Trump's Russian Collusion

[CU77]

I absolutely agree. Take HRC away in handcuffs, and get the trial rolling. I want to see the actual evidence, presented according to standard court rules of criminal prosecution. Let's see what there is.

[DocBarrister]

Oh, you'll get no argument from me. What Hillary did with her emails was batsh*t crazy, and as irresponsible as it gets. And, obviously, she was lamely trying to keep something from public record...otherwise should would have simply set up whatever she needed using the State Dept. tech wonks.

Prosecute away!

Nonsense.

Hillary Rodham Clinton did not violate federal law. There is no basis for a federal prosecution of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Those are not my opinions. Those are the factual findings of an extensive investigation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and those are the legal conclusions of the United States Department of Justice.

In contrast, to date (and just to date), President Donald John Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator of two felony violations of federal campaign laws. That is not my opinion. That is the finding of career federal prosecutors in the United States Attorney’s office for the federal Southern District of New York and the subject of two of eight felony guilty pleas by co-conspirator and convicted felon, Michael Cohen.

At some point, message board b*llsh*t needs to give way to cold hard reality.

DocBarrister

[MDlaxfan76]

Oh, you'll get no argument from me. What Hillary did with her emails was batsh*t crazy, and as irresponsible as it gets. And, obviously, she was lamely trying to keep something from public record...otherwise should would have simply set up whatever she needed using the State Dept. tech wonks.

Prosecute away!

Nonsense.

Hillary Rodham Clinton did not violate federal law. There is no basis for a federal prosecution of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Those are not my opinions. Those are the factual findings of an extensive investigation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and those are the legal conclusions of the United States Department of Justice.

In contrast, to date (and just to date), President Donald John Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator of two felony violations of federal campaign laws. That is not my opinion. That is the finding of career federal prosecutors in the United States Attorney’s office for the federal Southern District of New York and the subject of two of eight felony guilty pleas by co-conspirator and convicted felon, Michael Cohen.

At some point, message board b*llsh*t needs to give way to cold hard reality.

DocBarrister

DocB,
I think you missed a fan's point, a bit.

If I'm not mistaken, he's saying and been saying, go ahead and prosecute...if there's enough actual evidence of a crime she committed to achieve conviction. It's more of a challenge to 'show us the evidence' than an actual request for prosecution.

There are many of us who do believe she was hiding 'something' and that her actions were highly inappropriate, but that's a far cry from prosecutable.

Indeed, many of us think she and Bill are corrupt as all get out, but also were intensely focused on hiding any evidence. Pattern of behavior.

But prosecuting based on believing so, yet without the proof, is what dictatorships do, not our system (hopefully).

But if DOJ actually had the proof of crimes, we'd be happy to see her nailed for them.

But we've had R management of the DOJ and FBI for a year and a half and the prosecutors continue, apparently, to take the position that there simply isn't prosecutable evidence of a connectable crime. So, Trump and his cretins are just trying to muddy the waters.

You're right that the Southern District has strongly implied that Trump is complicit in the commission of those two felonies. They and the judge have accepted a plea from Trump's former lawyer/fixer directly implying such, apparently with evidence and testimony also provided by Trump's CFO and the other party to the conspiracy, Pecker. That evidence didn't need to be presented in court because Cohen plead guilty, but the prosecutors have asserted they have such.

America apparently believes that Trump committed those crimes. 61% to 31%.
However, though he may be impeached for such, my hunch would be the Senate wouldn't convict on those alone.

My hunch is that we'll eventually see evidence presented of much more serious crimes committed by Trump, most likely financial, and these will overlap with Russians.

That will be the test of whether the GOP will come to their senses... or whether it will become marginalized and be replaced by a new center right party.

[SCLaxAttack]

Nonsense. .....

In contrast, to date (and just to date), President Donald John Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator of two felony violations of federal campaign laws.

At some point, message board b*llsh*t needs to give way to cold hard reality.

DocBarrister

1. I could be wrong here, but over the past few days I could swear I’ve seen post/s of yours (either here or on Laxpower) that complimented McCain for his civilized discourse and treatment of those with opposing positions. If that’s true, you sure don’t take your very own comments to heart. It gets tiring to see you constantly belittling and/or attacking people here whose opinions don’t match yours.

2. The portions I’ve quoted from your very own post show that, right now in the eyes of the law both HRC and DJT are the same: neither of them have been indicted. (Caveat - I say that assuming DJT was never indicted for something before he entered politics.)

3. Perhaps as we enter the new post-Laxpower, FanLax era you can tone down your rhetoric toward the posters on these boards and become more civil. You want to call public individuals names and be personally critical of them when their positions don’t match yours? Have at it. The same for fellow posters here? Not so much.

[Trinity]

Trump says the Lester Holt tape about Rusher was doctored. Now. After all this time.

In addition, Sam Patten charged by Feds with FARA violations. Ties to Manafort, Konstantin Kilimnik and Cambridge Analytica.

[DocBarrister]

Nonsense. .....

In contrast, to date (and just to date), President Donald John Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator of two felony violations of federal campaign laws.

At some point, message board b*llsh*t needs to give way to cold hard reality.

DocBarrister

1. I could be wrong here, but over the past few days I could swear I’ve seen post/s of yours (either here or on Laxpower) that complimented McCain for his civilized discourse and treatment of those with opposing positions. If that’s true, you sure don’t take your very own comments to heart. It gets tiring to see you constantly belittling and/or attacking people here whose opinions don’t match yours.

2. The portions I’ve quoted from your very own post show that, right now in the eyes of the law both HRC and DJT are the same: neither of them have been indicted. (Caveat - I say that assuming DJT was never indicted for something before he entered politics.)

3. Perhaps as we enter the new post-Laxpower, FanLax era you can tone down your rhetoric toward the posters on these boards and become more civil. You want to call public individuals names and be personally critical of them when their positions don’t match yours? Have at it. The same for fellow posters here? Not so much.

Current Department of Justice policy doesn’t permit the indictment of a sitting president. So, being an unindicted co-conspirator in a federal crime is about as close as we will get. The plea papers filed in the SDNY clearly state that Trump coordinated and directed Cohen to perform acts which Cohen plead guilty to as felony federal crimes. Cohen stated that under oath. His guilty plea had to be approved by the federal judge, the federal prosecutors, and Cohen’s own lawyers. Last time a president was an unindicted co-conspirator was Dick Nixon, and that was enough to get him kicked out of office.

In contrast, Hillary was not indicted because there was no evidence that she committed a crime. You don’t have the FBI and DOJ make that determination and then turn the evidence over to a mob to make up their own mind. That’s now how due process works.

It’s these false equivalencies that are ruining our democracy.

DocBarrister

[runrussellrun]

docB,

Just curious as to how you know Hillary committed no crime. Have you seen the case file?

And, have you really complimented McLame? In the history of politics, when, as a Presidential candidate said they regretted their choice for VP? And, to top it off, have pubically told this person that they are not welcome at their funeral. No evidence to prosecute anyone for the S & L scandal either?

[Trinity]

Sam Patton is reportedly cooperating with Mueller.

Bruce Ohr told Congress this week that Steele advised him the Russians thought they “had Trump over a barrel.”

[Typical Lax Dad]

Sam Patton is reportedly cooperating with Mueller.

Bruce Ohr told Congress this week that Steele advised him the Russians thought they “had Trump over a barrel.”

I am not sure why anyone would be surprised. Look at how the guy has led his life. Trump is going to go to Russia and not get his freak on.........? Been going there for 30 years.

[Trinity]

Sam Patten admits he funneled Ukraine money to Trump Inaugural...where Rick Gates was waiting. So much funneling around Trump.

[DocBarrister]

docB,

Just curious as to how you know Hillary committed no crime. Have you seen the case file?

And, have you really complimented McLame? In the history of politics, when, as a Presidential candidate said they regretted their choice for VP? And, to top it off, have pubically told this person that they are not welcome at their funeral. No evidence to prosecute anyone for the S & L scandal either?

Did I see the case file? No. The FBI and DOJ did. They concluded Hillary committed no crime. Isn’t that good enough for you?

DocBarrister

[MDlaxfan76]

docB,

Just curious as to how you know Hillary committed no crime. Have you seen the case file?

And, have you really complimented McLame? In the history of politics, when, as a Presidential candidate said they regretted their choice for VP? And, to top it off, have pubically told this person that they are not welcome at their funeral. No evidence to prosecute anyone for the S & L scandal either?

I'll assume that wasn't a typo above and just say that it sure seems inappropriate to me to be running down someone who so clearly served his country honorably and courageously. He took great pains to make clear that he was an imperfect servant and had made many mistakes in his life's journey. To me, that's a mark of strength not weakness.

A day or two ago the Baltimore Sun had an op ed written by someone from the far left who wrote a piece as to why John McCain was an example of 'white privilege'. Pretty interesting argument, but wholly inappropriate for the time and place.

Frankly, I think any of these sorts of attempts to denigrate this man during this time of the nation's mourning reveals quite a lot about the character flaws of those who seek to do so, regardless of whether from the far left or far right.

[DocBarrister]

Sam Patten admits he funneled Ukraine money to Trump Inaugural...where Rick Gates was waiting. So much funneling around Trump.

Mueller referred Patten’s case. So, notch yet another felony conviction into Mueller’s belt.

We now have confirmation of an illegal $50,000 Russian/Ukrainian donation to Trump’s inaugural fund. There were a lot of Russian oligarchs at Trump’s inaugural events. Trump’s a notorious micromanager. Think he didn’t notice the donation or the large number of Russian oligarchs at his inaugural? The FBI certainly did.

DocBarrister

[a fan]

Oh, you'll get no argument from me. What Hillary did with her emails was batsh*t crazy, and as irresponsible as it gets. And, obviously, she was lamely trying to keep something from public record...otherwise should would have simply set up whatever she needed using the State Dept. tech wonks.

Prosecute away!

Nonsense.

Hillary Rodham Clinton did not violate federal law. There is no basis for a federal prosecution of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Those are not my opinions. Those are the factual findings of an extensive investigation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and those are the legal conclusions of the United States Department of Justice.

In contrast, to date (and just to date), President Donald John Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator of two felony violations of federal campaign laws. That is not my opinion. That is the finding of career federal prosecutors in the United States Attorney’s office for the federal Southern District of New York and the subject of two of eight felony guilty pleas by co-conspirator and convicted felon, Michael Cohen.

At some point, message board b*llsh*t needs to give way to cold hard reality.

DocBarrister

DocB,
I think you missed a fan's point, a bit.

If I'm not mistaken, he's saying and been saying, go ahead and prosecute...if there's enough actual evidence of a crime she committed to achieve conviction. It's more of a challenge to 'show us the evidence' than an actual request for prosecution.

There are many of us who do believe she was hiding 'something' and that her actions were highly inappropriate, but that's a far cry from prosecutable.

Indeed, many of us think she and Bill are corrupt as all get out, but also were intensely focused on hiding any evidence. Pattern of behavior.

But prosecuting based on believing so, yet without the proof, is what dictatorships do, not our system (hopefully)..

That's pretty much it, thank you! Have no problem with prosecution. And I think HRC's use of a private server was disgusting and dangerous.

[DocBarrister]

docB,

Just curious as to how you know Hillary committed no crime. Have you seen the case file?

And, have you really complimented McLame? In the history of politics, when, as a Presidential candidate said they regretted their choice for VP? And, to top it off, have pubically told this person that they are not welcome at their funeral. No evidence to prosecute anyone for the S & L scandal either?

I'll assume that wasn't a typo above and just say that it sure seems inappropriate to me to be running down someone who so clearly served his country honorably and courageously. He took great pains to make clear that he was an imperfect servant and had made many mistakes in his life's journey. To me, that's a mark of strength not weakness.

A day or two ago the Baltimore Sun had an op ed written by someone from the far left who wrote a piece as to why John McCain was an example of 'white privilege'. Pretty interesting argument, but wholly inappropriate for the time and place.

Frankly, I think any of these sorts of attempts to denigrate this man during this time of the nation's mourning reveals quite a lot about the character flaws of those who seek to do so, regardless of whether from the far left or far right.

https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/ ... poll%3famp

The older poll in that link reflects others. A plurality of Republicans have a negative view of McCain. In contrast, a majority of Democrats have a positive view of McCain.

What does that say about Republicans?

DocBarrister

[MDlaxfan76]

docB,

Just curious as to how you know Hillary committed no crime. Have you seen the case file?

And, have you really complimented McLame? In the history of politics, when, as a Presidential candidate said they regretted their choice for VP? And, to top it off, have pubically told this person that they are not welcome at their funeral. No evidence to prosecute anyone for the S & L scandal either?

Did I see the case file? No. The FBI and DOJ did. They concluded Hillary committed no crime. Isn’t that good enough for you?

DocBarrister

I just had this conversation with a buddy. In some twisted universe, the notion is that Sessions, Rosenstein, Mueller, Wray, and all of their reports are involved in a cover-up to benefit Democrats and hurt Trump. My buddy suggested that the "They" (he didn't use the term 'Deep State' by may as well have) have something on Sessions and that's why he turned from being such an avid Trump supporter to betrayal with his recusal. Couldn't imagine that it was because he was ethically bound to do so, having the day prior had it revealed that his various statements before Congress that he himself hadn't met with Russians during the campaign wasn't actually true. Nope, couldn't be that he would likely be a witness or subject or even target in the investigation. He had no explanation for all those other R's except that they all 'hate Trump', even though they were appointed by him and/or enthusiastically endorsed by the R Congress.

In that twisted universe, they believe the FBI and DOJ really do have evidence that would convict Hillary but refuse to prosecute, not just back in '16 but ever since these R's took control of the decisions. They can't imagine that she was successful in covering her tracks (assuming actual guilt of a crime) and believe that the DOJ and FBI, and even these R's appointed by Trump are all in cahoots to protect her.

It's a pretty twisted universe.

[MDlaxfan76]

[

Nonsense.

Hillary Rodham Clinton did not violate federal law. There is no basis for a federal prosecution of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Those are not my opinions. Those are the factual findings of an extensive investigation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and those are the legal conclusions of the United States Department of Justice.

In contrast, to date (and just to date), President Donald John Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator of two felony violations of federal campaign laws. That is not my opinion. That is the finding of career federal prosecutors in the United States Attorney’s office for the federal Southern District of New York and the subject of two of eight felony guilty pleas by co-conspirator and convicted felon, Michael Cohen.

At some point, message board b*llsh*t needs to give way to cold hard reality.

DocBarrister

DocB,
I think you missed a fan's point, a bit.

If I'm not mistaken, he's saying and been saying, go ahead and prosecute...if there's enough actual evidence of a crime she committed to achieve conviction. It's more of a challenge to 'show us the evidence' than an actual request for prosecution.

There are many of us who do believe she was hiding 'something' and that her actions were highly inappropriate, but that's a far cry from prosecutable.

Indeed, many of us think she and Bill are corrupt as all get out, but also were intensely focused on hiding any evidence. Pattern of behavior.

But prosecuting based on believing so, yet without the proof, is what dictatorships do, not our system (hopefully)..

That's pretty much it, thank you! Have no problem with prosecution. And I think HRC's use of a private server was disgusting and dangerous.

Me too.

[Trinity]

Since none of these SC targets are on the 2018 ballot, I’m not so sure the Trump camp can bank on sixty days of silence from Mueller. Nor do they deserve it. If the cases are ready, let them fly.

[youthathletics]

Since none of these SC targets are on the 2018 ballot, I’m not so sure the Trump camp can bank on sixty days of silence from Mueller. Nor do they deserve it. If the cases are ready, let them fly.

Thought for sure we would see something dropped today considering the long weekend, but maybe they have enough respect for Labor Day. I did read two of his prosecuters left the Mueller camp....maybe work is winding down?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Since none of these SC targets are on the 2018 ballot, I’m not so sure the Trump camp can bank on sixty days of silence from Mueller. Nor do they deserve it. If the cases are ready, let them fly.

Thought for sure we would see something dropped today considering the long weekend, but maybe they have enough respect for Labor Day. I did read two of his prosecuters left the Mueller camp....maybe work is winding down?

Lobbyist pleads guilty, says he helped steer foreign money to Trump inaugural and lied to Congress

Why all the lying?