And money - its already more than paid for itself.Why is this investigation a farce? It's produced numerous convictions and jail time.
And money - its already more than paid for itself.Why is this investigation a farce? It's produced numerous convictions and jail time.
Then...actually using words...explain the comment about people falling for buzzfeed again? Considering the only time buzzfeed was the dossier and now this latest. Also...understand that not even the sc statement says that the report was false. You get that, right?I'd love to explain this to you, except I don't recall doing so.
Yes your posting seems to be the very definition of a troll when you do this. Again...you are making claims but refuse to back them up. Nothing confusing about as I don’t believe many at all...if any have stated the man will go down for collusion. So confusion would be what I feel when you make such an accusation. Though not all that confusing given your responses.
TROLL TROLL
You are indeed smart enough to never put all your eggs in the collusion basket, but then you try to act dumb and ignorant of all those that do... it is a confusing angle, I admit.
Eh... we don't know how much the change in DOJ leadership played in giving that statement. Perhaps it wouldn't have happened under Sessions/RosensteinNow that we know Mueller will speak up if leaks and rumors are untrue, it's mind boggling how that proves how much of what we've been hearing is accurate. Yikes. Trump is in deep trouble.
Well, I thought Bush/Obama should have been impeached too ¯\_(ツ)_/¯Glad you’ve finally gotten to here.
I’m going to assume the top story at Fox News is about cat adoptionsOh hey...top story on the ultra biased, Trump-hating cnn.com is “Mueller’s Office disputes report..”.
I think it's ok to hold in abeyance on some stories pending confirmation - Cohen in Prague, Assange-Manafort are a couple examples. - However on the flipside I think the press has also been overly cautious at times in reporting what has actually transpired to date in the actual submissions and reports to date. Mueller's message is fine believe what you want to believe but don't act on it until you hear it from him. And it happens all the time with investigation skeptics. 'Oh Flynn was tricked into this, and Papa was cornered into that, oh gosh poor Butina, just you wait'; but what happens when they actually show in court is all that actually matters, all that wishcasting and imagineering on their behalf melts away. Same is true of Mueller supporters. Something else is going to come out of Gates, Manafort, Flynn, Cohen, Papa and the rest of the them, but it won't really happen until you see it in black & white under the signature of the OSC.Nate Silver @NateSilver538
It's too early to know what to make of the BuzzFeed story, but it does seem like, dating all the way back to 2016, the share of stories that aren't on as firm a footing as you'd like has been pretty high on Russia-related stories.
It's funny how the Trump guys pop up like whack-a-trolls every time the media corrects a typo, but when the actual stories get released they are nowhere to be found. If you guys had any credibility, you'd be proclaiming "NO COLLUSION!" every time Rudy accidentally admits that there was collusion.
That was my thought as well - this sounds more like a directive from Whitaker than anything else.Eh... we don't know how much the change in DOJ leadership played in giving that statement. Perhaps it wouldn't have happened under Sessions/Rosenstein
WaPo giving its frontpage to that anonymous PropOrNot blacklist was a joke. So was 'Russian hackers have penetrated the electrical grid' story that turned out completely false. There's been a bunch of fake news from msm outlets of every stripe in Trump era.Man, I was waaaay off on BuzzFeed News. They had a good reputation as far as I’d heard, and I assumed they’d be extra-careful with something like this. I was wrong. In times like this it’s easy to lose sight of the fact that outlets like the Post and the network news services have earned their reputations over decades, and that matters.
Lesson learned, or at least refreshed.
I think you might be confused. I don't see or hear any crickets. But, since the OSC made their statement, I have seen a bunch of cockroaches crawling out of the woodwork.Hillary Clinton gave millions to a foreign agent who worked directly with the Kremlin to affect the US election and spy on an opponent.
But muh polling data.
Crickets.
He's trying to spin the Steele Dossier but he's got his talking points all wrong.I think you might be confused. I don't see or hear any crickets. But, since the OSC made their statement, I have seen a bunch of cockroaches crawling out of the woodwork.Hillary Clinton gave millions to a foreign agent who worked directly with the Kremlin to affect the US election and spy on an opponent.
But muh polling data.
Crickets.
The mods like the way our forum functions thoIt's funny how the Trump guys pop up like whack-a-trolls every time the media corrects a typo, but when the actual stories get released they are nowhere to be found. If you guys had any credibility, you'd be proclaiming "NO COLLUSION!" every time Rudy accidentally admits that there was collusion.
Clinton subborned perjury, destroyed evidence, committed perjury, and obstructed justice but the Senate decided that those things don’t rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.Seriously? Nixon was going to be impeached and removed because of it
Tim, good reporters make mistakes. I know this personally because a lot of my work gets covered in the media. A lot of it is wrong because the issues are complicated. It's nobody's fault and nothing is ill-intentioned.As I wrote in another thread (and I feel almost foolish now that I did) the journalist who wrote this story won the Pulitzer Prize. I would have thought he would have properly vetted this stuff. Oh well.
