Will Trump Be Impeached ?
Poll
 | 20 votes (32.25%) | ||
| | 42 votes (67.74%) |
62 members have voted
Quote: FaceAll because of the executive pen of one Donald J Trump.
Like he had a choice between the
proverbial rock and a hard place.
Quote: EvenBobLike he had a choice between the
proverbial rock and a hard place.
We all have choices.
It needs to be brought up. There are a number of folks here with whom I've banged the drum. 1,000pgs+, all the way back to before Hook. I consider myself an extremist, and here I found 4-5 other brothers who took it that far. Folks that understood. Folks that were willing to fight every bit as hard as me.
Here's another, yet there's no fight. Not even a tussle. It's just... crickets.
There was no rioting in the streets. No million mom march. I'd wager 80%+ of Americans had no idea what a bump stock was pre-Vegas, and it might still be a majority of those who still have no idea. I dunno what TV news has been doing about it the last year, but gunner news hasn't been churning, the way it had with the 30rd and "assault rifle definition" problems of just a few years ago. There just wasn't the uproar. And Trump's core, those he panders to, certainly weren't saying a word. And Trump's support, the Right, aren't grabbers by any definition of the term. All of this non-pressure, and he just went and did it. And you say he had no choice.
I'm gonna be honest, and it's gonna come across as insulting. I'm not trying to be, I'm just trying to work through a problem of mine. But this stuff right here, it makes me want to bash my face through a table. I don't understand why you sell out. I don't understand how one can shower him with adoration and laughable qualities such as "Alpha" and then turn around and shrug went he folds under little to no pressure at all. I don't understand how something that could and has triggered you in every other instance, somehow just becomes acceptable because Trump did it. Even immediately after a horrible tragedy, someone will come in and lash out in exasperation about gun culture, and someone is ALWAYS right there to defend it, even in those super sensitive, quasi-faux pas situations. Yet here....silence, drifting along with the tumbling tumbleweeds.
You, EB, have been one of my favorite posters since the Logan days. We get along, we agree, but I can and do still tell you what you said was idiotic, and you're free to and do critique all facets of my life, and we keep on rollin' along. I just don't understand why it seems impossible for some of you to do so when the subject is Trump. And that lack of understanding makes me want to put my face through a table.
I'll end with a reminder...
Quote: George Washington's Farewell Address
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation on the ruins of public liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and the duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
240yrs away Washington nailed it, and I can't for the life of me figure out why we don't take notice.
Quote: FaceAnd that lack of understanding makes me want to put my face through a table.
Video that, please. Thanks..
I doubt it helps your cause here for me to say thank you yet again, but thank you yet again. I am awash in that same mystery. The guy has proven a thousand times he is not worthy of adulation or emulation, and yet it persists. He acts in ways more contrary to the best interests of his constituency, out of expediency, greed, or ignorance, than any leader before him and they ignore or excuse it. The rest of the leadership despises him, but they only say so privately, while fawning in public. I just don't get it.
Quote: beachbumbabsFace,
I just don't get it.
You have no idea how those of us
who do 'get it' get a kick of youse
guys who don't. I could tell you
the reason you don't, but it would
be personally insulting, probably,
and I'd get suspended for sure.
Quote: EvenBobYou have no idea how those of us
who do 'get it' get a kick of youse
guys who don't. I could tell you
the reason you don't, but it would
be personally insulting, probably,
and I'd get suspended for sure.
"get suspended for sure"
So, there's no downside.
Are you not in favor of banning bump stocks?Quote: beachbumbabsFace,
I doubt it helps your cause here for me to say thank you yet again, but thank you yet again. I am awash in that same mystery. The guy has proven a thousand times he is not worthy of adulation or emulation, and yet it persists. He acts in ways more contrary to the best interests of his constituency, out of expediency, greed, or ignorance, than any leader before him and they ignore or excuse it. The rest of the leadership despises him, but they only say so privately, while fawning in public. I just don't get it.
Careful, I might be able to dig up an old post showing you were in favor of it.
Quote: AxelWolfAre you not in favor of banning bump stocks?
Careful, I might be able to dig up an old post showing you were in favor of it.
I think she is just wondering why most of the Trump constituency acts like sheeple, even when he clearly goes off the rails for what they seem to value.
Quote: rxwineI think she is just wondering why most of the Trump constituency acts like
I've actually been thinking about this, why
I support Trump & have very few negative
things to say about him. First and foremost,
he isn't Hillary. That's huge for me. Many
people have no idea how important it was
that we did not let that woman into the Oval
Office. It would have been a catastrophe for
the country.
I like Trump because he's getting
things done, he's doing what he said he
would do. I don't care if he likes to stand in
the Rose Garden in his underwear on one foot
eating a peanut butter sandwich. As long as
he's getting done what he said he would get
done, I don't care.
So those two things, he's
not Hillary, thank God, and he works hard to
improve the country. He's literally making
America great again. He's gotten more done
in his first two years little Obama got done in
8 years. Trump has a work ethic like no
president we've had since way back in the mid
20th century. He's amazing.
Quote: AxelWolfAre you not in favor of banning bump stocks?
Careful, I might be able to dig up an old post showing you were in favor of it.
rx understood my point/takeaway better than you did.
Bump stocks got banned because the NRA didn't defend a couple of small boutique/independent manufacturers against the overwhelming opinion of most Americans. It was politically expedient for them to let the gun control side win one.
It was also indefensible, with a work-around making semi-automatics (legal) behave as/emulate full automatics (illegal). But mostly it was small business with little influence.
But if S&W or Colt or whoever pays the NRA bills was the manufacturer, I think there would have been more of a fight. Why blow declining political power on an unwinnable battle unless it serves your masters? McConnell has buried enough gun control bills in process, they might have had to let one through.
And, yeah, I would agree with the ban. But that was not really Face's point as I took it - it was an example, one he particularly cared about, of a larger incomprehensibility.
Another example, in a not-coincidence, this morning Steve Rattner showed a chart. the 6 states with the most people (by percentage ) who depend on Obamacare for their health insurance, are the 6 states which voted most heavily (by percentage) for Trump in 2016.
In exit polling for 2018, 43% of all voters said health care was their #1 concern. The next closest issue was 23%, so not even close (and Russia didn't even make the poll).
Trump's people know this. They fought him on this week's decision to go after Obamacare again, especially with no plan to replace it. So, what the hell is he thinking? He's supposed to be politically astute. And yet he introduces a budget that slashes Medicare, Medicaid, AND Social Security, and kills the Special Olympics funding, among many others.( But funds the Wall, which is a loser issue. )
There is no question that the majority of Trump voters are using or expecting to use Obamacare, Medicare, Medicade, and/or Social Security. So why would they vote for Trump?
And the optics of defunding Special Olympics are among the most emotionally repugnant possible. They (and some here) claim the Wall funding is a drop in the bucket at billions - the Special Olympics are funded at 17.6 Million - a molecule in comparison. What the hell are they thinking? Are they even thinking? More knee-jerk stupidity IMO. This ship is rudderless.
Are you not in favor of banning bump stocks? A yes or no answer would be fine.Quote: beachbumbabsrx understood my point/takeaway better than you did.
Bump stocks got banned because the NRA didn't defend a couple of small boutique/independent manufacturers against the overwhelming opinion of most Americans. It was politically expedient for them to let the gun control side win one.
It was also indefensible, with a work-around making semi-automatics (legal) behave as/emulate full automatics (illegal). But mostly it was small business with little influence.
But if S&W or Colt or whoever pays the NRA bills was the manufacturer, I think there would have been more of a fight. Why blow declining political power on an unwinnable battle unless it serves your masters? McConnell has buried enough gun control bills in process, they might have had to let one through.
And, yeah, I would agree with the ban. But that was not really Face's point as I took it - it was an example, one he particularly cared about, of a larger incomprehensibility.
Another example, in a not-coincidence, this morning Steve Rattner showed a chart. the 6 states with the most people (by percentage ) who depend on Obamacare for their health insurance, are the 6 states which voted most heavily (by percentage) for Trump in 2016.
In exit polling for 2018, 43% of all voters said health care was their #1 concern. The next closest issue was 23%, so not even close (and Russia didn't even make the poll).
Trump's people know this. They fought him on this week's decision to go after Obamacare again, especially with no plan to replace it. So, what the hell is he thinking? He's supposed to be politically astute. And yet he introduces a budget that slashes Medicare, Medicaid, AND Social Security, and kills the Special Olympics funding, among many others.( But funds the Wall, which is a loser issue. )
There is no question that the majority of Trump voters are using or expecting to use Obamacare, Medicare, Medicade, and/or Social Security. So why would they vote for Trump?
And the optics of defunding Special Olympics are among the most emotionally repugnant possible. They (and some here) claim the Wall funding is a drop in the bucket at billions - the Special Olympics are funded at 17.6 Million - a molecule in comparison. What the hell are they thinking? Are they even thinking? More knee-jerk stupidity IMO. This ship is rudderless.
Quote: beachbumbabs
It was also indefensible, with a work-around making semi-automatics (legal) behave as/emulate full automatics (illegal). But mostly it was small business with little influence.
/self control on
Easily defensible. A bump stock does nothing you can't already do with your bare naked finger. Sending the entire mag downrange in less than 5sec has been possible since 1885.
3 sentences. How 'bout that =)
/self control off
But yes, this wasn't a gun post, it was an integrity post. Max says who cares, no one has em and ones that do ain't turning them in, and both of these are true. I sure don't care about my bump stock; its only purpose was discord, a proverbial finger to the Emperor of NY. And it's the 28th, and I still got it. So who cares?
My point is that we all did last time. No one owns a .50cal, but when they went after BMG's we all s#$% a chicken. They tried to not take our weapons, just lower the amount of ammo we could carry, and only lower it by 3. We s#$% a chicken. They tried to take AP rounds, we s#$% a chicken. They try to abolish 3d printing, we s#$% a chicken. Any time they "infringe", no matter how low that fruit is hanging, we s#$% a chicken, because any chunk they take is one we don't get back, and their only way to the disarmed victory they desire is by way of a thousand cuts. The only viable strategy they have is that of the Boiling Frog, and any win, even dumb ol bump stocks, is one more notch on the thermostat. We know this. We've preached it ad infinitum, and just got done screaming about it for 8 solid years.
But now.... crickets. That is a failure of integrity. Add to it all of Bab's offerings. A good chunk of what Don represents is antithetical to typical Right values. Yet you practically beg for more. And I Just. Don't. Get it.
I get liking the dude. I don't share EB's opinion of him because Mexicans and Muslims and coal and oil aren't in my wheelhouse, but I CAN understand why some people like him. That's not my issue. My issue is the deification of the man, and this inability to access self in the face of it. This seemingly willful desire to sacrifice self unto him. Can I even use "him", or do y'all wish me to use "Him" now? I don't get it. It creeps me the f#$% out.
I just wish someone would explain it. I've no idea what EB has in mind, but if it can be directed at one person, I'll gladly be that person. Carte blanche, no suspension, on my honor. Let me have it.
Quote: beachbumbabs
There is no question that the majority of Trump voters are using or expecting to use Obamacare, Medicare, Medicade, and/or Social Security. So why would they vote for Trump?
Because we do not vote based on who is playing Santa Claus in the biggest way. If people just vote on who is handing out the money then the republic is gone. To be quite honest, I find this kind of statement insulting to every Trump voter out there.
Quote: EvenBobI've actually been thinking about this, why
I support Trump & have very few negative
things to say about him. First and foremost,
he isn't Hillary. That's huge for me. Many
people have no idea how important it was
that we did not let that woman into the Oval
Office. It would have been a catastrophe for
the country.
I like Trump because he's getting
things done, he's doing what he said he
would do. I don't care if he likes to stand in
the Rose Garden in his underwear on one foot
eating a peanut butter sandwich. As long as
he's getting done what he said he would get
done, I don't care.
So those two things, he's
not Hillary, thank God, and he works hard to
improve the country. He's literally making
America great again. He's gotten more done
in his first two years little Obama got done in
8 years. Trump has a work ethic like no
president we've had since way back in the mid
20th century. He's amazing.
Face and Babs were wringing their hands
in anguish yesterday, crying, why oh why
do you support Trump, how could you.
So I make a post as to why, and now there's
the sound of crickets. They don't really want
to know why, they just want to complain
about it.
Quote: EvenBobFace and Babs were wringing their hands
in anguish yesterday, crying, why oh why
do you support Trump, how could you.
So I make a post as to why, and now there's
the sound of crickets. They don't really want
to know why, they just want to complain
about it.
Or, more likely, they just don't care what you think.
Quote: ams288Or, more likely, they just don't care what you think.
I don't support Trump because I don't support weak wimps when negotiating internationally
Trump is weak on Russia. Its obvious Putin has something on him
Could not believe Trump gave Kim a pass on Warmbier. WTF
Trumps is weak, no balls.
Quote: EvenBobFace and Babs were wringing their hands
in anguish yesterday, crying, why oh why
do you support Trump, how could you.
So I make a post as to why, and now there's
the sound of crickets. They don't really want
to know why, they just want to complain
about it.
He is making commonsense solutions and the haters cannot handle it. I love his ideas on student loans. Cap what people can borrow. What better way to make sure people do not get in over their heads? Then limit the repayment options to just 2.
The education establishment will be going crazy there. They want "free college."
Quote: AZDuffmanHe is making commonsense solutions
"The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows that 50% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance."
And if anybody cares, Rachel Maddow's ratings
are trying to see how low they can go now
that she can no longer scream RUSSIA every
night. She's lost about 25% of her audience
this week, while Hannity has gone up 32%.
Could you list what some of those "16 investigations" are? After all, the "17 intelligence agencies" finding Russian collusion sounds so similar.Quote: beachbumbabsMakes me wonder what Barr glossed over in his interpretation, and what else is coming in the other 16 investigations.
That is because most employees of most companies are required to pay Social Security taxes as well as Medicare premiums. There are no options. We are paying for people who have not paid a cent in millions of cases.Quote: beachbumbabsThere is no question that the majority of Trump voters are using or expecting to use Obamacare, Medicare, Medicade, and/or Social Security. So why would they vote for Trump?
Quote: SanchoPanzaThat is because most employees of most companies are required to pay Social Security taxes as well as Medicare premiums. There are no options. We are paying for people who have not paid a cent in millions of cases.
Can we agree both parties of their share of healthy, able bodied people of all ages who have made the conscious decision to not work and contribute to society. Instead they take advantage of a system that allows it and in some cases (EIC) encourages it.
And that is a problem everyone should be pissed about.
So sign me up for any candidate willing to cut “social” programs for those who don’t need them.
Of course then we would need these illegal criminals to fill the jobs these deadbeats refuse to work, so I guess we are back where we started.
Quote: SanchoPanzaThat is because most employees of most companies are required to pay Social Security taxes as well as Medicare premiums. There are no options. We are paying for people who have not paid a cent in millions of cases.
That's actually not true. A person must have 40 quarters of work counted towards Social Security/Medicare to receive either. 39 quarters? Too bad, so sad.
Obamacare, nearly everyone must pay some premium, scaled to income. Medicaid, I'm not sure how one qualifies for that, but you have to be certifiably disabled or very young (child) to receive it. None of them go for free except some medicaid for very poor, and I don't begrudge disabled people some assistance.
Quote: SanchoPanzaCould you list what some of those "16 investigations" are? After all, the "17 intelligence agencies" finding Russian collusion sounds so similar.
All Intelligence agencies found Russian interference. That's still true.
Quote: AxelWolfAre you not in favor of banning bump stocks? A yes or no answer would be fine.
Axel,
You quoted me saying I would ban them.
Quote:And, yeah, I would agree with the ban. But that was not really Face's point as I took it - it was an example, one he particularly cared about, of a larger incomprehensibility.
Quote: SanchoPanzaCould you list what some of those "16 investigations" are? After all, the "17 intelligence agencies" finding Russian collusion sounds so similar.
I hate doing your homework all the time.
Some.
Trump Foundation abuses of charity designation. SDNY
Trump Inc. Lying about valuations for tax purposes. SDNY
Trump unindicted conspirator on campaign finance violations. SDNY
Jared and Ivanka getting security clearances through intervention after they failed qualifying for them. DC something.
Jared and Ivanka using personal email and unsecured apps for official business.
Something in EDVA, maybe more than one.
I forget the rest, though some are reportrdly sealed. Google it for yourself.
Quote: EvenBobFace and Babs were wringing their hands
in anguish yesterday, crying, why oh why
do you support Trump, how could you.
So I make a post as to why, and now there's
the sound of crickets. They don't really want
to know why, they just want to complain
about it.
No crickets, I pointed out exactly what I understand and what I don't. Here, I'll use an example to help point it out directly...
You hold the belief that illegal immigration is a problem. Whether it is or in what way it is or how serious it is does not matter; it's a belief of yours and that's what matters. As such, it is perfectly understandable to me why you'd be thrilled with Trump and his stance on a border wall. I'm not confused here. You have a problem, Trump has a solution. Very easy to see the source of your support.
But here's the thing.... Trump had a bunch of power when he came in. Had support where he needed support. He waited until he lost that power and then seemed to ramp up the effort. That's a fail. It all started with a promise for Mexico to pay, and they're not. That's a fail. HE was gonna shut down .gov to get it done. He did, but then blamed Dems. That's a fail.
Support the wall? I get it. I disagree, but it's easy to understand. Support the one bringing the wall? Duh. He's doing what you want, hell yeah we're gonna cheer for him. But in any other facet of any part of life, one who has performed as Trump has would get a questioning. A confrontation. A "wtf you doin', hoss? I like ya, I'm cheerin' for ya, but you done f#$%ed this up. Get your s#$% together and get back out there." The same way you'd do with anyone else who you support but who also failed you.
That's not the case here. I hate to be redundant, but "deification" is the only word my limited vocab can come up with to describe what I'm seeing. Instead of a normal "I don't care if he's flawed, I'm on his side" or "He messed up but is better than the alternative", it's unrelenting adulation. It's lifting his qualities, Jong Il style, far above reality to untouchable heights to the point you can't even critique him. It's almost as if your very security is tied to it. Still support him after dropping these balls? Of course, that's what you're supposed to do. It's not the support that bothers me.
Obsequiousness. I found it. THAT'S what bothers me. To have the party of rugged individualism become almost servile is unbecoming as a mf'er, to the point it's got me questioning reality. Again lol.
Cool thanks. That's that's all I wanted to know and didnt feel like reading your entire post.Quote: beachbumbabsAxel,
You quoted me saying I would ban them.
So Trump got a good thing done in your opinion( of course not)?
Sorry if you covered this in your post already.
Quote: FaceSupport the wall? I get it. I disagree,
Who in their right mind would want
to stop this at the border. What was
I thinking..
Quote: AZDuffmanBecause we do not vote based on who is playing Santa Claus in the biggest way. If people just vote on who is handing out the money then the republic is gone.
This is actually sig-worthy AZ
could sum up 300 pages in 4 pages.
Barr is hiding the collusion, and
Mueller and the 19 prosecutors are
letting him. Good grief..
Don't the Dems remember they're
the ones that passed the resolution
for bare bones summaries of reports?
That was when Ken Starr submitted his
Clinton report, the Dems didn't want
all the 'cigar' details made public.
Now it's biting them on the butt.
Quote: EvenBobNow the big news is, in no way Barr
could sum up 300 pages in 4 pages.
Barr is hiding the collusion, and
Mueller and the 19 prosecutors are
letting him. Good grief..
Don't the Dems remember they're
the ones that passed the resolution
for bare bones summaries of reports?
That was when Ken Starr submitted his
Clinton report, the Dems didn't want
all the 'cigar' details made public.
Now it's biting them on the butt.
Face was talking about integrity. As am I.
So, here's where Adam Schiff stands on collusion. Defend this sequence of events after you hear the whole thing.
Preface: Trump tweeted today Schiff should resign Intelligence chairmanship for having said pre-Barr letter there was collusion. Republicans immediately prior to this demanded his resignation in writing. This is his response.
https://youtu.be/r8gAYUupm2k
Afterward: Republicans sputtered and freaked and went "huminah huminah huminah" but were cut off from speaking.
Quote: beachbumbabsFace was talking about integrity. As am I.
So, here's where Adam Schiff stands on collusion. Defend this sequence of events after you hear the whole thing.
Preface: Trump tweeted today Schiff should resign Intelligence chairmanship for having said pre-Barr letter there was collusion. Republicans immediately prior to this demanded his resignation in writing. This is his response.
https://youtu.be/r8gAYUupm2k
Afterward: Republicans sputtered and freaked and went "huminah huminah huminah" but were cut off from speaking.
So how do you feel about Hillary and the democrats paying Christopher Steele (through fusion GPS) to work with the Russians to produce the fake dossier???
huminah huminah huminah??
Quote: FleaswatterQuote: beachbumbabsFace was talking about integrity. As am I.
So, here's where Adam Schiff stands on collusion. Defend this sequence of events after you hear the whole thing.
Preface: Trump tweeted today Schiff should resign Intelligence chairmanship for having said pre-Barr letter there was collusion. Republicans immediately prior to this demanded his resignation in writing. This is his response.
https://youtu.be/r8gAYUupm2k
Afterward: Republicans sputtered and freaked and went "huminah huminah huminah" but were cut off from speaking.
So how do you feel about Hillary and the democrats paying Christopher Steele (through fusion GPS) to work with the Russians to produce the fake dossier???
huminah huminah huminah??
Deflection. The question is Trump's actions (both him and his people) for which they have not answered, as enumerated by Schiff. Tell me, and the rest of the people who follow this thread, that their actions were honorable, patriotic, acceptable, ethical, or admirable. Go ahead. I double dog dare ya.
But... that dossier started with a Trump primary opponent. So what do YOU think about that Republican tactic, paying to generate the dossier, that GPS then shopped to the Dems when the Republican left the race?
Quote: beachbumbabsQuote: FleaswatterQuote: beachbumbabsFace was talking about integrity. As am I.
So, here's where Adam Schiff stands on collusion. Defend this sequence of events after you hear the whole thing.
Preface: Trump tweeted today Schiff should resign Intelligence chairmanship for having said pre-Barr letter there was collusion. Republicans immediately prior to this demanded his resignation in writing. This is his response.
https://youtu.be/r8gAYUupm2k
Afterward: Republicans sputtered and freaked and went "huminah huminah huminah" but were cut off from speaking.
So how do you feel about Hillary and the democrats paying Christopher Steele (through fusion GPS) to work with the Russians to produce the fake dossier???
huminah huminah huminah??
Deflection. The question is Trump's actions (both him and his people) for which they have not answered, as enumerated by Schiff. Tell me, and the rest of the people who follow this thread, that their actions were honorable, patriotic, acceptable, ethical, or admirable. Go ahead. I double dog dare ya.
But... that dossier started with a Trump primary opponent. So what do YOU think about that Republican tactic, paying to generate the dossier, that GPS then shopped to the Dems when the Republican left the race?
Here is the truth about the dossier (if you believe the NY Times)
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/27/us/politics/trump-dossier-paul-singer.html
Quote:WASHINGTON — The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website funded by a major Republican donor, first hired the research firm that months later produced for Democrats the salacious dossier describing ties between Donald J. Trump and the Russian government, the website said on Friday.
The Free Beacon, funded in large part by the New York hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer, hired the firm, Fusion GPS, in 2015 to unearth damaging information about several Republican presidential candidates, including Mr. Trump. But The Free Beacon told the firm to stop doing research on Mr. Trump in May 2016, as Mr. Trump was clinching the Republican nomination.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee had begun paying Fusion GPS in April for research that eventually became the basis for the dossier.
“All of the work that Fusion GPS provided to The Free Beacon was based on public sources, and none of the work product that The Free Beacon received appears in the Steele dossier,” they said. “The Free Beacon had no knowledge of or connection to the Steele dossier, did not pay for the dossier, and never had contact with, knowledge of, or provided payment for any work performed by Christopher Steele.”
Here is some reading for you if you desire to see what "clean hands" your side has"
Glenn Simpson interviews
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4345537-Fusion-GPS-Simpson-Transcript.html
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/20180118/106796/HMTG-115-IG00-20180118-SD002.pdf
Bruce Ohr testimony
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5763899-Bruce-Ohr-s-private-testimony-before-a-joint.html
Nellie Ohr interview
https://dougcollins.house.gov/sites/dougcollins.house.gov/files/10.19.18%20Nellie%20Ohr%20Interview.pdf
Lisa Page interview (days 1 and 2)
https://dougcollins.house.gov/sites/dougcollins.house.gov/files/Lisa%20Page%20interview%20Day%201.pdf
https://dougcollins.house.gov/sites/dougcollins.house.gov/files/Lisa%20Page%20interview%20Day%202.pdf
Peter Strzok interview
https://dougcollins.house.gov/sites/dougcollins.house.gov/files/06.27.18%20Interview%20Of%20Peter%20Strzok.pdf
Russia urges release of full Mueller report: https://theantimedia.com/russia-us-publish-mueller-report/
Quote: beachbumbabsSo, here's where Adam Schiff stands on collusion.
Schiff is insane. Tucker nailed it tonight.
Only 3min long, but nobody will watch it.
Quote: Fleaswatter
So how do you feel about Hillary and the democrats paying Christopher Steele (through fusion GPS) to work with the Russians to produce the fake dossier???
huminah huminah huminah??
Nope. You're making an accusation they knew it was going to be fake. There's no evidence they wanted fake info.
Quote: EvenBobWho in their right mind would want
to stop this at the border. What was
I thinking..
You couldn't make my point any better if we had choreographed this.
My point wasn't about immigration, which is obvious both by context and the fact I stated it specifically. And you... lol, you're sharp as a tack, my friend. You know I had to read all of the last 5yrs of you and FrG, right? You're a researcher. A scholar. A learned individual who still has their capabilities.
Yet you deflect. You inject sensationalism where there is no cause to be any. You offer a provocative photo to support a stance that's not even being discussed thereby ignoring the issue entirely.
Why? Isn't this the exact behavior you've derided lo these last 5-10yrs? Isn't this all a bit "slippery"?
Trump is now performing the largest confiscation of private property (FIREARM property) in BATFE history, to the tune of $X00,000,000 of private citizen capital, and y'all are silent.
The prosecution rests.
Quote: Face
Trump is now performing the largest confiscation of private property (FIREARM property) in BATFE history, to the tune of $X00,000,000 of private citizen capital, and y'all are silent.
I have so many guns that I don't
care. I have no idea what other's
excuses are,
But Jerry 'Triple Chin Nadler' wants
it next Tuesday, un redacted. Gee,
who will win this argument.
This is Washington DC, a city that leaks like a sieve
This will be like the Pentagon Papers of our time
Every reporter on the planet is trying to get their hands on the report
Quote: EvenBobMueller report on Trump and Russia to be made public by mid-April: Barr-Reuters
But Jerry 'Triple Chin Nadler' wants
it next Tuesday, un redacted. Gee,
who will win this argument.
Again, precedent is on Nadler's side, not Barr's. Barr himself is obstructing a 420-0 vote in Congress, 90% of the country, and even Trump himself saying "release it"
And what's with the nasty name-calling yet again? Nobody has called Barr the Blimp that ate Cleveland or something.
Barr now says, I didn't say what you think I said.
Quote: Barr letter 3/29I am aware of some media reports and other public statements Mischaracterizing my March 24, 2019 supplemental notification as a "saummary" of the Special Counsel's investigation and report.
For example, Chairman Nadler's letter refers to my supplemental notification as a "four page summary of the Special Counsel's review".
My March 24 letter was not, and did not purport to be, an exhaustive recounting of the Special Counsel's investigation or report.
...
Quote: beachbumbabsand even Trump himself saying "release it"
How long does it take to go over 400
pages line by line and redact everything
that's illegal to be made public. At least
2 weeks, What's the rush anyway, it's
been 2 years, what's a few more weeks.
Do you see what you're doing, though?
You were so convinced Trump would
be nailed by Mueller. Now that he wasn't,
you're totally convinced Barr is holding
back. What will you do when you find
he held back nothing. It's a very slippery
slope you're on.
Quote: RonCWhy does everyone suddenly think Mueller won't speak out if the report is badly misrepresented?
Because they want to believe he legally
can't. He cannot discuss the details,
but he could go on CNN and claim Barr
is leaving out incriminating evidence.
And he's not.
Quote: MintyI think in the years of investigations I still haven't heard Mueller's voice. He seems to be more in the background and less likely to step into public attention than most would be in this situation, but that's just me.
He hasn't necessarily said a whole lot, but there was a fairly quick response when something inaccurate came out in testimony about the investigation:
"Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office issued a rare public rebuke on Friday of elements of a stunning report that alleged President Donald Trump directed his former legal counsel to lie in sworn Congressional testimony."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/18/muellers-office-disputes-buzzfeeds-bombshell-on-michael-cohen.html
I don't think AG Barr has a whole lot of latitude in what he releases beyond the stuff that can't be released. Yes, I would like to see the whole report...but there are parts that should not be released from the investigation regarding people who testified before a grand jury and were not charged (unless they also testified in court, which there has not been a lot of in this whole thing...mostly pleas), sources and methods information, and issues of National Security (classified stuff). Yes, Trump can declassify whatever he wants pretty much, but that is reckless in most situations. Of course, he has been reckless before...
A whole lot of people said to trust Mueller. Now trust him to do the right thing if AG Barr does anything too far off the reservation.
Quote: EvenBobSchiff is insane. Tucker nailed it tonight.
Only 3min long, but nobody will watch it.
I watched
Would watch again
