Posters in the past for close to 20 years have come and gone. I don't want to go to another board, I want to see a revival on this one! I see the views on topics, and there's clearly a lot of people who lurk and view, but don't post. I wish I knew how to increase the traffic here. I particularly miss Son of Mxy. Australia-Dave while we don't agree on much was a big contributor to politics and made us a bit more international, as does Nowhereman.
If you spent more time posting here than on another board, you might generate more responses here.
To answer MEM, what's provable to be a lie is that Trump is guilty of something. As I said prior, the Democrats have taken up the Soviet KGB approack of "shopw me the man, and I will give you the crime", where you target a man whi is visibly not guilty of anything, but use all the powers of the state to peel away the layers of his life and find something, anything to imprison and/or destroy him. If Kafka were alive, he could write a novel about what has been done to Trump. Is being done!
The fact is, there have been FOUR thorough investigations of Trump that have concluded proving no prosecutable wrongdoing by Trump:
1. an FBI 9-month counter-intelligence investigation. Peter Strzok in his texts to Lisa Page said he was invited to join that investigation, but he was reluctant to join it, because he knew "There's no 'there' there." Presumably Strzok knew this because he had access to the FISA surveillance of the Trump officials being monitored.
2. the concluded House Intelligence Committee investigation. Ended, finding no collusion, no conspiracy.
3. the bipartisan Senate investigation. Concluded about a month before the Mueller report was released. Again, no evidence to warrant further investigation.
and
4. the Mueller report. Again, purely Democrat collection of over 16 lawyers who virtually all were not only Democrats, but also 11 of the 16 were highly invested Democrat partisans and donors to the Obama and Hillary campaigns and broader DNC. One of whom, Jeannie Rhee, was appointed to the investigation directly from the Cinton Foundation, where ironically, her job was to protect Hillary Clinton from investigation and suppress FOIA requests. And Mueller appoints this partisan to his investigation? But even with this collection of Trump-hating partisans and a $35 million virtually unlimited budget to investigate, 500 witnesses deposed, 2,000 subpoenas issues, they found NOTHING, absolutely nothing. Only by partisan weaseliness did Mueller not find conclusions to absolutely say there is no evidence against Trump (as was Mueller's job to conclude one way or the other, highly unusual to say "well, here is the raw evidence, draw your own conclusions" to attorney general Barr). Barr, a highly respected lawyer for over 4 decades drew the conclusion: NO RUSSIA COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. And if there were any wrongdoing, it would have been found by the Mueller team of highly funded Democrat partisans. There's no 'there' there.
And because the Democrats have been exposed as liars, they are desperately creating a slanderfest of new allegations and new House investigations, desperately trying to open up Trump's banking and business record, praying there is something, ANYTHING, to rationalize Trump is guilty of something. (i.e., "show me the man, and I will give you the crime").
Frankly, I think if most people in America who were subjected to this level of scrutiny without reason, they would have been found guilty of a crime by now. That Trump hasn't speaks volumes about how remarkably clean he is, as a politician, as a businessman, as a billionaire.
I pretty much knew it was over in the weeks after the gun-parading televised midnight dog-and-pony-show raid of attorney Michael Cohen's various homes, offices and hotels. DOJ and U.S. Southern District of New York found a legalistic way to circumnavigate attorney-client privelege, to worm their way into Trump's attorney's most intimate records and secrets, and EVEN THERE they found nothing to incriminate Trump. Only to incriminate Cohen.
And then Cohen the convicted perjurer tried to "compose and sing" a fronted lie about Trump's alleged involvement in conspiracy (with no evidence, only convicted perjurer Cohen's testimony), to try and reduce his sentence. Even Cohen's crimes were pretty piddly stuff (fraudelent taxi medallions, to increase his taxi-business profits, perjury traps, and tape-recording clients, including Trump). Stuff that only a corrupt Mueller investigation and FBI would indict, in a desperate bid to extort "composed" confessions and smear Trump.
Likewise Pappadapoulos, likewise Roger Stone, likewise even greater reaches of malicious prosecution of Sam Clovis and Michael Caputo, where the FBI have interviewed every one of their business client and intimidated them away from these men, have bankrupted them with hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees while depriving them of an income to pay those legal fees, in a desperate bid to intimidate and bankrupt them into plea bargains for "crimes" of which FBI and Mueller know they are innocent. Kafka-esque. Orwellian.
And you, M E M, as a loyal partisan liberal zombie, cheer this on.
It's over, M E M. It's over.
53% of voters want the investigations to stop. FOUR investigations that have exonerated Trump are more than enough. It is far more likely that the conspirators who tried to frame Trump will be prosecuted and go to prison.
The FBI inspector general's report should be moving things in that direction, toward indictments of corrupt FBI and DOJ officials, within the next week. Then your party's little Bolshevik revolution should be out of business.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Posters in ths past for close to 20 years have come and gone. I don't want to go to another board, I want to see a revival on this one! I see the views on topics, and there's clearly a lot of people who lurk and view, but don't post. I wish I knew how to increase the traffic here. I particularly miss Son of Mxy. Australia-Dave while we don't agree on much was a big contributor to politics and made us a bit more international, as does Nowhereman.
If you spent more time posting here than on another board, you might generate more responses here.
As I said above nothing is stopping anyone from posting here but having another board we all post on as a back up could be a good idea.
In fact you may have forgotten this but when this board was at its most active, part of that activity was the result of members raiding other forums and then inviting people back here
Assuming the rest of us aren't already happily posting away on other forums or otherwise enjoying the rest of the internet, secure in the knowledge we (probably) won't cross paths with Wondy there.
Assuming the rest of us aren't already happily posting away on other forums or otherwise enjoying the rest of the internet, secure in the knowledge we (probably) won't cross paths with Wondy there.
You've had a personal obsession with me for several years. YEARS! And for someone you are allegedly trying to avoid, almost 100% of your posts here, on the rare occasions you post, are addressed to me or about me.
I'm frankly wondering what the hell I could have done to provoke you. I've always been either polite or friendly to you in most of the 18 or so years we've all been here posting. And you never seem able to articulate a case for whatever it is that's the bug up your ass.
One of us declared war between us, and it was never me.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) blasted a Thursday evening order by President Trump ordering intelligence agencies to cooperate with Attorney General William Barr’s investigation into possible “spying” on Trump’s 2016 campaign, calling it “un-American.”
Adam Schiff, posting on Twitter:
While Trump stonewalls the public from learning the truth about his obstruction of justice, Trump and Barr conspire to weaponize law enforcement and classified information against their political enemies.
The coverup has entered a new and dangerous phase.
This is un-American.
In the Thursday order, Trump ordered intelligence agencies to cooperate with Barr’s probe into "surveillance activities" directed at the president's 2016 campaign.
He also gave Barr “full and complete authority” to declassify information relating to the investigation, according to White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. "Today’s action will help ensure that all Americans learn the truth about the events that occurred, and the actions that were taken, during the last Presidential election and will restore confidence in our public institutions," Sanders said.
Barr told a Senate panel in April he was reviewing the process by which intelligence was collected on Trump campaign officials in 2016 and said he believed the campaign was spied on. Democrats have pushed back on his use of the term and FBI Director Christopher Wray told a Senate committee earlier in May that he would not use the term “spying” to describe FBI activity.
Oh, the irony.
Democrats in power for at least 12 years have weaponized the IRS, FBI, DOJ and other federal agencies like EPA, OSHA, and ATF, to maliciously target Republican leadership and grassroots Tea Party and Pro-Life and defense-of-marriage organizations, Republican donors like the NRA and Gibson guitars and 2012 million-dollar GOP donor Frank Vandersloot. To either prevent them from participating politically, to intimidate them and other potential Republican supporters by making a deterrant example of them, to use process crimes to imprison people like Scooter Libby (who wasn't even the one who outed Valerie Plame, it was Richard Armitage who eventually outed himself as the person who gave Robert Novak the puzzle-pieces to deduce and expose Valerie Plame who turned out to be a CIA agent), the same pattern used to manufacture process crimes to imprison Trump officials a decade later.
The Obama/Lois Lerner/Koskinin weaponizing of the IRS to target Republicans and neutralize them in 2010-2012, allowing Obama to narrowly win re-election in 2012, by crippling Republican grassroots groups from organizing.
Obama's Justice Department using ATF to run illegal guns to Mexican cartels that ended up killing dozens of Mexican citizens, and one U.S. border guard. Planned as a way to blame gun retailers for the guns sold, and rationalize a crackdown on retailer gun sales, but it backfied on the Obama administration when exposed to have originated from ATF.
And of course, the unheard-of weaponization of the FBI, DOJ, the FISA court and other intelligence agencies to obstruct and sabotage the case against Hillary Clinton and the broader Clinton campaign, Obama administration, and DNC. And then simultaneously use those intelligence and law enforcement branches to maliciously prosecute and cripple and run opposition research on the Trump campaign. And then not even have it end there, but continue to use FBI/DOJ/FISA surveillance and other intelligence agencies to surveil and attack Trump transition team and Trump administration!
Talk about weaponization of government...
Schiff in his above lying Twitter narrative is trying to project the guilt of Democrats and their Democrat-loyalist agents in these federal agencies, and turn it into an eclipsing dominant lying media narrative directed at Republicans, to divert from the actual weaponization of government visible on the Democrat side, a Democrat weaponization ongoing for years.
Ann Coulter back in 2009 said: "If you want to know what the Democrats are up to, just look at what they're accusing Republicans of."
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
You got a figure one of these days Rob is going to get sick of paying the hosting bill.
Originally Posted By: the G-man
As I said above nothing is stopping anyone from posting here but having another board we all post on as a back up could be a good idea.
In fact you may have forgotten this but when this board was at its most active, part of that activity was the result of members raiding other forums and then inviting people back here
Feel free to correct me if I misinterpreted anything, G-man, but it doesn't sound like you're trying to direct traffic here. In your first post, it sounds like you're directing us to leave to post elsewhere.
I've always liked that this was a relatively small posting community. Even at its peak, it was mostly at most 30 or 40 posters here. If we could just add 10 or 20 new active posters here, it would be about the same activity there was a few years ago.
I recently looked about 3 months ago to see among the top posters, how many there were posting here as regulars:
TOP 25 POSTERS: at least 16,249 posts TOP 26-50: at least 6,236 posts 51-75: at least 2,704 posts 76-100: at least 1,284 posts
TOP 101-125 at least 774 posts 126-150: at least 549 posts 151-175: at least 382 posts 176-200: at least 277 posts!
That's not even taking into consideration that there's a lot of alts among that top 200 that are the same person. So even at its peak it was a small but articulate and funny and acrimonious group. Smaller than even these numbers demonstrate.
At the point below that 200, you're talking about people who registered and only posted here for a few days or weeks. Or an alt that was only used periodically for a few weeks or months. Like the charming Angry-Drunk G-Man.
So... we've always been a small community. Son of Mxy I recall voiced my own view, that posting has reduced because of Facebook and Twitter, but neither of those is as good for prolonged discussion as these boards.
As I said to you elsewhere, G-man, I think Rob has a pride in these boards, and even when activity is slow here, there's a wealth of intelligent, provocative, and often funny as hell past discussions, that I think Rob wants to preserve, and probably like me and others here, enjoys looking back on and re-reading. I love that a discussion here can lay dormant for a year or five years, and then suddenly be revived with the same energy as when it began. There are links and articles and funny images that I've looked back on when it might seem even though there are no recent posts that no one cares. I do. I think others do as well. The Wrightson topic has 10,000 views, the Kaluta topic I started not even a year ago has close to 7,000 views. Someone is enjoying these topics, likewise the WOMEN section topics and nudie pics, and the Snarf topic, and many others.
So I'm not prepared to give up, and I just wish those lurking and quietly enjoying would post more. It shouldn't be that hard to revive what was always a small forum community.
I'm far from a partisan zombie. Nor am I the one attacking everybody in the media, courts, FBI or political party that doesn't provide the propaganda/talking points for my side. You do. Trump lied about never engaging in cover ups. And as much as you want to parrot the Trump talking points that it's over, well there have been a couple of court decisions insuring congress will continue it's constitutional role as a check on a President's powers providing oversight that was nonexistent for 2 years. Mueller will hopefully testify on his report as well as others. That lawyer Trump tried to get to lie for him for example. (besides Cohen).
Nor am I the one attacking everybody in the media, courts, FBI or political party that doesn't provide the propaganda/talking points for my side.
I'm attacking the ones who visibly weaponized federal agencies and FISA court surveillance to win an election. Not "everybody". Just the specific ones in these agencies incriminated by their own actions and texts.
The texts between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, for example.
The e-mails and testimony of Bruce Ohr and his testimony and documented e-mail communication with Fusion GPS head Glenn Simpson, who Bruce Ohr later before congress voiced concern about, but not while he was aiding the conspiracy. Bruce Ohr also funneled in Simpson's Russia Dossier, blatantly false information, into the DOJ and FBI through multiple back channels, after the FBI had already fired Christopher Steele and deemed the report "salacious and unreliable". But still submitted it as reliable evidence to obtain FISA warrants, and to spy on Carter Page and through that door, the rest of the Trump campaign staff. Likewise the self-incriminating public statements of James Comey, John Brennan, Rod Rosenstein, and James Clapper, who are now turning on each other in media statements, pending their own indictments.
It's a fact, M E M, that these people participated in or directly orchestrated spying on the Trump campaign/transition team/administration. It's a fact. The only question was whether it was authorized spying, or partisan rogue deep-state spying. And at this point, it clearly was rogue spying without any legitimate basis. Barr has already found that all four FISA warrants were filed with deliberately falsified evidence.
So... for you to still front the talking points that Trump is evil and that anyone including attorney general Barr who advocates investigating this is just attacking all federal law enforcement, you clearly are buying into a false Democrat talking points narrative. Or perhaps because you hate Trump so much, you are clinging to what you wish was true, rather than what is actually true.
To answer MEM, what's provable to be a lie is that Trump is guilty of something. As I said prior, the Democrats have taken up the Soviet KGB approach of "show me the man, and I will give you the crime", where you target a man who is visibly not guilty of anything, but use all the powers of the state to peel away the layers of his life and find something, anything to imprison and/or destroy him. If Kafka were alive, he could write a novel about what has been done to Trump. Is being done!
The fact is, there have been FOUR thorough investigations of Trump that have concluded proving no prosecutable wrongdoing by Trump:
1. an FBI 9-month counter-intelligence investigation. Peter Strzok in his texts to Lisa Page said he was invited to join that investigation, but he was reluctant to join it, because he knew "There's no 'there' there." Presumably Strzok knew this because he had access to the FISA surveillance of the Trump officials being monitored.
2. the concluded House Intelligence Committee investigation. Ended, finding no collusion, no conspiracy.
3. the bipartisan Senate investigation. Concluded about a month before the Mueller report was released. Again, no evidence to warrant further investigation.
and
4. the Mueller report. Again, purely Democrat collection of over 16 lawyers who virtually all were not only Democrats, but also 11 of the 16 were highly invested Democrat partisans and donors to the Obama and Hillary campaigns and broader DNC. One of whom, Jeannie Rhee, was appointed to the investigation directly from the Cinton Foundation, where ironically, her job was to protect Hillary Clinton from investigation and suppress FOIA requests. And Mueller appoints this partisan to his investigation? But even with this collection of Trump-hating partisans and a $35 million virtually unlimited budget to investigate, 500 witnesses deposed, 2,000 subpoenas issues, they found NOTHING, absolutely nothing. Only by partisan weaseliness did Mueller not find conclusions to absolutely say there is no evidence against Trump (as was Mueller's job to conclude one way or the other, highly unusual to say "well, here is the raw evidence, draw your own conclusions" to attorney general Barr). Barr, a highly respected lawyer for over 4 decades drew the conclusion: NO RUSSIA COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. And if there were any wrongdoing, it would have been found by the Mueller team of highly funded Democrat partisans. There's no 'there' there.
And because the Democrats have been exposed as liars, they are desperately creating a slanderfest of new allegations and new House investigations, desperately trying to open up Trump's banking and business record, praying there is something, ANYTHING, to rationalize Trump is guilty of something. (i.e., "show me the man, and I will give you the crime").
Frankly, I think if most people in America who were subjected to this level of scrutiny without reason, they would have been found guilty of a crime by now. That Trump hasn't speaks volumes about how remarkably clean he is, as a politician, as a businessman, as a billionaire.
I pretty much knew it was over in the weeks after the gun-parading televised midnight dog-and-pony-show raid of attorney Michael Cohen's various homes, offices and hotels. DOJ and U.S. Southern District of New York found a legalistic way to circumnavigate attorney-client privelege, to worm their way into Trump's attorney's most intimate records and secrets, and EVEN THERE they found nothing to incriminate Trump. Only to incriminate Cohen.
And then Cohen the convicted perjurer tried to "compose and sing" a fronted lie about Trump's alleged involvement in conspiracy (with no evidence, only convicted perjurer Cohen's testimony), to try and reduce his sentence. Even Cohen's crimes were pretty piddly stuff (fraudelent taxi medallions, to increase his taxi-business profits, perjury traps, and tape-recording clients, including Trump). Stuff that only a corrupt Mueller investigation and FBI would indict, in a desperate bid to extort "composed" confessions and smear Trump.
Likewise Pappadapoulos, likewise Roger Stone, likewise even greater reaches of malicious prosecution of Sam Clovis and Michael Caputo, where the FBI have interviewed every one of their business client and intimidated them away from these men, have bankrupted them with hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees while depriving them of an income to pay those legal fees, in a desperate bid to intimidate and bankrupt them into plea bargains for "crimes" of which FBI and Mueller know they are innocent. Kafka-esque. Orwellian.
And you, M E M, as a loyal partisan liberal zombie, cheer this on.
It's over, M E M. It's over.
53% of voters want the investigations to stop. FOUR investigations that have exonerated Trump are more than enough. It is far more likely that the conspirators who tried to frame Trump will be prosecuted and go to prison.
The FBI inspector general's report should be moving things in that direction, toward indictments of corrupt FBI and DOJ officials, within the next week. Then your party's little Bolshevik revolution should be out of business.
As for going to another board, thanks G. I will probably let the mem persona die with this board. Our political bickering really got in the way of the comics and entertainment that we enjoy. I'm careful to avoid politics on other boards.
M E M, I post frequently to the COMICS, MEDIA and WOMEN forums, and I don't see that the POLITICS forum prevents you from enjoying the other forums. I prefer the separation, and posting in the others is often a pleasant diversion from the more serious political topics.
I fail to see why you'd need a separate I.D. to post about politics. We've posted to all these topic sections for over 15 years.
That lawyer Trump tried to get to lie for him for example. (besides Cohen).
That again is another fishing eexpedition by the House Democrats. And McGahn allegedly being instructed to obstruct is again another misrepresentation. In the worst light, the president voiced the desire to fire Mueller, but ultimately based on the advice of his lawyers, did not. So what is Trump guilty of, a thoughtcrime? There is no actual crime, Trump ultimately just explored his legal options.
Again, FOUR investigations have found a lack of evidence, and concluded no collusion or obstruction. If the exhaustive $35 million Mueller probe didn't find anything, it is highly unlikely any other investigation will.
Rep. Nadler's new House investigation (and Maxine Waters, and I forget the others) are all engaged in a baseless and vindictive fishing expedition for Trump's IRS, business and bank records.
AGAIN: where there is no evidence of a crime, Democrats are in a desperate attempt, based on nothing, to manufacture a crime for Trump to be guilty of. To smear him, to diminish him, to prevent his re-election by whatever malicious abuse of powers available.
I am far from the only one voicing this perspective. Among those who have voiced similar views of this Democrat over-reach, legal scholar (and liberal) Alan Dershowitz, liberal Geraldo Rivera, constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, and former DOJ official and lawyer Mark Levin.
Keep in mind, Alan Dershowitz is one of the nation's most respected legal scholars, a registered Democrat who voted for Hillary Clinton, and professor emeritus at Harvard Law School.
Nor am I the one attacking everybody in the media, courts, FBI or political party that doesn't provide the propaganda/talking points for my side.
I'm attacking the ones who visibly weaponized federal agencies and FISA court surveillance to win an election. Not "everybody". Just the specific ones in these agencies incriminated by their own actions and texts.
The texts between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, for example.
The e-mails and testimony of Bruce Ohr and his testimony and documented e-mail communication with Fusion GPS head Glenn Simpson, who Bruce Ohr later before congress voiced concern about, but not while he was aiding the conspiracy. Bruce Ohr also funneled in Simpson's Russia Dossier, blatantly false information, into the DOJ and FBI through multiple back channels, after the FBI had already fired Christopher Steele and deemed the report "salacious and unreliable". But still submitted it as reliable evidence to obtain FISA warrants, and to spy on Carter Page and through that door, the rest of the Trump campaign staff. Likewise the self-incriminating public statements of James Comey, John Brennan, Rod Rosenstein, and James Clapper, who are now turning on each other in media statements, pending their own indictments.
It's a fact, M E M, that these people participated in or directly orchestrated spying on the Trump campaign/transition team/administration. It's a fact. The only question was whether it was authorized spying, or partisan rogue deep-state spying. And at this point, it clearly was rogue spying without any legitimate basis. Barr has already found that all four FISA warrants were filed with deliberately falsified evidence.
So... for you to still front the talking points that Trump is evil and that anyone including attorney general Barr who advocates investigating this is just attacking all federal law enforcement, you clearly are buying into a false Democrat talking points narrative. Or perhaps because you hate Trump so much, you are clinging to what you wish was true, rather than what is actually true.
This will be the third investigation of the investigation I believe. Unlike the others Trump has given Barr broad powers to declassify information while fighting to hide everything else from house investigations. This is an obvious political move that you would label as "weaponizing" if a democrat was doing it. Look I didn't like Trump when he was a democrat. He's was always an awful person. I'm not like you who enjoyed his birtherism because it humiliated Obama. I would hope that my party would reject that type of thing from a candidate. I don't extend that to his political party or other sources either like you do with democrats/media/science or the FBI. Trump did engage in cover ups in the past. It's well documented just like his attempts to obstruct the Mueller investigation.
As for going to another board, thanks G. I will probably let the mem persona die with this board. Our political bickering really got in the way of the comics and entertainment that we enjoy. I'm careful to avoid politics on other boards.
Speaking only for myself, I always thought you and I got along fine on the comics side of the board.
I remember times where there was some politics that would filter into other forums where other members would complain and ask to keep the political stuff here. I honestly don't remember if that involved you at all though. And now like you said it's down to just a few of us that are here that post at all.
This will be the third investigation of the investigation I believe. Unlike the others Trump has given Barr broad powers to declassify information while fighting to hide everything else from house investigations. This is an obvious political move that you would label as "weaponizing" if a democrat was doing it. Look I didn't like Trump when he was a democrat. He's was always an awful person. I'm not like you who enjoyed his birtherism because it humiliated Obama. I would hope that my party would reject that type of thing from a candidate. I don't extend that to his political party or other sources either like you do with democrats/media/science or the FBI. Trump did engage in cover ups in the past. It's well documented just like his attempts to obstruct the Mueller investigation.
"Science"?!? I don't think there's much credible deniability for the argument that "democrats/media/science or the FBI" deceitfully work together against Republicans, and against the American people. Some examples include: * the texts and testimony of Strzok, Page, Ohr, Comey, McCabe and other FBI/DOJ officials. * Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch in a secret meeting on the airport tarmac, just a few days before her DOJ and FBI exonerated Hillary despite overwhelming evidence. * The Wikileaks internal DNC e-mails released during the DNC 2016 national convention. * "Journo-list". * IRS/Lois Lerner, and about 150 meetings of IRS head Koskinin with the White House in one year (as compared to the previous IRS head's meetings in Pesident W. Bush's entire 8 years: one meeting). * And ultimately, the FISA court abuse to do surveillance and entrapment of the Trump administration. (Strzok and Page: "POTUS wants to know everything. we have.")
CIA agent Tony Schaffer (as I posted recently in an videotaped interview of him) said that during his decades with the CIA, with the authorization channels he went through on far lower CIA surveillance, there is absolutely no way Obama and his security staff DIDN'T know and approve the Trump surveillance at the very top.
So... the notion that there's separation between the Democrats/liberal media/deep-state agents in federal agencies is less credible by the day. And there will be indictments for that corruption soon. I think James Comey will be the first head to roll, with hopefully Brennan, Clapper, Strzok, Page, McCabe, Ohr, Sally Yates and Loretta Lynch likely facing indictment following in close succession. The above named people signed off the falsified evidence for those FISA warrants, and they will be going down for that federal crime, among other federal crimes.
Thanks to Barr, we now have what ceased to exist in the Obama years: equal protection (and punishment) under the law.
Barr immediately after reading the report rightly determined there was not evidence to prosecute obstruction of justice (as Mueller should have, if Mueller had not been a partisan weasel shaving his report to aid the House Democrats politically, and give them the slightest window of ambiguity to open more investigations.
In our system, you are either 1) found guilty (with the evidence to prosecute) or 2) found not guilty because there is not sufficient evidence to prosecute. The >>>FOUR<<< previous investigations including the Mueller report found Trump not guilty and insufficient evidence to prosecute. It was not legally correct or valid for Mueller and his investigators to say "We find insufficient evidence to prove Trump guilty of obstruction of justice, but we can NOT certify Trump's innocence." That is a new and un-Constitutional standard, declaring Trump guilty until proven innocent. NO!! The standard is Trump and every other American is presumed innocent unless PROVEN guilty. And Mueller in his report said there is insufficient evidence to prosecute Trump to find him guilty. PERIOD.
Mueller's job was simply to say whether to prosecute or not, instead of waxing philosophic for 448 pages, to give Democrats the thinnest rationalization for opening a 5th (Nadler), 6th(Maxine Waters) and 7th(Adam Schiff) investigation of Trump.
AGAIN: >>>FOUR<<< previous investigations have found no evidence against Trump, and no justification beyond political weasel-moves to continue with more investigations. The Mueller investigation was extraordinarily well funded, and these new partisan-Democrat House investigations don't have the same resources and powers to find anything new. It's all political theatre, to smear and damage Trump going into the 2020 election. And Trump will win anyway.
53% of the population polled don't want further investigation, FOUR investigations is enough. 58% don't want to hear the Mueller report raised as an issue any more. PERIOD.
Trump has given Barr broad powers to expose the facts and publicly disclose the actual FISA warrant submissions, so the American people can judge the facts for themselves, rather than filtered by FBI and DOJ officials trying to protect themselves and their friends (Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein, and Mueller for example, a very tight club for many years, and it's an outrageous conflict of interest for these guys to assign each other to investigate each other.)
HOW IS DISCLOSING THE FACTS "WEAPONIZING" and "PARTISAN"? That's a lying Democrat narrative, where Democrats (in a psychological game of projection) accuse Republicans of what they themselves, the Democrats, are guilty of! Democrats have been weaponizing federal law enforcement agencies and the IRS for over 10 years, at least. Going back at least to the vindictive prosecution of Scooter Libby (prosecuted, when it was in truth Richard Armitage who inadvertantly caused Valerie Plame to be outed as a CIA agent, but special prosecutor Fitzgerald, another member of the Comey/Mueller/Rosenstein/Weissmann club, vindictively jailed Libby anyway on "process crimes", a familiar pattern now for Republicans under deep state FBI prosecution).
How is Barr's full disclosure a "cover-up" or a "weaponization" of government? It is simply disclosing the documents and true facts. Disclosure is the opposite of covering up!
I would argue that Trump has disclosed and kept himself and his staff more accountable and more open to testifying than any other recent president, and far less often exerted the protection of executive privelege. Far less often than Nixon, than Reagan, than Bill Clinton, than W. Bush or Obama.
Barr refused to testify because he would be interrogated by subordinate staff lawyers of House members, not by House members themselves, an unprecedented change of protoocol. So Barr basically told the Democrats to go to hell, and didn't appear. And the lying partisan Democrats (who I think deliberately made the conditions so absurd as to guarantee Barr would not appear, their plan all along) gloated and one piece of shit Democrat (Rep. Cohen) ate a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken at his hearing floor desk.. Oh, yes, these are exalted saints of truth-finding, not at all resorting to slander and vile partisan behavior!
Trump has only withheld, in the example of the Mueller report, that which he is required BY LAW to not disclose.
And even in that, Democrat and Republican House members can go to a special room where they can view the entire report. About 95% is already publicly disclosed, and House members can privately/securely view almost 100% of it. But none of the Democrats have done so, even as they bemoan Barr's alleged non-disclosure. And since House Democrats haven't viewed it, how would they know there's anything there that should be disclosed? It's more Democrat lies and posturing.
In the example of witholding McGahn from testifying, Trump is defending the very essence of Presidential executive privelege, for all presidents, to have vital confidential conversations with his White House staff, and not be required to tell every detail in House or Senate testimony, limiting their ability to discuss freely any national crisis, for fear of being forced to disclose it and be made vulnerable by it later. That is the essence of executive privelege. While president, not having to endure these kind of harassments, gives ANY president the information and freedom to make informed decisions, and to act on that information, as president. As opposed to he or his staff being restrained in their discussions and possibly not sharing information, for fear of having to reveal it in committee later.
Regarding Trump's pressure on Obama over "birtherism" (i.e., getting Obama to legally disclose his actual birth certificate, what every other presidential candidate has disclosed) I made it clear from the beginning that I don't believe Obama was born outside the U.S., I was certain from the beginning he was born in Hawaii, where his parents met and both attended college, and Barack Obama's birth announcement appeared at the time of his birth in two Hawaii newspapers. Even Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter said they had investigated and it was absurd conspiracy theory to allege otherwise.
The part I enjoyed is that Obama had already been publicly belligerent toward Trump, and Trump was firing back and humiliating Obama, and the controversy over Obama not disclosing his birth certificate was causing a sharp decline in Obama's support in the polls. So what I enjoy is that Trump got Obama to do what no one else could, about 5 years into Obama's presidency, to pressure Obama to finally do what was legally required of him as a presidential candidate years prior, long after his campaign had ended. What no one else was able to compel Obama to do, in all those years.
That was a precursor of Trump later similarly beating 16 other Republican primary candidates, what was considered impossible. And then beating Hillary Clinton in the general election, despite her incredible campaign resources that out-spent him 2-to-1, what was considered an inevitable Hillary Clinton victory.
I liked that Trump out-bullied the bully, and got Obama to do the right thing. Not because I ever believed the birther speculation, but just because Trump made Obama do something he didn't want to do and had previously withheld for pure political reasons (i.e., as long as Obama didn't disclose his proper birth certificate, it kept the birther conspiracy alive, which helped Obama politically, to be able to say the Republicans, not just the birthers, but all Republicans, were crazy, and allowed Obama to front that all the other things Obama was guilty of were just crazy conspiracy theories like the birther thing.) Trump's forcing Obama to disclose his birth certificate humiliated Obama, made Obama look less credible and look weak and to have something to hide and finally forced to disclose, and to put an end to that tactic of sweepingly dismissing all Republican criticism.
Obama was not born in Kenya, and as a U.S. citizen born is Hawaii, is legally able to be president. But Obama is also a Saul Alinsky-indoctrinated Cultural Marxist revolutionary, who was raised by Marxist radical parents and marxist radical grandparents, surrounded his entire life by anti-American marxist radicals like Frank Marshall Davis, Rashid Khalidi, Bill Ayers, who volunteered after college at ACORN (where he taught Saul Alinsky's Rules For Radicals to classrooms of ACORN "community organizer" marxist street agitators like himself), his closest advisor Valerie Jarret, and the maniacs he appointed to his administration like Jarrett, Van Jones, Mark Lloyd, Cass Sunstein, Anita Dunn, Hillary Clinton, and Huma Abedin, among many others. Radicals all, many of whom you can go on Youtube and see their videotaped comments praising and quoting the likes of Mao Tse Tung, Saul Alinsky, Hugo Chaves, and praaising other genocidal marxists on their marxist authoritarian tactics for seizing power.
And the damage these people did to this country is still being repaired.
Former U.S. attorney Joe DiGenova gives a nice blueprint of the Democrat partisans in the FBI and DOJ and their connections to Fusion GPS and the DNC, how they entered "evidence" they knew to be false to the FISA court, and otherwise obstructed in the Hillary Clinton case, and orchestrated malicious prosecution of Trump.
Which is now finally being investigated by Barr, and by the just-appointed U.S. attorney Durham. Also involving conspiracy with James Clapper (DNI), and John Brennan (CIA). DiGenova points to Brennan as the initiator of the coup (disguised as an FBI investigation).
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Note that this would be the third investigation. So I don't understand your finally comment. My fear is after Barr's partisan handling of the Mueller report we'll wind up with selective declassification. I would be more interested in what a more independent review would have to say because there are legitimate credibility problems with Barr. He isn't even willing to show up at the House to answer questions? Why would anyone besides Russians and Trump's faithful trust him?
Note that this would be the third investigation. So I don't understand your finally comment. My fear is after Barr's partisan handling of the Mueller report we'll wind up with selective declassification. I would be more interested in what a more independent review would have to say because there are legitimate credibility problems with Barr. He isn't even willing to show up at the House to answer questions? Why would anyone besides Russians and Trump's faithful trust him?
GAH! How can you with a straight face allege that?!?
95% of the report is already made public. For House Democrats and Republicans, attorney general Barr has set up a special room where they can view 99% of the Mueller report, omitting only the grand jury names that Barr is required by law to keep confidential.
Barr is required to make none of the report public, but has accomodated Democrat House investigators to an incredible and unprecedented level. (A level of disclosure Rep. Nadler fought tooth and nail to prevent anywhere NEAR the same level of disclosure with Kenneth Starr's special investigation report in 1998-1999, hypocritically enough.)
99% of the report is already available to any House Democrat, and has been for weeks, that no House Democrat has bothered to look at, despite its availability, EVEN AS THEY BEMOAN BARR'S ALLEGED LACK OF DISCLOSURE!
The Democrat false narrative and deceit is beyond belief.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
To answer MEM, what's provable to be a lie is that Trump is guilty of something. As I said prior, the Democrats have taken up the Soviet KGB approack of "shopw me the man, and I will give you the crime", where you target a man whi is visibly not guilty of anything, but use all the powers of the state to peel away the layers of his life and find something, anything to imprison and/or destroy him. If Kafka were alive, he could write a novel about what has been done to Trump. Is being done!
The fact is, there have been FOUR thorough investigations of Trump that have concluded proving no prosecutable wrongdoing by Trump:
1. an FBI 9-month counter-intelligence investigation. Peter Strzok in his texts to Lisa Page said he was invited to join that investigation, but he was reluctant to join it, because he knew "There's no 'there' there." Presumably Strzok knew this because he had access to the FISA surveillance of the Trump officials being monitored.
2. the concluded House Intelligence Committee investigation. Ended, finding no collusion, no conspiracy.
3. the bipartisan Senate investigation. Concluded about a month before the Mueller report was released. Again, no evidence to warrant further investigation.
and
4. the Mueller report. Again, purely Democrat collection of over 16 lawyers who virtually all were not only Democrats, but also 11 of the 16 were highly invested Democrat partisans and donors to the Obama and Hillary campaigns and broader DNC. One of whom, Jeannie Rhee, was appointed to the investigation directly from the Cinton Foundation, where ironically, her job was to protect Hillary Clinton from investigation and suppress FOIA requests. And Mueller appoints this partisan to his investigation? But even with this collection of Trump-hating partisans and a $35 million virtually unlimited budget to investigate, 500 witnesses deposed, 2,000 subpoenas issues, they found NOTHING, absolutely nothing. Only by partisan weaseliness did Mueller not find conclusions to absolutely say there is no evidence against Trump (as was Mueller's job to conclude one way or the other, highly unusual to say "well, here is the raw evidence, draw your own conclusions" to attorney general Barr). Barr, a highly respected lawyer for over 4 decades drew the conclusion: NO RUSSIA COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. And if there were any wrongdoing, it would have been found by the Mueller team of highly funded Democrat partisans. There's no 'there' there.
And because the Democrats have been exposed as liars, they are desperately creating a slanderfest of new allegations and new House investigations, desperately trying to open up Trump's banking and business record, praying there is something, ANYTHING, to rationalize Trump is guilty of something. (i.e., "show me the man, and I will give you the crime").
Frankly, I think if most people in America who were subjected to this level of scrutiny without reason, they would have been found guilty of a crime by now. That Trump hasn't speaks volumes about how remarkably clean he is, as a politician, as a businessman, as a billionaire.
I pretty much knew it was over in the weeks after the gun-parading televised midnight dog-and-pony-show raid of attorney Michael Cohen's various homes, offices and hotels. DOJ and U.S. Southern District of New York found a legalistic way to circumnavigate attorney-client privelege, to worm their way into Trump's attorney's most intimate records and secrets, and EVEN THERE they found nothing to incriminate Trump. Only to incriminate Cohen.
And then Cohen the convicted perjurer tried to "compose and sing" a fronted lie about Trump's alleged involvement in conspiracy (with no evidence, only convicted perjurer Cohen's testimony), to try and reduce his sentence. Even Cohen's crimes were pretty piddly stuff (fraudelent taxi medallions, to increase his taxi-business profits, perjury traps, and tape-recording clients, including Trump). Stuff that only a corrupt Mueller investigation and FBI would indict, in a desperate bid to extort "composed" confessions and smear Trump.
Likewise Pappadapoulos, likewise Roger Stone, likewise even greater reaches of malicious prosecution of Sam Clovis and Michael Caputo, where the FBI have interviewed every one of their business client and intimidated them away from these men, have bankrupted them with hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees while depriving them of an income to pay those legal fees, in a desperate bid to intimidate and bankrupt them into plea bargains for "crimes" of which FBI and Mueller know they are innocent. Kafka-esque. Orwellian.
And you, M E M, as a loyal partisan liberal, cheer this on.
It's over, M E M. It's over.
53% of voters want the investigations to stop. FOUR investigations that have exonerated Trump are more than enough. It is far more likely that the conspirators who tried to frame Trump will be prosecuted and go to prison.
The FBI inspector general's report should be moving things in that direction, toward indictments of corrupt FBI and DOJ officials, within the next week. Then your party's little Bolshevik revolution should be out of business.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Why would anyone besides Russians and Trump's faithful trust him?
That is the most incendiary and baseless of your lies.
No one could possibly believe on the facts that Trump is an "asset" of the Russians as pieces of shit like Rachel Maddow on your side have lyingly snarked.
Trump has frozen Russian financial assets (as Obama never did). Trump has tightened sanctions on Russia that have seriously crippled their economy. Trump has wiped out ISIS in Syria, and in the process had 150 Russian mecenaries killed who were attacking our allies there. Trump is rebuilding our military to a level of strength and preparedness it never was under Obama, and never would be under Hillary. Trump has engaged in a trade war with China to eliminate the $400 billion a year in annual trade deficits with China. And is further pushing back at the 600 billion a year in cyber theft of technogolical research and intellectual property China steals every year. Trump is defending U.S. national interests like no other president in over 30 years. Trump is arming and aiding Ukraine to repel Russian invasion of their country, in a way that neither Obama or Hillary ever would, WAY beyond Obama or Hillary. Trump is supplying oil and natural gas to Europe, that takes away the stranglehold of Russian energy dependency they previously had over Europe.
And finally, Democrats have been the party of treason, aiding our enemy and of U.S. surrender in wars for over 70 years. * In allowing Soviets to infiltrate the Truman administration and steal our atomic secrets, * in being the party of treason and surrender during the Vietnam war, * in timidity from 1977-1980 that encouraged Soviet expansions in Afghanistan, Angola and Nicaragua, * in undermining Reagan with Ted Kennedy and Jim Wright secretly dealing with the Soviets in the 1980's offering deals to sabotage Reagan, * in undermining the invasion of Kuwait in 1991, * in undermining W. Bush at every turn after the 2003 Iraq invasion, * and Obama himself directly undermined and railed on the 2007-2008 troop surge in Iraq, and ironically when it worked and concluded with victory after the transition from W.Bush to Obama and the opening months of his presidency, Obama took credit for a victory in Iraq that he sabotaged every step of the way! * And then in Dec 2011, Obama destroyed that victory with a full withdrawal that de-stabilized Iraq and paved the way for the rise of ISIS that seized half of Iraq and Syria. Only pushed back and destroyed by a change away from Obama policy, when Trump became president.
At every turn, Democrats have been the opposition to U.S. military victory, and have been part of the fifth column for weakening our military. Especially with the "sequestration" cuts under Obama that have destroyed our military, and Trump is still rebuilding from those crippling cuts. * 50% of our military aircraft were not combat ready when Trump took office. * Multipe naval accidents by untrained crew killed dozens of sailors in Obama's final years.
And when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and the Kremlin records were opened and the extent of spying in past decades was exposed, it was revealed how much Democrats under FDR and Truman had allowed communist infiltration of our government, despite all warnings and Democrat dismissiveness of the threat in those decades: MCCARTHYISM: THE ROSETTA STONE OF LIBERAL LIES
What you allege, M E M, is thoroughly disproven by the facts.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Mueller spoke yesterday about his report yesterday for the first time. He made clear that the report did not exonerate Trump. Since the report details Trump's various attempts to obstruct justice that was not a surprise. He also clarified that he followed policy so charges were never considered to charge a sitting President no matter the evidence. It left conservative friendly voices on Fox agreeing with me about Barr misrepresenting Mueller.
Mueller spoke yesterday about his report yesterday for the first time. He made clear that the report did not exonerate Trump. Since the report details Trump's various attempts to obstruct justice that was not a surprise. He also clarified that he followed policy so charges were never considered to charge a sitting President no matter the evidence. It left conservative friendly voices on Fox agreeing with me about Barr misrepresenting Mueller.
I question your reading comprehension skills, M E M:
Originally Posted By: WB
Barr immediately after reading the report rightly determined there was not evidence to prosecute obstruction of justice (as Mueller should have, if Mueller had not been a partisan weasel shaving his report to aid the House Democrats politically, and give them the slightest window of ambiguity to open more investigations.
In our system, you are either 1) found guilty (with the evidence to prosecute) or 2) found not guilty because there is not sufficient evidence to prosecute.
The >>>FOUR<<< previous investigations including the Mueller report found Trump not guilty and insufficient evidence to prosecute. It was not legally correct or valid for Mueller and his investigators to say "We find insufficient evidence to prove Trump guilty of obstruction of justice, but we can NOT certify Trump's innocence." That is a new and un-Constitutional standard, declaring Trump guilty until proven innocent. NO!! The standard is Trump and every other American is presumed innocent unless PROVEN guilty. And Mueller in his report said there is insufficient evidence to prosecute Trump to find him guilty. PERIOD.
Mueller's job was simply to say whether to prosecute or not, instead of waxing philosophic for 448 pages, to give Democrats the thinnest rationalization for opening a 5th (Nadler), 6th(Maxine Waters) and 7th(Adam Schiff) investigation of Trump.
AGAIN: >>>FOUR<<< previous investigations have found no evidence against Trump, and no justification beyond political weasel-moves to continue with more investigations. The Mueller investigation was extraordinarily well funded, and these new partisan-Democrat House investigations don't have the same resources and powers to find anything new. It's all political theatre, to smear and damage Trump going into the 2020 election. And Trump will win anyway.
53% of the population polled don't want further investigation, FOUR investigations is enough. 58% don't want to hear the Mueller report raised as an issue any more. PERIOD.
Barr has said that Mueller could have recommended prosecution, and that the prosecution of the case could just be set aside until Trump is no longer president, after 2020 or 2024. It seems to me Mueller as a decades-long FBI prosecutor and attorney, if he really felt he had the evidence to indict, could have found a way to do so.
Mueller's plan is clearly to convict Trump in the court of public opinion and damage Trump politically, since he cannot prosecute Trump based on the facts.
Again I would point out the Mueller report details Trump's multiple attempts to obstruct justice. That he mostly failed because of the people around him doesn't make him innocent. Mueller is a republican so calling him a partisan weasel doesn't even make sense. I think it would have been much more damaging if Mueller had weighed in with his opinion instead of just presenting the evidence.
Again I would point out the Mueller report details Trump's multiple attempts to obstruct justice. That he mostly failed because of the people around him doesn't make him innocent. Mueller is a republican so calling him a partisan weasel doesn't even make sense. I think it would have been much more damaging if Mueller had weighed in with his opinion instead of just presenting the evidence.
Mueller did weigh in with his opinion, re: "while it does not prove Trump's guilt, it also does not prove his innocence"
Again: It is NOT MUELLER'S JOB as special prosecutor to subjectively judge Trump's innocence or not. It is only Mueller's job as prosecutor to judge whether there is evidence to prosecute, or to NOT prosecute. Mueller ultimately said in his convoluted 448 page report that there was >>>NOT<<< sufficient evidence to prosecute Trump for obstruction of justice.
Mueller details 11 points where Trump possibly obstructed justice, which again the greatest legal minds such as Alan Dershowitz and Jonathan Turley and others have said was highly irregular and outside of legal procedure (see linkes in posts above). Ultimately, Mueller left it to Barr to judge if there were obstruction (what Mueller himself should have determined) and Barr immediately after reviewing the report determined there was no obstruction of justice. As Mueller should have done in the first place, as any prosecutor should do. (i.e., it was a weasel move by Mueller.)
Finally your allegation that Barr is a "partisan". Barr is a lawyer of over 40 years experience, and has an absolutely spotless reputation, has been through multiple confirmations, and has been highly regarded as one of the most impartial and respectful of the rule of law of all attorneys.
It is laughaable that after decades with a spotless legal reputation, as soon as Barr doesn't do what Democrats want, he is slimed as a partisan. What Democrats are terrified of is that Barr will impartially enforce the law, and subject the Hillary Clinton campaign/ the Perkins-Coie law firm/Fusion GPS/Christopher Steele and all the incestuous deep state players at FBI, DOJ, DNI, and CIA to the same microscope that has been focused to this point only on Trump. The little bit of light that has been put on that side of the scandal has already made the roaches scramble for cover.
Equal justice under the law. The Democrats are terrified of it. That's why Barr has to be slandered and discredited by your side.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
You're cherry picking those that are playing defense for Trump but that is hardly a consensus opinion. Literally hundreds of federal prosecutors signed a letter saying there was enough evidence to charge Trump. Not surprising since the report does detail Trump literally trying to obstruct the investigation multiple times. Any one of those you would find damming if it were coming from a democrat. Personally I think Mueller needs to answer some questions but I think his decision to follow the policy that a sitting President cannot be charged was a good one. His investigation is the evidence and it's up to congress to do its constitutional duty to look at it and decide what to do with it.
Hundreds of registered Democrat prosecutors who never looked at the specifics of the evidence (or lack thereof) in the Trump case.
As Newt Gingrich said, the Mueller team was made up of 16 highly skilled prosecutors. And for all their skill and being highly invested Democrat partisans, with a virtually unlimited prosecutorial budget, 500 deposed witnesses, and 2,000 subpoenas, found nothing. Nothing.
If these lawyers, with this unlimited budget, with this level of prosecutorial authority could not make a case for prosecution, it cannot be found.
