them that he could no longer participate in information exchanges with other possible Mueller targets, the first public indication that a plea deal was in the works.

On Monday, Kelner was spotted exiting a meeting at Mueller’s offices in Washington, ABC News reported.

Flynn is a decorated military officer who once headed the Defense Intelligence Agency and, after leaving government, spoke frequently at Trump campaign rallies. He began facing scrutiny after it was learned he took payment to attend a Russian television event, at which he appeared seated next to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

That scrutiny only increased after he took over as Trump’s national security adviser. He was ultimately forced to resign after just a few weeks on the job after it was revealed that he misled Vice President Mike Pence and other administration officials about his meeting with the Russian ambassador.

Flynn initially denied that he discussed U.S. sanctions placed on Russia with Kislyak, but transcripts of Flynn and Kislyak’s phone calls reviewed by Justice Department lawyers showed otherwise.

Flynn was paid over $500,000 by foreign clients for consulting work and speaking fees – including contracts he allegedly failed to list on applications for security clearances and financial disclosure forms. He also only belatedly disclosed lobbying work his firm engaged in on behalf of the Turkish government.

Trump reportedly attempted to persuade the FBI to drop its investigation into Flynn’s conduct. In a Feb. 14 meeting at the White House, Trump reportedly told then-FBI Director James Comey to “let this go.”

“I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,” Trump told Comey, according to a memo Comey wrote afterwards, which was later described by the New York Times. “He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”

On Oct. 30, two members of Trump's campaign staff, former campaign chair Paul Manafort and his longtime associate Rick Gates, were indicted on 12 counts brought by Mueller's team related to work done prior to joining the Trump campaign, including conspiracy against the U.S., conspiracy to launder money and serving as an unregistered agent of a foreign principal.

That same day, it was also revealed that a third Trump campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, pleaded guilty earlier in the month to making false statements to FBI agents probing his attempts to arrange a meeting between Russian officials and the campaign.

ABC News' Jack Date, Geneva Sands, Mike Levine, and Trish Turner contributed to this report.

First, Papadopoulos pleads guilty and admits he was colluding with Russians for the Trump Campaign. Then Manafort and his aide are indicted. Now, Flynn tips and goes state's evidence. Who is he giving evidence on? There ain't many above him...Trump Jr., son-in-law Kushner, AG Jeff Sessions...or the fat enchilada himself.

BREAKING: Anti-Trump FBI Agent Fired From Investigation Interviewed Flynn



Peter Strzok, the FBI agent who was fired from Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel’s Office investigative team for alleged bias against President Trump back in August, also supervised the FBI’s interviews of former National Security advisor Michael Flynn, according to Sara Carter of Hannity.com. After Strzok was removed from Mueller’s office, he was reassigned to the FBI's human resources department,

Two FBI agents interviewed Flynn on January 24 at the White House; one was Strzok and the other was reportedly a field supervisor in the “Russian Squad, at the FBI’s Washington Field Office,” according to a former intelligence official who was cognizant of the interview.

The intelligence official added:

With the recent revelation that Strzok was removed from the Special Counsel investigation for making anti-Trump text messages it seems likely that the accuracy and veracity of the 302 of Flynn’s interview as a whole should be reviewed and called into question. The most logical thing to happen would be to call the other FBI Special Agent present during Flynn’s interview before the Grand Jury to recount his version.

The intelligence official concluded, “Strzok’s allegiance to (Deputy Director Andrew) McCabe was unwavering and very well known.”

Yet a former senior Trump administration official countered that perspective, saying Strzok was one of the “best agents in the bureau, and has now become the latest victim in the Russia investigation. He was the top counterintelligence agent and an asset to the bureau and America.”

One source told Carter that McCabe had contacted Flynn by phone directly at the White House, and that McCabe told Flynn “some agents were heading over (to the White House) but Flynn thought it was part of the routine work the FBI had been doing and said they would be cleared at the gate. … It wasn’t until after they were already in (Flynn’s) office that he realized he was being formerly interviewed. He didn’t have an attorney with him.”

Strzok was removed from working with the Special Counsel’s Office after text messages between him and his alleged lover, FBI attorney Lisa Page, illuminated his hostility to Trump, according to The New York Times and The Washington Post.

Strzok was part of the team interviewing Hillary Clinton on July 2, 2016, just before then-FBI Director James Comey announced he would not recommend prosecution of Clinton in connection with her use, as secretary of state, of a private email server.

According to House investigators, Strzok was highly involved when the FBI received the infamous anti-Trump "dossier" and started a counterintelligence investigation into Russian meddling in the election. At one point, an informant told the House Intelligence Committee there was “documentary evidence” that Strzok was supposedly obstructing the House probe into the dossier.


http://www.dailywire.com/news/24298/anti-trump-fbi-agent-fired-investigation-later-was-hank-berrien

Wall Street Journal Editorial Board: Mueller Should Step Down

On Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal editorial board cleared the way for President Trump to fire special counsel Robert Mueller over allegations that Mueller’s investigation is stonewalling Congress, particularly with regard to fired FBI agent Peter Strzok. Strzok was let go this summer after Mueller learned about anti-Trump text messages Strzok had sent to his mistress; Strzok had been variously responsible for helping initiate the Trump-Russia collusion investigation, changing language in the prospective Hillary Clinton prosecution announcement to exonerate her of crimes, interviewing Hillary Clinton aides and then letting them off the hook for allegedly lying to the FBI, and interviewing former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. According to the Journal:

The latest news supports our view that Mr. Mueller is too conflicted to investigate the FBI and should step down in favor of someone more credible. The investigation would surely continue, though perhaps with someone who doesn't think his job includes protecting the FBI and Mr. Comey from answering questions about their role in the 2016 election.

This isn’t the first time the Journal called for Mueller to step down — they did so in October as well, based on the news that Hillary Clinton’s campaign had funded the compilation of the Fusion GPS’s Trump-Russia dossier, which was used as the basis to launch the investigation. That dossier gathered information from Russian government-associated actors.

So, should Mueller go?

