Status
Not open for further replies.
Right, I asked the question: Does that make those people antisemitic or racists? (does it?) What I did not do is assume anyone's guilt by association, like you're trying to imply.

I was calling out your whataboutism tactic, based on guilt by association. That is exactly what you did, when Mumbles was relying on a direct attack of character based on what he perceived (and rightlfully so, IMO) was racist.

Enough derail.
 
And you know what the bitch of it is? That's the traditional, convervative position.

The prototypical conservative position is to protect tradition and the status-quo. Republicans have been lying and breaking their word for so long, such dishonesty IS their status-quo and tradition.
 
I have no doubt that Mueller and pals would love to find something to go after Trump for. One would assume they have been doing their best to do so for quite some time now.
This strongly implies that you're promoting "deep state" and "17 angry democrats" conspiracy theories. By all means, correct me if I'm misinterpreting.

I don't think any previous president has gone through such a thorough "probe" or review. Unprecedented?
Already debunked (Clinton) although you blithely waved it off. Add the Watergate investigation as an example that contradicts your claim.

I suspect Mueller would love obstruction of justice, but Trump would never be convicted of that in any court. Could he be charged with it? For what exactly?
More 17 angry democrats JAQ off.

I've seen many toss out theories about money laundering without any proof also.
This doesn't cut it, especially now in the age of "people are saying". Please cite examples.


Do you suspect Trump of election rigging? Based on?
Yes. The body of evidence is so vast that it's a major task to summarize. In brief, I base this on the likelihood that the Trump campaign conspired with Russian operatives. After all, we know for a fact that the Trump team (1) knowingly attempted to obtain illegally obtained Clinton dirt from Russian operatives and (2) had foreknowledge of the hacking.

Just curious what yourself and others may think Trump could possibly end up charged with. "collusion"?
Don't know. It might be hard to prove. I imagine that this sort of conspiracy would involve more nudges/winks than written contracts.

Does anyone think these documents might change things or did anyone notice this?
It might give Hannity and Carlson something to bray about for a few days. Critical thinkers on the other hand will be mindful that the content is cherry-picked.

I have some suspicions that exposing the roots may be interesting.
Clearly.
 
I have no doubt that Mueller and pals would love to find something to go after Trump for. One would assume they have been doing their best to do so for quite some time now.
>snip<

Why would you assume this? Mueller is a life long Republican who was highly regarded on both sides of the aisle. He was appointed by Sessions, a Trump supporter (at the time, not so sure now) and appointee. What has Mueller done to indicate he is "after" Trump? Do you consider his reporting crimes he found committed during the course of his investigation to the DOJ somehow indicative that he would "love to find something on Trump"?

You've fallen for the Trump "discredit Mueller in order to discredit the investigation" tactic.
 
I have no doubt that Mueller and pals would love to find something to go after Trump for.

I suspect Mueller would love obstruction of justice

You are proceeding from a false assumption, that a Special Counsel is working towards a desire to find someone guilty of something. You are categorically wrong! A Special Counsel is looking for only one result... the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

but Trump would never be convicted of that in any court. Could he be charged with it? For what exactly?

He has used (and is still using) his Presidential power to try to cripple any investigation into him. That IS obstruction of justice, and he has done all this publicly. If he was not the President, he would already have been indicted and charged along with his former lawyer Michael Cohen, on similar charges to him.

One of the things that must really chap Dolt's arse (and really worry his sycophantic hangers-on) is that Mueller's investigation team is airtight... IT - DOES - NOT - LEAK. There are no hints of what will be in the indictments until they are handed down. When there are official releases (in the form of indictments) they are absolutely jam-packed with detail... usernames, real names, places, dates & times, conversations & connections. They are able to find out minute details about crimes committed... just look at the Paul Manafort indictment; I was staggered by the sheer amount of detail in those indictments. That detail comes from having great investigators and good sources... the kind of sources that will be compromised if Dolt gets his way with the release of FBI documents including the FISA warrants. His willingness to order the release of those documents is another public example of him attempting to obstruct justice (by trying to hinder Mueller's investigation).

IMO, Dolt could end up spending a considerable time behind bars wearing an orange jump suit. Whether that happens sooner or later has yet to be determined.
 
Last edited:
Cohen has been talking a lot:

President Donald Trump’s former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, has participated over the last month in multiple interview sessions lasting for hours with investigators from the office of special counsel, Robert Mueller, sources tell ABC News.

The special counsel’s questioning of Cohen, one of the president’s closest associates over the past decade, has focused primarily on all aspects of Trump's dealings with Russia -- including financial and business dealings and the investigation into alleged collusion with Russia by the Trump campaign and its surrogates to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election, sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News.

Investigators were also interested in knowing, the sources say, whether Trump or any of his associates discussed the possibility of a pardon with Cohen.

Over the 16 months that Mueller has been investigating, the president has repeatedly bashed the investigation as a partisan witch hunt, insisting there has been no collusion and no obstruction of justice.

The interviews with Cohen took place in Washington, D.C., and New York City. They were also attended in part by prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York.

Cohen’s participation in the meetings has been voluntary -- without any guarantee of leniency from prosecutors, according to several people familiar with the situation.

ABC News has also learned that Cohen is also cooperating with a separate probe by New York state authorities into the inner workings of the Trump family charity and the Trump Organization, where Cohen served as an executive vice president and special counsel to Trump for 10 years.

Linky.
 
I've always believed that criminal financial activity is what will bring down Trump. From the moment it became clear that he lied about releasing his tax return history "once the audit was done" (which was an excuse in the first place), I strongly suspected he was hiding financial/tax illegalities He is desperate to discredit Mueller in order to discredit what he fears the investigation will find...and it's clear many have fallen for it.
 
