Status
Not open for further replies.
Obstruction Inquiry Shows Trump’s Struggle to Keep Grip on Russia Investigation

President Trump gave firm instructions in March to the White House’s top lawyer: stop the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, from recusing himself in the Justice Department’s investigation into whether Mr. Trump’s associates had helped a Russian campaign to disrupt the 2016 election.

...

Mr. McGahn was unsuccessful, and the president erupted in anger in front of numerous White House officials, saying he needed his attorney general to protect him.
​
It's clear after years of bribing state AGs that Trump simply thinks that's how one handles these legal matters.
 
Trump sees the AG's principal task as being to seemingly literally protect the prez. He invokes Bobby Kennedy (for brother Jack) and Eric Holder (for Obama) as examples. Yet one example of so many evidencing an ocean of ignorance and hence his unfitness to serve from the standpoint of both basic knowledge of job requirements and ability/willingness to freaking *learn* anything.

I mean, the job requirements for a burger flipper at Mickey D's are more stringently imposed. The here demonstrated virtually complete inversion of level of qualification for a position with respect to supposed responsibility and import is breathless to behold so nakedly made apparent. And the difficulty of imposition of sanctions--even censure--when the political factors conspire against such is dismaying, to say the least. Boy, when it's said "anyone" can become president, at least that part of the social contract is pretty near 100% true--when a critical mass of credulous dupes have a say.
 
The reason I think Bannon is at least complicit is - ignoring the fact that he probably did say exactly that - in addition Brietbart is all over this, and that's Bannon's work.

I'd agree that he probably did say it. Breitbart would probably be pointedly refuting it if it was false and it's hardly something that would be surprising in the first place, given how badly Jr and co messed up. I'd withhold judgement on whether Bannon is directly complicit, though, until there's something more clear to work with. It's looking like Trump's the only one of the two actually attacking the other, either way.
 
It's not the translation, it's the pronunciation. 'ei' sounds like 'eye' (eg wine is wein) / 'ie' sounds like 'ee'

(German was technically my first language, but I left Europe as a child, so a bit wobbly on dialect... but the ei/ie pronunciation rule about hearing the 2nd letter is pretty consistent)

A German composite word. Bart indeed means beard, while Breit means "broad, wide" (or colloquially "drunk" or "stoned", if you prefer).

Sheesh. Skeptics are a tough crowd for making jokes ;)

(I know a little German (his name is Rolf ;)), and am familiar with the pronunciation. Was just trying to be funny...now you know why I work as a computer analyst :D).
 
If Trump has a heart-attack, I would not cry.


That's easy to admit. But would you cry if he were assassinated? Or if his presidency would have been prevented by the machinations of the Russiagate hoaxers? I don't think so, and as I said earlier I think the latter is the reason why your buddies don't even acknowledge the by now obvious hoax. Well, the several investigations do, and January will be a busy month:

Walls Close In Around DOJ and FBI “Small Group” Participants…
 
That's easy to admit. But would you cry if he were assassinated? Or if his presidency would have been prevented by the machinations of the Russiagate hoaxers? I don't think so, and as I said earlier I think the latter is the reason why your buddies don't even acknowledge the by now obvious hoax. Well, the several investigations do, and January will be a busy month:

Walls Close In Around DOJ and FBI “Small Group” Participants…

Look whose posting links to CTH now ... I'm actually a little surprised. But I guess any port in a storm, eh ?
 
Look whose posting links to CTH now ... I'm actually a little surprised. But I guess any port in a storm, eh ?


Contrary to the guy who introduced the site to the thread, I don't care if a source is "right" or "left", I care if it is "right" or "wrong". And on this topic they are doing excellent research.

And it's fun to rub it under partisan noses who thought they had a couple of months vacation... :thumbsup::cool:
 
Contrary to the guy who introduced the site to the thread, I don't care if a source is "right" or "left", I care if it is "right" or "wrong".

Going on the evidence you've posted to date I am not convinced that you can tell right from wrong.
 
That's easy to admit. But would you cry if he were assassinated? Or if his presidency would have been prevented by the machinations of the Russiagate hoaxers? I don't think so, and as I said earlier I think the latter is the reason why your buddies don't even acknowledge the by now obvious hoax. Well, the several investigations do, and January will be a busy month:

Walls Close In Around DOJ and FBI “Small Group” Participants…

Contrary to the guy who introduced the site to the thread, I don't care if a source is "right" or "left", I care if it is "right" or "wrong". And on this topic they are doing excellent research.

And it's fun to rub it under partisan noses who thought they had a couple of months vacation... :thumbsup::cool:

You contradict yourself.
 
That's easy to admit. But would you cry if he were assassinated? Or if his presidency would have been prevented by the machinations of the Russiagate hoaxers? I don't think so, and as I said earlier I think the latter is the reason why your buddies don't even acknowledge the by now obvious hoax. Well, the several investigations do, and January will be a busy month:

Walls Close In Around DOJ and FBI “Small Group” Participants…

I don't think I have cried at anything bad happening to strangers. I'm just not a crier.
 
Listening to Rep Jim Jordan, Republican from Ohio try to talk over Katy Tur is lalalalala I can't hear you insanity.

He can't let go of the GOP talking points trying to discredit the dossier.

Paraphrasing:
Jordan: Papdopolous was a coffee boy mouthing off in a bar, that's ridiculous it could lead to a FISA warrant
Tur: How did he know about the stolen emails?
Jordan: Repeats his talking points
Tur: Keeps trying
Jordan: Keeps repeating
Tur: I love having you on but I wish you would actually answer my questions.

Do these guys know they are lying? Or are they unconsciously
blocking inconvenient facts and sticking to the narrative they like?
 
Last edited:
Listening to Rep Jim Jordan, Republican from Ohio try to talk over Katy Tur is lalalalala I can't hear you insanity.

He can't let go of the GOP talking points trying to discredit the dossier.

Paraphrasing:
Jordan: Papdopolous was a coffee boy mouthing off in a bar, that's ridiculous it could lead to a FISA warrant
Tur: How did he know about the stolen emails?
Jordan: Repeats his talking points
Tur: Keeps trying
Jordan: Keeps repeating
Tur: I love having you on but I wish you would actually answer my questions.

Do these guys know they are lying? Or are they unconsciously
blocking inconvenient facts and sticking to the narrative they like?
Same mouthpiece, Jordan, is now on Meet the Press. Chuck Todd lets him repeat his entire propaganda speech. Todd asks a couple questions that challenge the bull **** being spewed: Clinton's emails, the FBI is biased for Clinton, why is no one investigating Clinton's collusion.... :eusa_sick:

Interesting to compare Tur to Todd. Tur and Jordan talked over each other through much of the interview because she wasn't letting him repeat his lies without being challenged. Todd let Jordan get the whole spiel out and only spoke up in between. Yes Todd's questions properly challenged some of Jordan's key points. But he let Jordan get a ton of falsehoods out without anything countering it. And of course, Tur, being female (they get no respect) couldn't cut the guy off the way Chris Matthews does.

Also of note, Jordan had a hard time keeping a straight face. Not sure if that was on camera nervousness or hard-to-keep-a-straight-face lying.

The propaganda being spewed by this crowd wouldn't be so bad if it was contained to Limbaugh's and Jone's talk radio shows. But this is mainstream Congress repeating the most far-fetched CTs on the mainstream news.

There's a whole different quality to this from the usual political talking points ignoring global warming and financial facts, throwing snowballs in Congress, and pretending they are benefitting the poor by cutting all the social safety nets.

But this other stuff, it's not alternative reality, it's downright dangerous propaganda alt-reality. :jaw-dropp
 
Last edited:
Wow, my above post is an understatement. Now we have some key Republican legislators requesting Steele be investigated for misleading the FBI.:jaw-dropp

Looks like all the right wing blogosphere has this story before the mainstream news did.

Wading through that here's Business Insider:
Senate Judiciary Republicans refer dossier author Chris Steele to DOJ for criminal investigation
Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham on Friday sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department about Christopher Steele, the author of the so-called Trump-Russia dossier.

The referral, sent along with undisclosed classified attachments, accused Steele of making false statements about speaking to the press about the dossier's claims.

Legal experts said the referral seemed politically motivated insofar as it did not appear to provide information to the FBI that it did not already have.


And along with all that, the DoJ is allowing Nunes access to a bunch of classified material on the Russia investigation. Not sure what that is going to lead to.

And there was that reopening of investigating the Clinton Foundation. :rolleyes:

Things are getting very hot in the White House.
 
Last edited:
2 Senators recommend to the DOJ that Chris Steel be prosecuted for providing the FBI with false information

Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham on Friday sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department about Christopher Steele, the author of the so-called Trump-Russia dossier.

The referral, sent along with undisclosed classified attachments, accused Steele of making false statements about speaking to the press about the dossier's claims.

Legal experts said the referral seemed politically motivated insofar as it did not appear to provide information to the FBI that it did not already have.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom