Trump's Russian Collusion

[seacoaster]

"much of the public"?

What % think Trump is dishonest, a liar and a cheat?

What % think Mueller is honest?

What % think Trump is telling the truth about the Russian interference in the 2016 election, or about his dealings with the Russians?

If by "much of the public" you mean the 37%, then sure, otherwise the "crybaby sore losers"...in 2018...are the Trumpist Republicans. Boo hoo, Der Leader faces ethical questions and constitutional oversight. Boo hoo.

You're getting a little caught up in the "technicalities" known as the Constitution, the separation of powers and the system of checks and balances. OS/RR doesn't share that little blind spot; he is party first. Kind of like the Soviets back in the day.

[old salt]

"much of the public"?

What % think Trump is dishonest, a liar and a cheat?

What % think Mueller is honest?

What % think Trump is telling the truth about the Russian interference in the 2016 election, or about his dealings with the Russians?

If by "much of the public" you mean the 37%, then sure, otherwise the "crybaby sore losers"...in 2018...are the Trumpist Republicans. Boo hoo, Der Leader faces ethical questions and constitutional oversight. Boo hoo.

Whether Trump is a dishonest liar & cheat is irrelevant. He was elected, legally, IAW our Constitution.
I don't care what Trump says. I care what Mueller found.
(1) Did Trump or his supporters conspire with agents of the Russian government, or not ?
(2) Were the powers of our intel & law enforcement agencies abused, or not ?
We waited 2+ years for Mueller to answer (1).
It should not require a SC or take that long to answer (2).

[runrussellrun]

"much of the public"?

What % think Trump is dishonest, a liar and a cheat?

What % think ____________(politician) is dishonest, a liar and a cheat? Congress approval rating still in the teens.

What % think Mueller is honest?

In Southie, grabbing an ice cream at Sullivans/Castle Island.....probably tons.

What % think Trump is telling the truth about the Russian interference in the 2016 election, or about his dealings with the Russians?

Americans may be mostly lazy on these type of topics (have to spend time on fantasy drafts and online betting ) but weren't the people we elected and provide trillions of dollars supposed to tell us the truth about foreign interference. So, what you took from all of this is our intelligence community and Obama had NO idea this was going on? It's all tRumps fault? Why didn't tRump stop China and it's act of "war" when they hacked the Office of Personnel? How is Feinsteins limo driver? Status?


If by "much of the public" you mean the 37%, then sure, otherwise the "crybaby sore losers"...in 2018...are the Trumpist Republicans. Boo hoo, Der Leader faces ethical questions and constitutional oversight. Boo hoo.

[runrussellrun]

"much of the public"?

What % think Trump is dishonest, a liar and a cheat?

What % think Mueller is honest?

What % think Trump is telling the truth about the Russian interference in the 2016 election, or about his dealings with the Russians?

If by "much of the public" you mean the 37%, then sure, otherwise the "crybaby sore losers"...in 2018...are the Trumpist Republicans. Boo hoo, Der Leader faces ethical questions and constitutional oversight. Boo hoo.

You're getting a little caught up in the "technicalities" known as the Constitution, the separation of powers and the system of checks and balances. OS/RR doesn't share that little blind spot; he is party first. Kind of like the Soviets back in the day.

the TAATS are a joke. Arrest the Sect. of the Treasury.......but, what part of the US Constitution mentions income taxes? And why has this 80 year old law , that few knew existed, being used for the first time. Did Teddy Kennedy show his taxes when he ran in 1980? JFK in 1960?

[old salt]

"much of the public"?

What % think Trump is dishonest, a liar and a cheat?

What % think Mueller is honest?

What % think Trump is telling the truth about the Russian interference in the 2016 election, or about his dealings with the Russians?

If by "much of the public" you mean the 37%, then sure, otherwise the "crybaby sore losers"...in 2018...are the Trumpist Republicans. Boo hoo, Der Leader faces ethical questions and constitutional oversight. Boo hoo.

You're getting a little caught up in the "technicalities" known as the Constitution, the separation of powers and the system of checks and balances. OS/RR doesn't share that little blind spot; he is party first. Kind of like the Soviets back in the day.

Blindspot ? Mueller investigated & reported. The Senate confirmed AG acted within his his powers & disclosed as much of Mueller's report as he could, under the law. He did not have to disclose any of it.

I'm all for Congress exercising their powers under the Constitution. Fire up the impeachment hearings. Let both sides make their case. Let the American people, acting through their elected representatives, decide.

[a fan]

(1) Did Trump or his supporters conspire with agents of the Russian government, or not ? They tried. Mueller told us they tried. But we already know that they tried. Republicans don't care.
(2) Were the powers of our intel & law enforcement agencies abused, or not ?
We waited 2+ years for Mueller to answer (1).
It should not require a SC or take that long to answer (2). That's already been investigated. Just not "investigated enough" for you, correct?

[old salt]

(1) Did Trump or his supporters conspire with agents of the Russian government, or not ? They tried. Mueller told us they tried. But we already know that they tried. Republicans don't care. A few Trump supporters tried (on their own) but didn't succeed. Others were waved off by higher ranking campaign officials. In HRC's campaign, nobody waved off Fusion GPS & their Russian based disinformation campaign.
(2) Were the powers of our intel & law enforcement agencies abused, or not ?
We waited 2+ years for Mueller to answer (1).
It should not require a SC or take that long to answer (2). That's already been investigated. Just not "investigated enough" for you, correct?
Plz provide a link to that report.

[a fan]

A few Trump supporters tried (on their own) but didn't succeed. Others were waved off by higher ranking campaign officials. In HRC's campaign, nobody waved off Fusion GPS & their Russian based disinformation campaign

"A few Trump supporters?" That's what your calling Trump Jr., Manafort, Kush et.al. meeting with a Russian spy, looking for dirt on Hillary?

And a whataboutHillary thrown in for good measure, eh?

So what's your position here? That if Hillary does it, you're ok with it? Or that this is wrong, and Hillary should....what, exactly? We both know neither act is by the book illegal. For me? Change the laws. But that's just me, obviously.

[a fan]

Plz provide a link to that report.[/color]

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document ... 06-14-18-0

July of last year.

But you want more and more investigating. Show me the man, I'll show you the crime. I guess that complaint is out the window.

[OCanada]

Warren undressing g from the report in the Senate.

RM is leaving DOJ in a few days.

The President’s counsel, office not personal, is going to refuse the a legal subpoena. He is an officer of the Court. Lots to hide there

[old salt]

Plz provide a link to that report.[/color]

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document ... 06-14-18-0

July of last year.

But you want more and more investigating. Show me the man, I'll show you the crime. I guess that complaint is out the window.

Do you even read what you post ?
What was the subject of that investigation & when did it end ?

[old salt]

A few Trump supporters tried (on their own) but didn't succeed. Others were waved off by higher ranking campaign officials. In HRC's campaign, nobody waved off Fusion GPS & their Russian based disinformation campaign

"A few Trump supporters?" That's what your calling Trump Jr., Manafort, Kush et.al. meeting with a Russian spy, looking for dirt on Hillary?

And a whataboutHillary thrown in for good measure, eh?

So what's your position here? That if Hillary does it, you're ok with it? Or that this is wrong, and Hillary should....what, exactly? We both know neither act is by the book illegal. For me? Change the laws. But that's just me, obviously.

Trump & his supporters were investigated (exhaustively) & no criminality was charged.

Clinton & her supporters have yet to be investigated.

[a fan]

Um. Yes, I read what I post. Are you giving me the same courtesy?

Letsee here. The title of the report, which you obviously didn't click on, is:

" A review of various actions by the FBI and the DoJ in advance of the 2016 election".

Is this not the exact timeframe and the exact agencies you want investigated? What did I miss?

[a fan]

Clinton & her supporters have yet to be investigated.

For what? Campaign research? Didn't you and Trump and, most recently, Giuliani tell us for two years that it's not illegal to meet with Russians? So what's the problem?

[old salt]

Um. Yes, I read what I post. Are you giving me the same courtesy?

Letsee here. The title of the report, which you obviously didn't click on, is:

" A review of various actions by the FBI and the DoJ in advance of the 2016 election".

Is this not the exact timeframe and the exact agencies you want investigated? What did I miss?

That was in relation to Mid Year Exam. No mention of Crossfire Hurricane.

You know this. You're just being willfully obtuse & argumentative to waste my time.

[old salt]

Clinton & her supporters have yet to be investigated.

For what? Campaign research? Didn't you and Trump and, most recently, Giuliani tell us for two years that it's not illegal to meet with Russians? So what's the problem?

For conspiring with foreign agents to influence an American election.

[a fan]

Ah, ok. Well, call Barr, I guess. Works for me. But it's a bit rich asking for that after calling us all crazy for not wanting our elected officials to meet with Russians in the weeks leading to a election. You've been cheering it on. Now that Hill may have done it, you want more investigations? Show me the man, I'll show you the crime is no longer your motto?

Seriously?

So does this mean you've moved on from the Deep State, and are satisfied that the report I just linked clears them?

[cradleandshoot]

Warren undressing g from the report in the Senate.

RM is leaving DOJ in a few days.

The President’s counsel, office not personal, is going to refuse the a legal subpoena. He is an officer of the Court. Lots to hide there

"There is nowhere in the Constitution that says that the Congress can subpoena the President of the U.S. or his people. Congress does however have general subpoena powers, but they are not absolutely clear. There are Supreme Court cases that speak to this. They generally limit this to national security type of issues. They also say that the President himself cannot be subject to subpoena."

The key question here is that the Congress right to subpoena the POTUS or his people is not absolutely clear. This is one of those legal issues that will wind up in front of the SCOTUS. Let them deal with this hot potato.

[OCanada]

The Constitution is something cradle does not understand.

[a fan]

Um. Yes, I read what I post. Are you giving me the same courtesy?

Letsee here. The title of the report, which you obviously didn't click on, is:

" A review of various actions by the FBI and the DoJ in advance of the 2016 election".

Is this not the exact timeframe and the exact agencies you want investigated? What did I miss?

That was in relation to Mid Year Exam. No mention of Crossfire Hurricane.

You know this. You're just being willfully obtuse & argumentative to waste my time.

So no. This isn't enough.

Ok.