I've always believed that criminal financial activity is what will bring down Trump. From the moment it became clear that he lied about releasing his tax return history "once the audit was done" (which was an excuse in the first place), I strongly suspected he was hiding financial/tax illegalities He is desperate to discredit Mueller in order to discredit what he fears the investigation will find...and it's clear many have fallen for it.

He appears to me to have been operating some kind of shell game, for possibly decades. That he has stated he 100% leverages his projects is a big fat checkmark on the smoking gun list. It's like we elected Madoff as president.
 
Why would you assume this? Mueller is a life long Republican who was highly regarded on both sides of the aisle. He was appointed by Sessions, a Trump supporter (at the time, not so sure now) and appointee. What has Mueller done to indicate he is "after" Trump? Do you consider his reporting crimes he found committed during the course of his investigation to the DOJ somehow indicative that he would "love to find something on Trump"?

You've fallen for the Trump "discredit Mueller in order to discredit the investigation" tactic.

While I agree with your larger point, I believe the highlighted is incorrect.
 
While I agree with your larger point, I believe the highlighted is incorrect.

Wasn't Mueller appointed by Rod Rosenstein, then Rosenstein got Dolted, and Sessions recused himself from the investigation?



ETA: Corrected error, Rosenstein wasn't fired
 
Last edited:
Wasn't Mueller appointed by Rod Rosenstein, then Rosenstein got Dolted, and Sessions recused himself from the investigation?

ETA: Corrected error, Rosenstein wasn't fired

Sessions recused himself from ANYTHING Involving Russian involvement in our elections. And Rosenstein as Deputy AG then ordered the appointment of Robert Mueller.
 
Why would you assume this? Mueller is a life long Republican who was highly regarded on both sides of the aisle. He was appointed by Sessions, a Trump supporter (at the time, not so sure now) and appointee. What has Mueller done to indicate he is "after" Trump? Do you consider his reporting crimes he found committed during the course of his investigation to the DOJ somehow indicative that he would "love to find something on Trump"?

You've fallen for the Trump "discredit Mueller in order to discredit the investigation" tactic.


There's your answer, right there.

Anyone the Democrats like has got to be corrupted by the Deep State.
 
Why would you assume this? Mueller is a life long Republican who was highly regarded on both sides of the aisle. He was appointed by Sessions, a Trump supporter (at the time, not so sure now) and appointee. What has Mueller done to indicate he is "after" Trump? Do you consider his reporting crimes he found committed during the course of his investigation to the DOJ somehow indicative that he would "love to find something on Trump"?

You've fallen for the Trump "discredit Mueller in order to discredit the investigation" tactic.

While I agree with your larger point, I believe the highlighted is incorrect.

You are correct. My bad.

The fact that Trump himself nominated Rosenstein, who then nominated Mueller, undermines River's assumption even more that Mueller is somehow out to get Trump.
 
As someone who would probably be considered a conservative on a number of issue..primarly fiscal I think Trump and the GOP have betrayed many conservative principals for political power.
That line from "A Man For All Seasons" has been used by many Never Trump Conervatives (many have out and out quit the GOP) about the Republican Party.
It is the line when Thomas More confronts Richard Rich, who has perjured himself in a oath before God to convict More of Treason, ( a mortal sin deserving of Damnation in Traditional Catholic Doctrine )and has received a lucrative government office t in Wales as a reward:

"To gain the world and lose your soul is bad,Richard, but for Wales?".

I note that more and more people are referring to themselves as Libertarians rather ten Conservatives nowdays.

The thing about the GOP establishment's "fiscal conservatism" is that they've been lying about what they know about how the economy really works since the 80's. They've been playing the American public for fools.

When they freak out about the deficit, it's all an act, and it has been since Reagan was POTUS.

https://www.nytimes.com/1985/07/19/opinion/in-the-nation-a-deliberate-deficit.html

But, Dr. von Hayek continued, ''You see, one of Reagan's advisers told me why the President has permitted that to happen, which makes the matter partly excusable: Reagan thinks it is impossible to persuade Congress that expenditures must be reduced unless one creates deficits so large that absolutely everyone becomes convinced that no more money can be spent.''

Thus, the economist said, Mr. Reagan ''hopes to persuade Congress of the necessity of spending reductions by means of an immense deficit.

Regarding libertarians, that's often a phase people go through before they just become democrats.
 
The thing about the GOP establishment's "fiscal conservatism" is that they've been lying about what they know about how the economy really works since the 80's. They've been playing the American public for fools.

When they freak out about the deficit, it's all an act, and it has been since Reagan was POTUS.

https://www.nytimes.com/1985/07/19/opinion/in-the-nation-a-deliberate-deficit.html



Regarding libertarians, that's often a phase people go through before they just become democrats.[/QUOTE]

It's similar to the agnostic phase people go through before becoming atheists.
 
I never liked him but he's not dumb. I read some articles that Carlson wrote about 10 years ago. They were thoughtful although I didn't agree with some of his conclusions. He's basically a whore.but not a good whore. By this, I mean he sold his soul to the Fox News narrative where truth and integrity is sacrificed every day to promote the Fox News Republican narrative. He's a phony, not a moron.

Totally. He's an actor, and what's he's doing is really, really immoral.

I think Megyn Kelly was often just acting, too, when she was on Fox, but she had the basic human decency to get the hell out and stop promoting and legitimizing conservative nuttery. In the last year or so she was there, sometimes she'd rebel, all out of the blue, and say very sane, very liberal things, much to the apparent chagrin of her co-hosts who would look at her like she'd grown a second head. It was really funny.

Hannity is the real deal. I kind of wish they'd give him a chalkboard so he could start drawing charts linking George Soros to the Muslim Brotherhood like Beck used to do. Watching Beck was greatly entertaining while it lasted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom