[jimjam]

Here we go. Obese Donald NEVER disappoints when it comes to issuing grammar school level insults at various and sundry real or imagined "enemies". It's his idea of democracy and serves the additional purpose of entertaining the Obese Donald Cult. In addition to coming up with a positively brilliant name/insult for Nancy Pelosi, Nervous Nancy, he got a twofer by also insulting Robert Mueller in the same speech. Trump said Mueller had “made a fool out of himself” last time he testified before Congress. Keep in mind that Mueller was deployed to Vietnam with the US marines in 1968 and suffered a gunshot wound there. Obese Donald received a deferment from Vietnam for phony bone spurs which was arranged by his daddy.

[Finfinder]

I check in on this thread every once in a while, what page shows the evidence of Russian collusion I don't have time to go through it all?

[BigSteve]

Obese Donald NEVER disappoints when it comes to issuing grammar school level insults...

You just can't make this shit up...

Keep in mind that Mueller was deployed to Vietnam with the US marines in 1968 and suffered a gunshot wound there. Obese Donald received a deferment from Vietnam for phony bone spurs which was arranged by his daddy.

What does that have to do with anything?

One of the biggest idiots I know is a guy who won the Silver Star (with "V") in Vietnam. Sure, he's battle tested and brave, but he's dumber than a bag of hammers.

Do you believe that deploying and getting shot should forever insulate you from criticism?

[Beren]

You just can't make this shit up...



What does that have to do with anything?

One of the biggest idiots I know is a guy who won the Silver Star (with "V") in Vietnam. Sure, he's battle tested and brave, but he's dumber than a bag of hammers.

Do you believe that deploying and getting shot should forever insulate you from criticism?

But Mueller is not dumb. He's a typical dutiful and disciplined underling always respecting hierarchy and serving well. He also must be a big fan of fraternity firmly believing in group loyalty.

[Hindsite]

But Mueller is not dumb. He's a typical dutiful and disciplined underling always respecting hierarchy and serving well. He also must be a big fan of fraternity firmly believing in group loyalty.

That must be why he hired all those Democrats to help him with investigating the made-up Trump and Russia conspiracy theory.

[Godstud]

He hired FBI agents, not Democrats. You're really stretching now.

[BigSteve]

But Mueller is not dumb. He's a typical dutiful and disciplined underling always respecting hierarchy and serving well. He also must be a big fan of fraternity firmly believing in group loyalty.

Thank you for being a spectacular failure at answering my question.

Should deploying and being shot be sufficient to insulate you from criticism?

[jimjam]

Throughout his time as the Trump campaign chairman, Paul Manafort stayed in touch with a Russian man named Konstantin Kilimnik, whom, according to the Mueller report, “the F.B.I. assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence.” Mr. Gates, Mr. Manafort’s deputy, believed Mr. Kilimnik to be a “spy.” — a view, the report says, that he shared with Mr. Manafort.

While managing the campaign, Mr. Manafort told Mr. Gates to share “internal polling data” private to the campaign with Mr. Kilimnik, so he could share it with Ukrainian oligarchs and a Russian oligarch. Mr. Gates sent Mr. Kilimnik the data regularly, deleting the WhatsApp messages after he did so. In an in-person meeting with Mr. Kilimnik, Mr. Manafort shared more information about the campaign’s election plans and polling, including information about “battleground states” that would be key to Mr. Trump’s election.

and

A month after Mr. Mueller’s appointment, President Trump’s ordered his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski — who was not a government employee — to convey a message to Attorney General Jeff Sessions, telling him to constrain the scope of the Mueller investigation. Mr. Sessions, Mr. Trump said, was to deliver a speech restricting the investigation to only future election interference. Mr. Lewandowski never delivered the message.

Simply firing Mr. Mueller would have been within the president’s power. Asking a private citizen to deliver that message, however, moves this outside the realm of the president’s management of the executive branch and toward clearer-cut obstruction of justice. Attorney General Bill Barr’s view that the president did not obstruct justice is informed by his argument that presidential conduct authorized by the Constitution cannot constitute obstruction. But this does not address conduct, like the order to Mr. Lewandowski, that took place outside the scope of the Constitution.

The longer one spends with the Mueller report, the more disturbing a document it is, despite the initial fuzziness of some of Mr. Mueller’s conclusions. Mr. Mueller makes clear that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 election with the goal of supporting Mr. Trump; that the Trump campaign sought to benefit from that interference; and that the president worked to put to an end to the office investigating the interference effort. Questions remain, but the most important question is whether this conduct should be acceptable.

[BigSteve]

[Beren]

Thank you for being a spectacular failure at answering my question.

Should deploying and being shot be sufficient to insulate you from criticism?

I didn't mean to answer your question because I thought it was a rhetoric one.

However, the answer is no.

That must be why he hired all those Democrats

Sorry for disappointing you, but Democrats are not his group.

[Hindsite]

Sorry for disappointing you, but Democrats are not his group.

Yeah, the Never Trumpers are also Mueller's group. But I was referring to the fact that he only had lawyers associated with Democrats on his team investigating President Trump.

[Beren]

Yeah, the Never Trumpers are also Mueller's group. But I was referring to the fact that he only had lawyers associated with Democrats on his team investigating President Trump.

The whole FBI is associated with Democrats recently.

[Hindsite]

The whole FBI is associated with Democrats recently.

They were part of the "Deep State" that tried to overthrow a duly elected President. I hope most of them are gone now. We will have to wait and see what else the IG investigation uncovers.

Dems fear report on Russia probe could kill their oversight momentum

By ANDREW DESIDERIO and KYLE CHENEY 06/06/2019

Democrats lurching toward potential impeachment and ramping up their probes of President Donald Trump are becoming increasingly worried that the Justice Department will subvert their efforts.

An internal DOJ watchdog report on the origins of the Russia probe is expected to spotlight potential political bias by FBI agents at the heart of the Russia probe. The report, due out as soon as this month and as late as October, could raise pointed questions about the FBI’s decision-making at the time — handing Trump a bludgeon in his long-running campaign to accuse the bureau of mounting a “coup” against him.

They fear the report, by DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who is respected by lawmakers from both parties, will diminish any momentum Democrats are seeking in their efforts to convince Americans that Trump obstructed the Russia investigation, later taken over by special counsel Robert Mueller.

Members of both parties largely acknowledge that the results of the inspector general’s report are likely to bode poorly for the senior FBI officials who decided to launch the investigation into Trump’s presidential campaign — in turn, giving Trump and his allies much-needed political firepower against House Democrats who are seeking to highlight the evidence laid out in Mueller’s report.

And it’s not just the IG report that could disrupt Democrats’ plans. Trump recently gave Attorney General William Barr broad authority to declassify information about how the Russia probe began — an order that prompted Democrats to warn of selective declassification that wouldn’t tell the full story.

Trump is likely to latch on to any hint of evidence that would suggest that an anti-Trump bias permeated the upper echelons of the FBI. His allies on Capitol Hill have been parroting those claims of bias, in addition to allegations that senior officials leaked information to the media and inappropriately relied upon salacious and unverified claims about Trump that were outlined in a controversial dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/ ... mp-1355524

[jimjam]

From cyberattacks on state voter systems to disinformation campaigns waged on social media to the hacking of materials belonging to a major political party, Mr. Mueller made plain that the country’s electoral infrastructure remains vulnerable to attack. If the problems are left unaddressed, nothing will stop Russia or other actors from once again undermining free and fair elections in the United States — and they seem to be gearing up to try to do just that.

This has nothing to do with Obese Donald, liberals, conservatives, Democrats or Republicans. I suspect, however, that it will become lost in a sea of irrelevant political nonsense.

[Hindsite]

From cyberattacks on state voter systems to disinformation campaigns waged on social media to the hacking of materials belonging to a major political party, Mr. Mueller made plain that the country’s electoral infrastructure remains vulnerable to attack. If the problems are left unaddressed, nothing will stop Russia or other actors from once again undermining free and fair elections in the United States — and they seem to be gearing up to try to do just that.

This has nothing to do with Obese Donald, liberals, conservatives, Democrats or Republicans. I suspect, however, that it will become lost in a sea of irrelevant political nonsense.

The Russians did not undermine any election. They just attempted to and could attempt to again. That was all the Mueller report said. Trump won the election with smart campaigning.

[annatar1914]

@Hindsite ;

The Russians did not undermine any election.

Correct.

They just attempted to

No they didn't.

and could attempt to again.

Why should they? Every candidate for US President is on record as being inimical to Russian interests, and some are even against Russia existing at all. From their perspective, we're insane people with nuclear weapons, best to leave us alone and try to keep us from meddling too much in their affairs-which we do regularly.

That was all the Mueller report said. Trump won the election with smart campaigning.

Trump is a great campaigner, but also Hillary Clinton was a horrible candidate that kept even many Democrats home in 2016.

[Rugoz]

They could conceivably defund it, but Congress rarely writes legislation that specific as it is very difficult to get a majority vote in both houses.

Meaning the investigation was wanted by at least the majority of one house.

Trump could have fired Sessions and nominated a replacement with both houses of Congress in Republican hands. He waited until after the election when the Democrats took control of the House. He could have replaced Sessions either way. It was his choice. Congress did not fire Sessions. Trump did.

Trump fired Sessions when the Russia investigation was almost concluded. From what I remember many republicans in congress would not have approved of Trump firing Sessions before that, hence he did not. He needs them for legislation and for not getting impeached (though that's a step further).

The branches of the US federal government are considered co-equal. For example, the president could also declare a national emergency and assume near dictatorial power.

A supermajority can overrule the emergency. With sufficient support, congress can overrule the president and in fact impeach him, while the president has no such powers over congress (unlike for example in the French republic, where the president can dissolve the national assembly).

Calling the branches equal is a stretch, IMO.

[Hindsite]

“I don’t want to see him impeached, I want to see him (Obese Donald) in prison,” Pelosi said.

Oh My! One tough bitch here. Wouldn't it be cool to see Obese Donald get whipped by a woman

I look forward to Donald's two dozen or so Twitter Nonsense posts on this one .

"Crazy Nancy"? No wait, that one has already been assigned to Bernie. "Fucking Bitch" Nancy ………… no, may lose some votes from the Bible Thumper bloc. Stay tuned ….. we'll see what the "Very Stable Genius" comes up with ………….. .

"I actually don't think she's a talented person," the President said. "I've tried to be nice to her because I would've liked to have gotten some deals done. She's incapable of doing deals."

"She's a nasty, vindictive, horrible person," Trump added.

Trump called Pelosi a "terrible person" and a "disaster" and said he calls her "Nervous Nancy" "because she's a nervous wreck."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/06/politics ... index.html

[blackjack21]

From cyberattacks on state voter systems to disinformation campaigns waged on social media to the hacking of materials belonging to a major political party, Mr. Mueller made plain that the country’s electoral infrastructure remains vulnerable to attack. If the problems are left unaddressed, nothing will stop Russia or other actors from once again undermining free and fair elections in the United States — and they seem to be gearing up to try to do just that.

It's up to voters to apprise themselves of such actions. Laws can only do so much. For example, China clearly wants Trump gone, because of the tariffs. So they are jerking around farmers in states that Trump carried. Yet, we do not hear the media wailing about China trying to defeat Trump. If anything, they seem sympathetic.

In addition to coming up with a positively brilliant name/insult for Nancy Pelosi, Nervous Nancy, he got a twofer by also insulting Robert Mueller in the same speech. Trump said Mueller had “made a fool out of himself” last time he testified before Congress.

Trump is quite good at that. It's not something establishment people like, but personally I love it.

Trump is a great campaigner, but also Hillary Clinton was a horrible candidate that kept even many Democrats home in 2016.

Indeed. I think her defeat to Donald Trump is the greatest political upset in American History. Her inability to accept defeat gracefully has cost her a favorable place in history. Her hand in this Steele Dossier is going to stain her reputation forever.

Meaning the investigation was wanted by at least the majority of one house.

Your words, not mine. What people want does not mean they direct or control the process. The reason for the investigation was a deep state coup. Some of those actors could well be members of Congress. For example, Chuck Schumer warned Trump that the intelligence community has six ways from Sunday to get back at you if you criticize them. Comey said he leaked his memos to get a special counsel appointed. It's very clear now that the whole thing was orchestrated.

Trump fired Sessions when the Russia investigation was almost concluded. From what I remember many republicans in congress would not have approved of Trump firing Sessions before that, hence he did not.

Many Republicans don't approve of Trump either way. The issue of getting a new Attorney General is that the appointment requires confirmation by the Senate. So that is an area where Congress does have a role.

A supermajority can overrule the emergency. With sufficient support, congress can overrule the president and in fact impeach him, while the president has no such powers over congress (unlike for example in the French republic, where the president can dissolve the national assembly).

They can, and they can impeach the president. You need supermajorities for both. Supermajorities do not form easily. The US does not allow a president to dissolve Congress, because in the US the people are sovereign. Not all European countries do not subscribe to that theory, as most are based on Roman Law. Just as kings could dissolve parliaments, so can the French president.

Calling the branches equal is a stretch, IMO.

It depends on what you consider more important. Even the Houses of Congress operate differently. For example, all tax and spending bills have to arise in the House, not the Senate.

[Hindsite]

Even the Houses of Congress operate differently. For example, all tax and spending bills have to arise in the House, not the Senate.

Congress also determine their own pay. Members of Congress would receive a $4,500 pay bump, or a 2.6 percent raise, under a spending package that the House is expected to consider next week. They will also raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour.