Is that a record? The small crowds and Trumps reaction portended all of this...
117 days from Inauguration to Special Counsel
- Thread starter davidallen
- Start date
Probably. Should have been done earlier IMO. I'm a fan of people paying for crimes they committed regardless of party, especially regardless of party. It's much more refreshing than the corrupt secret tarmac meeting shitshow that Barry's DOJ was. How many people pled the 5th and got immunity on how many different scandals but the left just screamed "right wing conspiracy?" Disgusting. And I'm not talking Benghazi, which was just a complete political embarrassment. I'm talking classified emails and IRS.
Kudos to the government for being above board for the first time in nearly a decade.
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
Wow. Just wow. Hillary and company were complete idiots. No wonder Obama wanted to try to deflect by calling ISIS the JV team. I had not previously seen anything about this. I wonder why...
Shocking that the kremlin's propoganda arm is writing hit pieces against U.S. government and business.
Russia is literally your get out of jail free card on errrrrrrrrthing now!
Buffonery
Yes, that must be it. No way no how were Hillary and Barry complete idiots. Not never. Brilliant strategies in Libya, Iraq, and Syria. Brilliant! Let's arm and help terrorists recruit...
TERRORISTS!
There's plenty to pe pissed off at these days without making things up. Dave doesn't even have to leave work to set his delicate sensibilities all atwitter.
Last edited:
The Russians are responsible for everything bad. Maxine Waters said they even came up with the phrases "lock her up" and "crooked Hillary" for the Trump campaign.
Yeah, it's almost like there is some kind of coordinated strategy between currently elected Democrat officials, the media, the Clinton machine, and Soros & Co. But that's just crazy talk, even though the drumbeat for impeachment started in 2016.
Just let me know when it actually finds something tangible. If its there, I sincerely hope its found and exposed. But given the witch-hunt status the media has with Trump, and the all the breadcrumb innuendo that's gone on for the past 6 months (Since the election), I still haven't seen any actual evidence of inappropriate activity. Heck, I'd settle for someone having to plead the fifth to not incriminate themselves as evidence of wrong-doing (my Obama standard). All I've seen so far is that Flynn had an inappropriate financial relationship with the Russians while he was still in the employ of Obama.
Well, so much for the presumption of innocence in the face of zero evidence.
And I'm with @Medic007. When a crime is committed, hang 'me high.
Zero evidence? You really haven't heard of Mannafort, Flynn, et al? Failing to register as foreign agents - harmless, happens all the time right?????
Amazing how Senator Feinstein isn't aware of this massive amount of proof you refer to. You would think a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee would be aware of such things.
Out of context? Don't have any of those. But you'll be interested in this:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattv...no-evidence-of-russiatrump-collusion-n2329053
Excellent. Now we talk about suspicion and conclusion. Kudos for those who are suspicious to not claim conclusive proof but rather point out suspicion as evidenced by things like Flynn retroactively registering as a foreign agents... That doesn't trouble you at all? Mannaforts contract - you think that is completely fine? Trump saying "I can only speak for myself and the Russians" doesn't cause you to at least think "wait, what"?
As to Feinstein - when the question is "do you have evidence that there was in fact collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the campaign?" - how else should you answer but "not at this time".
Get back with me when there's something to be excited about. For example, a secret Ukrainian ledger which allegedly shows a payment to Manafort (who denies its authenticity) leaked by an anonymous source isn't something to get excited about. When there's probable cause for an arrest or guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, let me know. Together, we will cast the first stone.
So, you clearly are in favor of an investigation. That is usually what leads to determining guilt or innocence.
I'm clearly in favor of believing a crime has been committed before launching an investigation.
Whose belief? The former director of the FBI? Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III who felt it was serious enough to recuse himself? The Deputy AG who appointed Mueller? Whose belief matters in your mind? Is it just yours?
I can't count the conservative stampedes on this board over the years that have been based on nothing more than piss and wind. Now there's not enough proof. The hypocrisy is astounding. At least 10 of you self-described conservatives would be screaming for armed insurrection if this was a democrat.
Trump has done or will do something that Mueller will grab onto. We already have persons of interest who are still employed at the highest levels of the WH. This will take a while for sure... but only because there will be so much to process.
If WJC couldn't scheme his way out of impeachment, what hope do the Trumpets have?
So it is never OK to investigate whether or not a crime has been committed?
A little sanity from the libs in the mean time, for starters.
An exercise:
Revisiting the election, David, how can the democratic party learn to be more representative, thereby winning the next presidential election?
Would you like the cops to show up at your house to search for your weed stash whenever they want to just because they need to determine whether or not a crime has been committed?
Sessions and Rosenstein strike me as being chumps who folded under pressure.
I wonder why Mueller is referred to a special counsel as opposed to a special prosecutor. Anyway, I'm a patient guy. I'm also a law and order sort of person. But before I jump on the bandwagon of locking everybody up and throwing away the key, I want to see some credible evidence from a credible source. You know, like Comey rattled off about Hillary before he made up the prosecutor's mind that there wasn't a case.
Probable cause? Like.... your best couple of buds admit to having weed and were picked up right outside your house high as a kite? I will defer to the actual JDs but I do believe the AG, Deputy AG, the Director of the FBI, House and Senate committees chaired by Republicans all agree there is sufficient Probable Cause to actually launch investigations. Just saying...
Nope. But if one of my employees didn't show up to work, and no one was able to reach her, I would like them to show up at her house.
Similar threads