That seems premature at best. Mueller is the one who fired Strzok; he didn’t allow him to continue working on the case after finding out about the anti-Trump messages. The problem here seems to be within the FBI — from fired FBI Director James Comey in particular, and among his underlings as well. But Mueller has little to do with that. Mueller had to use the resources and people at his disposal, and when he saw a problem, he did away with it.

With that said, Mueller’s investigation is obviously stretching at this point. It’s not clear that any evidence of collusion has been found; all the indictments thus far involve lying to the FBI, not underlying criminal activity. Perhaps Mueller will uncover something deeper. Perhaps not. But Mueller hasn’t done anything to warrant his ouster at this point, and if Trump were to fire him, he’d merely amplify Democrats’ suggestions that he is attempting to obstruct the investigation. Trump’s best move here is to continue to allow surrogates to paint the investigation as a wild goose chase, and to let Mueller continue his work. Trump’s supporters aren’t going to dump him over; absent serious evidence of real crime outside of fibbing to the FBI, Republicans won’t dump him over either. The real risk here isn’t to Trump. It’s to other members of his administration, and if Trump sees fit, he can pardon and/or commute their sentences.

Which means that those who should be scared right now are Trump associates who may have lied to the FBI — and Democrats who may not get what they want out of the investigation.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/24350/wall-street-journal-editorial-board-mueller-should-ben-shapiro

Mueller Credibility Plunges, Trump Probe Imploding

Sometimes, you can tell the big story of the day by what CNN is not covering — or by how the heavily biased network covers what they think is the big story.

"Trump's Russia defense in disarray," blared the CNN website headline on Tuesday morning.

So, clearly, the real story is just the opposite. Here's the real headline of the day: "Mueller Credibility Plunges, Trump Probe Imploding." Subhead: "Should he step down?"

Special prosecutor Robert Mueller was sold to America as an above-the-fray, non-partisan elder with the gravitas to handle investigating the President of the United States. As it turns out, Mueller has put together a pack of partisan lawyers, many of whom contributed campaign cash to Hillary Clinton and other Democrats; stonewalled demands from House lawmakers for information; and, most recently, secretly demoted a heavily biased FBI agent who's a hater of President Trump.

The special prosecutor's probe, which has already cost taxpayers some $5 million, hit a massive speed bump last week — the kind that snaps the axles and blows out the transmission. Reports emerged in both The Washington Post and The New York Times that a lead FBI investigator sent anti-Trump texts to a mistress. Weirdly, the investigator, Peter Strzok, wasn't fired, just quietly demoted to the Bureau's human resources department.

Then the shoes kept dropping — like Imelda Marcos having a yard sale. It turns out Strzok was one of former FBI Director James Comey's top lieutenants. From that perch, he played a key role in the early probe of alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

But then it was revealed that before that, Strzok led the investigation into Clinton’s email scandal and sat in on her "interview" with the Bureau (during which she was not under oath and for which no transcript or tape has ever been produced). And Strzok also led interviews with all of Clinton's top aides: Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin, Jake Sullivan and Heather Samuelson.

More.

"Electronic records show Peter Strzok, who led the investigation of Hillary Clinton's private email server as the No. 2 official in the counterintelligence division, changed Comey's earlier draft language describing Clinton's actions as 'grossly negligent' to 'extremely careless,' the sources said," CNN reported. (Good job, Clinton News Network!)

But wait, there's more. Much more.

Strzok was a "key figure in the chain of events when the bureau, in 2016, received the infamous anti-Trump 'dossier' and launched a counterintelligence investigation into Russian meddling in the election that ultimately came to encompass FISA surveillance of a Trump campaign associate," Fox News reported.

The dossier was a compilation of rumors and lies about Trump put together by an opposition research team contracted by Democrats called Fusion GPS. Fusion's records, obtained by House investigators, show the dossier was funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

And more.

Strzok interviewed former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, who last week pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. On January 24, Strzok and another agent interviewed Flynn, according to an intelligence official.

So Strzok just happened to be everywhere, his fingerprints on everything — Trump, Hillary, the dossier, Flynn. Quite a coincidence.

Back to Mueller. The special prosecutor didn't announce the termination of Strzok, nor his reassignment. Instead, word just leaked out. Both Mueller and the Justice Department kept the information of Strzok's biased texts from House investigators, who had been demanding more information for weeks — had even issued subpoenas.

"Oh, and the woman with whom he supposedly exchanged anti-Trump texts, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, worked for both Mr. Mueller and deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe, who was accused of a conflict of interest in the Clinton probe when it came out that Clinton allies had donated to the political campaign of Mr. McCabe’s wife," The Wall Street Journal reported. "The texts haven’t been publicly released, but it’s fair to assume their anti-Trump bias must be clear for Mr. Mueller to reassign such a senior agent."

While some praise Mueller for acting to remove a biased agent from his team, others see an attempt to bury the whole matter. The very underpinnings of the Trump-Russia collusion probe were predicated on the infamous dossier, which may also have led to the government wiretapping Trump officials (again, the House has demanded information about the surveillance, but both the FBI and Justice are stonewalling).

"Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mr. Mueller, is also playing an increasingly questionable role in resisting congressional oversight. Justice has floated multiple reasons for ignoring House subpoenas, none of them persuasive," the Journal said.

"First it claimed cooperation would hurt the Mueller probe, but his prosecutions are proceeding apace. Then Justice claimed that providing House investigators with classified material could hurt security or sources. But House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes has as broad a security clearance as nearly anyone in government. Recently Justice said it can’t interfere with a probe by the Justice Department Inspector General—as if an IG trumps congressional oversight."

So, despite CNN's take — "Trump's Russia defense in disarray" — it's really Mueller that has the huge problem. The avuncular, 73 year old who led the FBI for a dozen years is now so utterly compromised that there's no way he can continue to lead the probe into Trump and Russia.

But "Mueller must step down" is not a headline you're likely to read on the CNN website any time soon.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/24322/mueller-credibility-plunges-trump-probe-imploding-joseph-curl

BREAKING: Key FBI Agent Involved In Russia Investigation, Exonerating Hillary, Targeting Flynn, Also Sent Anti-Trump Text Messages, Fired By Mueller




On Monday, the FBI’s reputation with regard to its investigation into Hillary Clinton, Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, and its investigation into Trump officials including former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, took a serious hit. That hit came courtesy of FBI agent Peter Strzok, who was fired by Robert Mueller’s special investigation for alleged bias against President Trump. That bias was uncovered based on texts from Strzok apparently signaling his distaste for Trump.

Strzok wasn’t just any agent. Here are some of the events in which he was involved.

He Interviewed Hillary Clinton And Helped Exonerate Her. Not only did Strzok lead the investigation into Hillary’s email server, he interviewed Hillary herself. He also drafted the language responsible for allowing Hillary to escape prosecution — instead of labeling her behavior grossly negligent, he classified the behavior as “extreme carelessness.”

He Was Involved In The Investigation Into The So-Called Russian Dossier. According to Fox News, Strzok briefed the House Intelligence Committee on December 5, 2016, but an informant told the committee that Strzok was allegedly obstructing a probe into the dossier; Strzok was reportedly involved in the transmission of the dossier to the FBI.

He Interviewed Mike Flynn. On January 24, Strzok and one other agent interviewed Flynn, according to an intelligence official. According to one source, Strzok’s boss, Andrew McCabe, contacted Flynn by phone and said that “some agents were heading over (to the White House) but Flynn thought it was part of the routine work the FBI had been doing and said they would be cleared at the gate. … It wasn’t until after they were already in (Flynn’s) office that he realized he was being formerly interviewed. He didn’t have an attorney with him.”

It’s not clear whether Mueller fired Strzok upon finding out about his anti-Trump text messages; if so, that would actually boost Mueller’s credibility. And it’s also true that Strzok was a top agent, and would have been tasked by Comey to let Hillary off the hook. However, Strzok’s involvement in every area touching the collusion and Hillary investigations, and his known bias, throws the entire investigation into chaos.


http://www.dailywire.com/news/24301/breaking-key-fbi-agent-involved-russia-ben-shapiro

anytime you wanna bow out quill is fine by me

Smelly's outdoing Didge today...

Just look at all that unabridged and un-edited c&p'ing..

You lazy sod, Smelly' !

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Smelly's outdoing Didge today...

Just look at all that unabridged and un-edited c&p'ing..

You lazy sod,  Smelly'  !

no point in making an effort anymore.

talking to quill is like talking to a brick wall, actually you would get more sense from a brick wall

so why bother with the cretin when copy and paste will do a better job??

smelly-bandit wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Smelly's outdoing Didge today...

Just look at all that unabridged and un-edited c&p'ing..

You lazy sod,  Smelly'  !

no point in making an effort anymore.

talking to quill is like talking to a brick wall, actually you would get more sense from a brick wall

so why bother with the cretin when copy and paste will do a better job??

As opposed to thinking for yourself?  Conservatives will do anything to avoid original thinking.  It hurts them to exercise their mind.

That brick wall you are up against are blocks of fact--reality closing in, if you will.  The Trump people are apoplectic over the methodical way that the Mueller team is bringing the walls in around them.  What you see in your RW media excerpts are desperate pleas--notably by Sean Hannity--to make the hurt go away.  The exegesis you have just posted is a litany of ouches and moans, not intelligent arguments.  

Strzok was removed from the investigation merely on the appearance of impropriety, not for any wrongdoing.  The ABA former Model Code includes Canon 9, which stated: “A Lawyer Should Avoid Even the Appearance of Impropriety.”  So Strzok was removed for the sake of appearances.  The move is a signature of the fastidious piety with which Mueller is going about his job.

Once again, your article is representative of the kind of anxiety that guilty people undergo.  As the walls close, they abandon the facts, they abandon the law, and feverishly start cursing the sky and all beneath it.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

no point in making an effort anymore.

talking to quill is like talking to a brick wall, actually you would get more sense from a brick wall

so why bother with the cretin when copy and paste will do a better job??

As opposed to thinking for yourself?  Conservatives will do anything to avoid original thinking.  It hurts them to exercise their mind.

That brick wall you are up against are blocks of fact--reality closing in, if you will.  The Trump people are apoplectic over the methodical way that the Mueller team is bringing the walls in around them.  What you see in your RW media excerpts are desperate pleas--notably by Sean Hannity--to make the hurt go away.  The exegesis you have just posted is a litany of ouches and moans, not intelligent arguments.  

Strzok was removed from the investigation merely on the appearance of impropriety, not for any wrongdoing.  The ABA former Model Code includes Canon 9, which stated: “A Lawyer Should Avoid Even the Appearance of Impropriety.”  So Strzok was removed for the sake of appearances.  The move is a signature of the fastidious piety with which Mueller is going about his job.

Once again, your article is representative of the kind of anxiety that guilty people undergo.  As the walls close, they abandon the facts, they abandon the law, and feverishly start cursing the sky and all beneath it.

ive tried to engage you quill with my own thinking but you simply ignore the points i raise.

i cant force you to engage if all you want to do is run for cover.

hey ho

The Democrats Just Tried To Vote To Impeach Trump. Here Are The Pathetic Results.

On Wednesday, House Democrats finally had their moment to do what they've been vowing to do since Hillary Clinton's team announced that she wasn't ready to take the stage to address her historic upset loss: they got to impeach President Trump. But it turns out that they didn't quite have the numbers they were hoping for. In fact they were a few hundred short.

In a move he described as one of the "greatest moments" of his life, Texas Democrat Rep. Al Green brought dead-on-arrival articles of impeachment against Trump on Wednesday. After reading all eight pages, in which he called Trump "unfit" to be president and accused him of creating "discord," flaming hatred, and committing "high misdemeanors," the House voted 364-58 to kill the ill-advised effort.

Somehow failing to throw in the Democrats' "collusion" narrative, as the Texas Tribune notes, Green laid out a laundry list of what he says is evidence that Trump is harming America, including Trump blasting the "son of a b****" NFL players who continue to kneel for the national anthem. Some of Trump's other impeachable offenses, Green suggested, was not being critical enough of the white supremacists involved in the tragic Charlottesville protests and his administration's supposed failure to adequately respond to Hurricane Maria's devastation of Puerto Rico. Green even threw in the recent "anti-Muslim" videos Trump retweeted from a far-right British group for good measure.

Green's initial announcement that he would seek to bring articles of impeachment focused entirely on the "collusion" and "obstruction" narratives. "President Trump has committed an act for which he should be charged by the U.S. House of Representatives," said Green. "The act is the obstruction of a lawful investigation of the President’s campaign ties to Russian influence in his 2016 Presidential Election."

Among those who voted against Green's articles were the two leading House Democrats, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Whip Steny Hoyer, who issued a joint statement explaining that while there are "legitimate" reasons to question Trump's "fitness to lead this nation," now is not the time to try to take Trump down:

Congress faces a vast set of urgent, overdue priorities for the American people. Democrats are firmly focused on taking real, effective steps to improve the lives of hard-working Americans and defeating Republicans’ cruel barrage of attacks on the middle class. ... This President has made statements and taken actions that are beyond the pale for most Americans, embracing those who espouse hatred and division while promoting policies that would harm our economy and undermine our national security. Legitimate questions have been raised about his fitness to lead this nation. Right now, Congressional committees continue to be deeply engaged in investigations into the President’s actions both before and after his inauguration. The special counsel’s investigation is moving forward as well, and those inquiries should be allowed to continue. Now is not the time to consider articles of impeachment.

The Texas Tribune highlights that even most of Green's fellow Texas Democrats couldn't get behind the effort, only three of them, including Sheila Jackson Lee, voting with him.

Green issued his own statement following the stunt, declaring that he held no "animus" for his fellow Democrats who voted against his articles and vowing to "continue to speak out against the hatred and hostility that is invading our national discourse."

While far more Democrats voted against impeaching Trump than for it on Wednesday, the party is clearly working toward impeachment should they manage to win the House in 2018. As Pelosi and Hoyer's statement suggests, Democrats are hoping to use special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Trump and his associates to provide them a rationale for impeachment if they're successful in the next election cycle.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/24413/democrats-just-tried-vote-impeach-trump-here-are-james-barrett

Yes, in a Republican filled Congress, it won't work.  

The hope is that next year the Divided States will oust the Republicans, like they did recently in Virginia.  Then impeachment will become a roller coaster.

You're taking a beating here Quill

Your go to source of information has once again been caught out with fake news

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5162517/Trump-hits-CNN-vicious-fake-news-report.html

smelly-bandit wrote:You're taking a beating here Quill

Your go to source of information has once again been caught out with fake news

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5162517/Trump-hits-CNN-vicious-fake-news-report.html

You're big on narrating about your situation. But it's all fiction.  

I'm just being honest.  We either oust the Republicans, or we're back to working for the PSA.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:You're taking a beating here Quill

Your go to source of information has once again been caught out with fake news

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5162517/Trump-hits-CNN-vicious-fake-news-report.html

You're big on narrating about your situation.  But it's all fiction.  

I'm just being honest.  We either oust the Republicans, or we're back to working for the PSA.

Well you have to admit, the momentum we saw earlier has been lost, the initiative surrendered.

Even you have gone from "impeachment is nigh" to "mmmmmmmm best we dust off plan B"

Like I said before, why do you need a plan B if you are so sure that trumps impeachment is imminent???

I'd say stick to plan B, at least there Is a plan B, there is however no collusion.

sb wrote:Well you have to admit, the momentum we saw earlier has been lost, the initiative surrendered.

Even you have gone from "impeachment is nigh" to "mmmmmmmm best we dust off plan B"

Like I said before, why do you need a plan B if you are so sure that trumps impeachment is imminent???

I'd say stick to plan B, at least there Is a plan B, there is however no collusion.

I believe I started out saying that.  Trump and the white nationalists are the incentive for the good guys wanting to divorce the rest of the nation. But it's a sliding scale.

It's not a categorical choice.  Either we are incentivized to correct the course of the country, or we apply the same momentum to a separate promised land, fulfilling the original promise of the founding fathers.  Plan 'B' is already built in.

And yes, there were at least two conspiracies between Trump and the Russians.  One to rig the election.  Another to lift sanctions.

Original Quill wrote:

sb wrote:Well you have to admit, the momentum we saw earlier has been lost, the initiative surrendered.

Even you have gone from "impeachment is nigh" to "mmmmmmmm best we dust off plan B"

Like I said before, why do you need a plan B if you are so sure that trumps impeachment is imminent???

I'd say stick to plan B, at least there Is a plan B, there is however no collusion.

I believe I started out saying that.  Trump and the white nationalists are the incentive for the good guys wanting to divorce the rest of the nation.

It's not a categorical choice.  Either we are incentivized to correct the course of the country, or we apply the same momentum to a separate promised land, fulfilling the original promise of the founding fathers.  Plan 'B' is already built in.

And yes, there were at least two conspiracies between Trump and the Russians.  One to rig the election.  Another to lift sanctions.

Isn't that what elections are for??

Correcting the course of the country??

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I believe I started out saying that.  Trump and the white nationalists are the incentive for the good guys wanting to divorce the rest of the nation.

It's not a categorical choice.  Either we are incentivized to correct the course of the country, or we apply the same momentum to a separate promised land, fulfilling the original promise of the founding fathers.  Plan 'B' is already built in.

And yes, there were at least two conspiracies between Trump and the Russians.  One to rig the election.  Another to lift sanctions.

Isn't that what elections are for??

Correcting the course of the country??

Not on creed issues.

But you raise a good point. Is racism an election issue, or is it a creed issue? The notion of dividing the nation turns on that very question. What good is a whole nation, festering in the cauldron of racism?

Perhaps that is the very point on which America is teetering.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Isn't that what elections are for??

Correcting the course of the country??

Not on creed issues.  

But you raise a good point.  Is racism an election issue, or is it a creed issue?  The notion of dividing the nation turns on that very question.  What good is a whole nation, festering in the cauldron of racism?

Perhaps that is the very point on which America is teetering.

That wasn't the point I was making.

The point I was making is that your pas pipe dream is nothing but surrender.

Capitulation to what you perceived as institutional racism across America, you've given up, running away instead of sticking around to change it.

You've realised you're arguments are not convincing anyone so you're taking your toys and going.

Boo hoo, you big girls blouse

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Not on creed issues.  

But you raise a good point.  Is racism an election issue, or is it a creed issue?  The notion of dividing the nation turns on that very question.  What good is a whole nation, festering in the cauldron of racism?

Perhaps that is the very point on which America is teetering.

That wasn't the point I was making.

The point I was making is that your pas pipe dream is nothing but surrender.

Capitulation to what you perceived as institutional racism across America, you've given up, running away instead of sticking around to change it.

Do you play chess, Russ? It's a great chess move. But certain circumstances have to be perfect, as I've said. Trump must continue in office, and conditions have to deteriorate to the point that the population, as a whole, wants the result. Then, we are there and, swoooooop...

sb wrote:You've realised you're arguments are not convincing anyone so you're taking your toys and going.

Boo hoo, you big girls blouse

Ah-hah...you seemed to have realized I'm onto something. But, as with all chess gambits, the other side has to make the right moves. It's unpredictable.

Think of it as 10-moves ahead of the rednecks.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

That wasn't the point I was making.

The point I was making is that your pas pipe dream is nothing but surrender.

Capitulation to what you perceived as institutional racism across America, you've given up, running away instead of sticking around to change it.

Do you play chess, Russ?  It's a great chess move.  But certain circumstances have to be perfect, as I've said.  Trump must continue in office, and conditions have to deteriorate to the point that the population, as a whole, wants the result.  Then, we are there and, swoooooop...

sb wrote:You've realised you're arguments are not convincing anyone so you're taking your toys and going.

Boo hoo, you big girls blouse

Ah-hah...you seemed to have realized I'm onto something.  But, as with all chess gambits, the other side has to make the right moves.  It's unpredictable.

Think of it as 10-moves ahead of the rednecks.

Weren't ten moves ahead of the Russians though were you??

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

That wasn't the point I was making.

The point I was making is that your pas pipe dream is nothing but surrender.

Capitulation to what you perceived as institutional racism across America, you've given up, running away instead of sticking around to change it.

Do you play chess, Russ?  It's a great chess move.  But certain circumstances have to be perfect, as I've said.  Trump must continue in office, and conditions have to deteriorate to the point that the population, as a whole, wants the result.  Then, we are there and, swoooooop...

sb wrote:You've realised you're arguments are not convincing anyone so you're taking your toys and going.

Boo hoo, you big girls blouse

Ah-hah...you seemed to have realized I'm onto something.  But, as with all chess gambits, the other side has to make the right moves.  It's unpredictable.

Think of it as 10-moves ahead of the rednecks.

Weren't ten moves ahead of the Russians though were you??

You do realize that Russia is fucking with your country as well, don't you?

Maybe you'll wake up before it's too late.

Ben Reilly wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Weren't ten moves ahead of the Russians though were you??

You do realize that Russia is fucking with your country as well, don't you?

Maybe you'll wake up before it's too late.

In what way??

If you say Brexit then you're wrong because Brexit is the best thing to happen to the UK

If you say the elections, well then you're wrong again because if Russia really wanted to screw the UK up they would have made it so Corbyn won the elections.

Sorry ben, but if Russia is fucking with the UK then they are making it better than our own politicians are.

So let them crack on I say

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Do you play chess, Russ?  It's a great chess move.  But certain circumstances have to be perfect, as I've said.  Trump must continue in office, and conditions have to deteriorate to the point that the population, as a whole, wants the result.  Then, we are there and, swoooooop...



Ah-hah...you seemed to have realized I'm onto something.  But, as with all chess gambits, the other side has to make the right moves.  It's unpredictable.

Think of it as 10-moves ahead of the rednecks.

Weren't ten moves ahead of the Russians though were you??

It was a massive surprise.

No one was ten steps ahead...least of all the Russians.  The Russians were amazed when it worked they didn't know what to do.  In fact, it was when they were human beings that they got caught.  (Occasionally, they spoke Russian to one another, and left tell-tale software that was known to be of Russian origin.)

Once they were found out, all threads led back to GRU and FSU sources.  Otherwise, it would have worked perfectly. In Putin's little circle it caused a huge rift. Putin's press spokesman, who headed the project, was elated. However, Putin's chief-of-staff was vehemently against it, and he was relieved of his job.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Weren't ten moves ahead of the Russians though were you??

It was a massive surprise.

No one was ten steps ahead...least of all the Russians.  The Russians were amazed when it worked they didn't know what to do.  In fact, it was when they were human beings that they got caught.  (Occasionally, they spoke Russian to one another, and left tell-tale software that was known to be of Russian origin.)

Once they were found out, all threads led back to GRU and FSU sources.  Otherwise, it would have worked perfectly.  In Putin's little circle it caused a huge rift.  Putin's press spokesman, who headed the project, was elated.  However, Putin's chief-of-staff was vehemently against it, and he was relieved of his job.

Russians speaking to other Russians in Russian??

Well that's sold it for me,you have totally convince me Quill, trump is definitely guilt of something

Tell the mule that smelly-bandit says he has a green light to impeach trump

The Trump connection goes through Flynn, Manafort and Carter Page.  They were independent recruits, already victims of Kompromat.  Russians work this way.

It's difficult to ascertain who conceived of the plot to run Trump--also, already a victim of Kompromat--for president...Republicans or Russians.  However, when Trump was in place, Russia hand-picked 'dependable' people to fill roles, selecting people who were already 'in the fold'.  That's why, today, the Trump people constantly seek back channel communications with the Kremlin; they want their orders to come from the top directly.

Collusion, which is not a legal term, is another word for conspiracy.  Conspiracy to break laws, obviously draws into question what laws(?).  There are two areas of interest for the Russians: (1) hacking, which is a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), in order to pull off the gambit; and (2) conspiracy to sell official acts, which would be the lifting of sanctions which have hurt Russian so much.

Obviously, the hacking had to have inside men, and Mueller is pursuing that, looking into the June 9th meeting at Trump Tower and interactions between the Trump sons and the Russians.  They are thought to have been 'coaching' the Russian IRA people as to where to place their ads, per where they were strategically needed to get votes.

The selling of official acts leads directly to Flynn's efforts to lift sanctions...OMG, Flynn was actually recorded having those conversations with Kislyak, after the election.  It was the basis of his firing.  It is undisputed that on the day Trump took office the WH issued orders to the State Department to commence procedures lifting the sanctions (State alerted Congress, which intervened and said no-no-no).

Amazing, innit?  One of the greatest espionage stories of all time, happening right under our noses.  Today, it's falling apart because it's been ratted out by Christopher Steele.  Thank god a competent British SIS agent (retired) was lurking about, watching in the shadows.

The mule is obviously not that good at his job.

If all this evidence is so evident then why hasn't the mule done his job??

smelly-bandit wrote:The mule is obviously not that good at his job.

If all this evidence is so evident then why hasn't the mule done his job?

Mueller is doing great.  Keep in mind that the bad guys (WH) are working too.  So far, we've only discussed conspiracy.  There is also the obstruction of justice case, and that activity is on-going, with active push back.  It's happening as Mueller prosecutes, so it's not all full speed ahead.

But look at the progress so far.  It took Watergate prosecutors three years to investigate Nixon's crimes.  Mueller has had only 8-months, and look ^ what has been accomplished.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:The mule is obviously not that good at his job.

If all this evidence is so evident then why hasn't the mule done his job?

Mueller is doing great.  Keep in mind that the bad guys (WH) are working too.  So far, we've only discussed conspiracy.  There is also the obstruction of justice case, and that activity is on-going, with active push back.  It's happening as Mueller prosecutes, so it's not all full speed ahead.

But look at the progress so far.  It took Watergate prosecutors three years to investigate Nixon's crimes.  Mueller has had only 8-months, and look ^ what has been accomplished.

Um

What has been accomplished??

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Mueller is doing great.  Keep in mind that the bad guys (WH) are working too.  So far, we've only discussed conspiracy.  There is also the obstruction of justice case, and that activity is on-going, with active push back.  It's happening as Mueller prosecutes, so it's not all full speed ahead.

But look at the progress so far.  It took Watergate prosecutors three years to investigate Nixon's crimes.  Mueller has had only 8-months, and look ^ what has been accomplished.

Um

What has been accomplished??

Four indictments. Two convictions. And the clean-up is progressing nicely.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Um

What has been accomplished??

Four indictments.  Two convictions.  And the clean-up is progressing nicely.

The cleanup, trumps the cleanup??

I thought trump was the main effort??

Vermont Senator and former presidential candidate Bernie Sanders says that, unlike some of his Democratic colleagues, he's not ready to talk about impeaching Fake President Trump just yet.

Speaking to NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday morning, Sanders says that he believes Democrats like Rep. Al Green (TX), whose impeachment effort failed spectacularly last week, are jumping the gun — and ruining future efforts to discredit and demote the Republican president.

“I think there is a process that has to be followed. I think Mr. Mueller is doing a very good job on his investigation, and if Mueller brings forth the clear evidence that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, I think you have grounds for impeachment,” Sanders said.

"But I think jumping the gun does nobody any good,” he continued. “You have to bring the American people onto this issue. You don’t want to make it into a partisan issue.”

It may be too late to avoid making impeachment talk a "partisan issue," even if Bernie Sanders wants to appear reasonable on the matter. Of the 58 members of Congress who voted to bring articles of impeachment to the floor, all 58 were Democrats. Although Republicans may disagree with the president, few are demanding he step down.

As for Mueller, despite finding some evidence of communication between Trump transition team members and Russian officials, the special counsel has yet to produce evidence that the Trump operation colluded with the Russians to influence the election itself. While Russia certainly appears to have tried to make inroads, the Trump campaign seemed oblivious to its efforts.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/24538/bernie-sanders-were-not-there-right-now-emily-zanotti?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Four indictments.  Two convictions.  And the clean-up is progressing nicely.

The cleanup, trumps the cleanup??

I thought trump was the main effort??

He's the headliner show, unless we can include Putin. Maybe I should have said the 'build-up' is progressing, as we are using the rock concert metaphor.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

The cleanup, trumps the cleanup??

I thought trump was the main effort??

He's the headliner show, unless we can include Putin.  Maybe I should have said the 'build-up' is progressing, as we are using the rock concert metaphor.

Youre going after putin now??

Did you ever encounter Phil?? The lunatic they keep chained up under the stairs??

You remind me of him.

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

He's the headliner show, unless we can include Putin.  Maybe I should have said the 'build-up' is progressing, as we are using the rock concert metaphor.

Youre going after putin now??

Did you ever encounter Phil?? The lunatic they keep chained up under the stairs??

You remind me of him.

Phil........Again?

HoratioTarr wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Youre going after putin now??

Did you ever encounter Phil?? The lunatic they keep chained up under the stairs??

You remind me of him.

Phil........Again?

That's the one

CNN Walks Back Previous Report Suggesting Jeff Sessions Colluded With Russia

On Monday, CNN quietly walked back a report from May on security clearance forms submitted by Attorney General Jeff Sessions that did not list his prior contacts with Russian officials — a story that CNN framed as possible evidence of collusion between Trump campaign officials and Russian officials.

CNN’s May report said that Sessions did not report his interactions with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak last year on forms that required him to list “any contact” that he had with any member of a “foreign government” within the previous seven years, as first reported by The Daily Caller.

CNN’s report painted the revelation as possible evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and members of the Russian government. The network stated Sessions was under “withering criticism from Democrats” over not listing his interactions with Kislyak and noted, “Sessions could be a witness before the House and Senate intelligence panels as part of their ongoing probes into potential Trump campaign collusion with Russia.”

Ian Prior, Principal Deputy Director of Public Affairs at the Department of Justice (DOJ), rebuffed CNN’s report at the time, noting that Sessions consulted the proper officials who advised him to fill out the forms the way that he did.

“In filling out the SF-86 form, the Attorney General's staff consulted with those familiar with the process, as well as the FBI investigator handling the background check, and was instructed not to list meetings with foreign dignitaries and their staff connected with his Senate activities,” Prior said.

CNN, however, reported that Mark Zaid, a Washington attorney who specializes in national security law, claimed that the DOJ was wrong

“My interpretation is that a member of Congress would still have to reveal the appropriate foreign government contacts notwithstanding it was on official business,” Zaid said.

On Monday, CNN reported that the DOJ was correct:

A newly released document shows that the FBI told an aide to Attorney General Jeff Sessions that Sessions wasn't required to disclose foreign contacts that occurred in the course of carrying out his government duties when he was a senator.

The FBI email from March bolsters the explanation by the Justice Department for why Sessions didn't disclose contacts with the Russian ambassador in his application for a US security clearance. When the omission of the foreign contacts on the form was first reported by CNN in May, the Justice Department said Sessions' office was advised by the FBI that he didn't need to disclose the meetings.

CNN had to issue a major retraction in another one of their reports on Friday after the network botched the timeline on a story as they tried to nail Donald Trump Jr. for colluding with WikiLeaks — something that did not happen

https://www.dailywire.com/news/24561/cnn-walks-back-previous-report-suggesting-jeff-ryan-saavedra?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro

Coming apart at the seams

Oh dear oh dear oh dear

Shit just keeps getting worse and worse for you guys don't it?

I'll say it again NO IMPEACHMENT FOR TRUMP

Could go either way. Whichever...I've got the answer.

Original Quill wrote:Could go either way.  Whichever...I've got the answer.

not looking good for meuller is it??

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Could go either way.  Whichever...I've got the answer.

not looking good for meuller is it??

Um...two convictions, four indictments...and the year isn't over yet?  All in less than eight months?  Not bad for a country boy.

May draw your attention to Trump's good friend, Roger Stone:

Politico wrote:Politics
It’s ‘Painfully Obvious’ Trump Will Be Charged by Mueller, Says President’s Ally Roger Stone
December 13, 2017, Newsweek  Marie Solis,

Updated | One of Failing Cheeto-Faced Ferret-Wearing Shit Gibbon's [edit: err...that would be the pussy-grabber, Don's] longtime allies is foretelling doom for the commander in chief, who is embroiled in multiple controversies that threaten his office.

Political strategist Roger Stone said it's only a matter of time before special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe and the Trump sexual misconduct allegations that number well into the double digits catch up to the president.

"It’s painfully obvious Mueller will bring charges," Stone told Vanity Fair. "The theory is Mueller will indict him on some process-related matter.... The only people who don’t seem to know it are [Trump lawyers] Ty Cobb, [John] Dowd, and the president."

Also, Stone said it's telling that members of Trump's cabinet, including Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, seem to be turning against him. During a Sunday interview on CBS's Face the Nation, Haley said the 19 women who have accused Trump of sexual harassment or assault "should be heard" and "dealt with." Two unidentified sources later told the Associated Press that the president was angry about her comments—as he should be, Stone told Vanity Fair.

“Nikki Haley stuck a knife in his back," he said.

Stone said he has been compiling anecdotes about the political strife that has punctuated Trump's presidency into a book to be called The Fall of Trump, reportedly the first in a series he'll publish with Skyhorse Publishing. Stone said he's been adding to the book "as we go along" in Trump's presidency.

Stone, however, may also be sticking a knife in the president's back. The political consultant has a long history of self-promotion, from his many conspiracy theorist books to his radio show to his eponymous blog StoneColdTruth.com.

Stone stepped away from Trump's presidential campaign in 2015, though there was some dispute about whether he left of his own volition or was fired by Trump's campaign aides, who believed Stone had "sought attention for himself instead of the candidate," according to The Washington Post.

Since then, Stone has been in the public spotlight for calling CNN commentator Ana Navarro "an entitled diva bitch" on Twitter and host Don Lemon a "buffoon." The platform suspended his account in October.

A month before, Stone appeared at a closed-door hearing before the House committee investigating Russia's involvement in the 2016 election. Publicly, he accused lawmakers of blowing out of proportion the allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, and of spreading "falsehoods, misstatements and misimpressions" about the campaign's ties to Russia.

"Multiple members of this committee have made false allegations against me in public session in order to ensure that these bogus charges received maximum media coverage," Stone said in a statement addressing the intelligence committee. "Now, however, you deny me the opportunity to respond to these charges in the same open forum. This is cowardice."

Even though Stone may still believe the allegations against Trump's campaign staff and current administration are "bogus," he said things are looking far worse for Trump than the president can imagine—at least, that's what he'll write in his book, which could become just one of the many presidential tell-alls Stone has published to help sustain his career.

"I hope it’s a book I don’t have to publish," Stone said. "I just don’t think Trump is being told the truth about how bad things are."

This article was first written by Newsweek
https://www.yahoo.com/news/apos-painfully-obvious-trump-charged-185028681.html

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

not looking good for meuller is it??

Um...two convictions, four indictments...and the year isn't over yet?  All in less than eight months?  Not bad for a country boy.

May draw your attention to Trump's good friend, Roger Stone:

Politico wrote:Politics
It’s ‘Painfully Obvious’ Trump Will Be Charged by Mueller, Says President’s Ally Roger Stone
December 13, 2017, Newsweek  Marie Solis,

Updated | One of Failing Cheeto-Faced Ferret-Wearing Shit Gibbon's [edit: err...that would be the pussy-grabber, Don's] longtime allies is foretelling doom for the commander in chief, who is embroiled in multiple controversies that threaten his office.

Political strategist Roger Stone said it's only a matter of time before special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe and the Trump sexual misconduct allegations that number well into the double digits catch up to the president.

"It’s painfully obvious Mueller will bring charges," Stone told Vanity Fair. "The theory is Mueller will indict him on some process-related matter.... The only people who don’t seem to know it are [Trump lawyers] Ty Cobb, [John] Dowd, and the president."

Also, Stone said it's telling that members of Trump's cabinet, including Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, seem to be turning against him. During a Sunday interview on CBS's Face the Nation, Haley said the 19 women who have accused Trump of sexual harassment or assault "should be heard" and "dealt with." Two unidentified sources later told the Associated Press that the president was angry about her comments—as he should be, Stone told Vanity Fair.

“Nikki Haley stuck a knife in his back," he said.

Stone said he has been compiling anecdotes about the political strife that has punctuated Trump's presidency into a book to be called The Fall of Trump, reportedly the first in a series he'll publish with Skyhorse Publishing. Stone said he's been adding to the book "as we go along" in Trump's presidency.

Stone, however, may also be sticking a knife in the president's back. The political consultant has a long history of self-promotion, from his many conspiracy theorist books to his radio show to his eponymous blog StoneColdTruth.com.

Stone stepped away from Trump's presidential campaign in 2015, though there was some dispute about whether he left of his own volition or was fired by Trump's campaign aides, who believed Stone had "sought attention for himself instead of the candidate," according to The Washington Post.

Since then, Stone has been in the public spotlight for calling CNN commentator Ana Navarro "an entitled diva bitch" on Twitter and host Don Lemon a "buffoon." The platform suspended his account in October.

A month before, Stone appeared at a closed-door hearing before the House committee investigating Russia's involvement in the 2016 election. Publicly, he accused lawmakers of blowing out of proportion the allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, and of spreading "falsehoods, misstatements and misimpressions" about the campaign's ties to Russia.

"Multiple members of this committee have made false allegations against me in public session in order to ensure that these bogus charges received maximum media coverage," Stone said in a statement addressing the intelligence committee. "Now, however, you deny me the opportunity to respond to these charges in the same open forum. This is cowardice."

Even though Stone may still believe the allegations against Trump's campaign staff and current administration are "bogus," he said things are looking far worse for Trump than the president can imagine—at least, that's what he'll write in his book, which could become just one of the many presidential tell-alls Stone has published to help sustain his career.

"I hope it’s a book I don’t have to publish," Stone said. "I just don’t think Trump is being told the truth about how bad things are."

This article was first written by Newsweek
https://www.yahoo.com/news/apos-painfully-obvious-trump-charged-185028681.html

he could have ten indictments and 50 convictions, none of them relate to trump colluding with the Russians

sb wrote:he could have ten indictments and 50 convictions, none of them relate to trump colluding with the Russians

They are all interconnected.

Here's Why Trump Would Be Making A HUGE Mistake In Killing The Mueller Probe

Should God Emperor Trump kill or impede the Mueller investigation?

The calls to do so have been growing louder after the revelation of new text messages between FBI top agent Peter Strzok and his FBI paramour, Lisa Page. As I wrote two days ago, Strzok’s anti-Trump texts aren’t particularly troublesome — government agencies have opinions on politicians — but one text regarding an “insurance policy” in case of a Trump win certainly is. Here’s the text message:

   I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in [deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe’s] office that there's no way he gets elected -- but I'm afraid we can't take that risk. It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40…

That sounds like a setup. And Strzok was both involved in the Hillary Clinton email investigation and initiation of the Trump-Russia probe — plus he was part of Mueller’s investigative team until the text messages were unearthed.

Now we’re hearing rumors that the Trump administration might fire McCabe:

And, of course,  God Emperor Trump signaled this morning that he might pardon former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, which would effectively end any cooperation between Flynn and the FBI.

So, should Trump move here?

No, he most certainly should not.

Why should he? He’s winning. Right now, a majority of the American public believes that Mueller has a conflict of interest thanks to his relationship with former FBI director James Comey. That’s thanks to a bevy of stories about members of the Mueller team with serious connections to high-ranking Democrats and serious bias against Trump. Furthermore, every charged leveled so far has nothing to do with election collusion, including Flynn’s guilty plea. In other words, this investigation’s legitimacy may already be fatally wounded.

In 1998, the Ken Starr investigation was fatally wounded publicly before it reached a conclusion. By February 1998, 62% of Americans thought Bill Clinton was hiding something, but 42% of Americans had an unfavorable opinion of Starr, as opposed to 25% who had a positive opinion. Fully 58% of Americans thought Starr should stop his investigation. That’s even though Starr did his due diligence and demonstrated that the president had perjured himself, a fact Clinton admitted by August 1998. A discredited investigation does little or no damage to a sitting president, no matter the outcome.

Trump should remember that. Clinton didn’t just survive impeachment. It drove his popularity skyward. Trump doesn’t have to stop Mueller. Mueller has done a bang-up job stopping himself.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/24743/heres-why-trump-would-be-making-huge-mistake-ben-shapiro

I agree, it would be foolish to even threaten Mueller.  Mueller has already made his case of conspiracy.  Listen:



That's the invitation to conspiracy right there.  Russia fulfilled the invitation, and made the overt act.  An agreement can be made by a unilateral offer and acceptance.

Flynn testimony will be icing on the cake.

Original Quill wrote:I agree, it would be foolish to even threaten Mueller.  Mueller has already made his case of conspiracy.  Listen:



That's the invitation to conspiracy right there.  Russia fulfilled the invitation, and made the overt act.  An agreement can be made by a unilateral offer and acceptance.

Flynn testimony will be icing on the cake.

Sure sure.

Then why hasn't it been done??

Oh yeah i forgot we are waiting for the Democrats to take the Senate.

So muller isn't interested in crime he is interested in trumps impeachment, which makes this a political witch hunt

His credibility is getting worse and worse.

The investigation will collapse soon, putin has decreed it so

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:I agree, it would be foolish to even threaten Mueller.  Mueller has already made his case of conspiracy.  Listen:



That's the invitation to conspiracy right there.  Russia fulfilled the invitation, and made the overt act.  An agreement can be made by a unilateral offer and acceptance.

Flynn testimony will be icing on the cake.

Sure sure.

Then why hasn't it been done??

Oh yeah i forgot we are waiting for the Democrats to take the Senate.

So muller isn't interested in crime he is interested in trumps impeachment, which makes this a political witch hunt

Or, American justice.  Look, the Constitution dictates the remedy, not Mueller.  If you don't like it, take it up with the founders.

sb wrote:His credibility is getting worse and worse.

The investigation will collapse soon, putin has decreed it so

The whines and moans in the White House are what are getting worse and worse.  Every time you hear the hue 'n cry to criticize Mueller, you know he's getting closer, or has just nailed a son or son-in-law.

That's what you said months ago

smelly-bandit wrote:That's what you said months ago

Yep. As true now as it was then. Takes time, worry-boy. TICK--TOCK.