If your Putin/Assad apologist, Tucker Carlson-loving hero Greenwald has to go back three years to find errors in a story whose underlying narrative was 100% accurate I’d say that’s pretty impressive, especially for a newspaper that publishes dozens of political stories a day. Pobody’s nerfect!
Yeah, he probably should have gotten the boot for that.Clinton subborned perjury, destroyed evidence, committed perjury, and obstructed justice but the Senate decided that those things don’t rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.
Not only did he nit get the boot, he continues to hold an esteemed place in the party. He campaigns for key candidates, he gets prime speaking spots at the conventions etc. I see this as continued tacit agreement that with the Senate decision.Yeah, he probably should have gotten the boot for that.
Agreed that the Dems should not invite him to further events.Not only did he nit get the boot, he continues to hold an esteemed place in the party. He campaigns for key candidates, he gets prime speaking spots at the conventions etc. I see this as continued tacit agreement that with the Senate decision.
Threaten Baron I guess. It's what Trump does right? Threaten family members to get what he wants?Agreed that the Dems should not invite him to further events.
Ok, with that out of the way, what should THIS Congress do about THIS obstruction of justice and suborning of perjury?
I dunno, I think it's pretty weird for American newspapers to launder anonymously-sourced spook propaganda to stigmatize dissenting viewpoints, but to each his own I guessIf your Putin/Assad apologist, Tucker Carlson-loving hero Greenwald has to go back three years to find errors in a story whose underlying narrative was 100% accurate I’d say that’s pretty impressive, especially for a newspaper that publishes dozens of political stories a day. Pobody’s nerfect!
Agreed that the Dems should not invite him to further events.
Ok, with that out of the way, what should THIS Congress do about THIS obstruction of justice and suborning of perjury?
You should show me where I said that and really zing me.Again - because people can't seem to comprehend the truth of it. I can't stand Trump.
If after 2 years of telling me how Trump is going down for collusion, you nail his campaign manager? Alright... congrats?
He got a BJ. Think about how that compares to what Trump has done. As far as a threat to our democracy. A BJ. Seriously.Clinton subborned perjury, destroyed evidence, committed perjury, and obstructed justice but the Senate decided that those things don’t rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.
Good luck. Not part of his troll playbookI wasn't being funny. Can you answer the question?
He sexually harassed Paula Jones and then trashed her reputation and committed felonies to undermine discovery in the ongoing legal case.He got a BJ. Think about how that compares to what Trump has done. As far as a threat to our democracy. A BJ. Seriously.
The comp for this instance are the Trump coverups of his affairs - Daniels/Clifford & McDougal. Trump’s behavior was actually worse, NDA’s, intimidation through the courts, the affairs were when his wife was pregnant and with young child. The shell LLC and the campaign finance crimes were something Clinton never did with Lewinsky.Clinton subborned perjury, destroyed evidence, committed perjury, and obstructed justice but the Senate decided that those things don’t rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.
My personal view is that those do rise to the level of removal, but, I have to respect the legal precedent that has been set by previous case law defining “high crimes and misdemeanors.”Oh. What did you think at the time? Did you think those things merited conviction? FWIW, I didn’t then, but have for some time. He should have resigned IMO, and had he we’d be living in a staunchly different timeline.
That's not how precedents work. You can hear this about the Edwards case vs Trump-Daniels/McDougal. Just because someone was acquitted with a different set of facts doesn't mean they stop charging people with the crime under those other different fact situations.My personal view is that those do rise to the level of removal, but, I have to respect the legal precedent that has been set by previous case law defining “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Again, explain the damage to the country.He sexually harassed Paula Jones and then trashed her reputation and committed felonies to undermine discovery in the ongoing legal case.
What case law defines "high crimes and misdemeanors"?My personal view is that those do rise to the level of removal, but, I have to respect the legal precedent that has been set by previous case law defining “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
By "move on", you mean, "invent something else" of which to accuse Trump and start reporting that.And now I’m reading that when Cohen testifies next month (if he actually does) he won’t answer any questions regarding this issue at the request of Mueller.
This is very frustrating. Are we ever going to find out what happened here? If Trump committed a crime let’s find out. If he didn’t commit a crime, let’s exonerate him and move on.
Nothing was invented to accuse him of.By "move on", you mean, "invent something else" of which to accuse Trump and start reporting that.
Got it
The civil case he won and then paid her a settlement on?He sexually harassed Paula Jones and then trashed her reputation and committed felonies to undermine discovery in the ongoing legal case.
I've been traveling so not up to date on the news but I wanted to come back to this. I understand (and somewhat share) your frustration but I still maintain that we don't need some large conspiracy or criminality. I think this can be explained by a combination of incompetence, the desire to stay in power at all cost and the belief that the ends justify the means (see SC justices).I can’t remember being more disappointed in American governance than today’s GOP - (Government of Putin). Why! Why did they agree to lift these sanctions! I cannot imagine a scenario that is born by anything other than corruption and compromise.
It harkens me back to something I heard on the Slow Burn Podcast, which was a vote a Democrat controlled House committee held on whether to even open an investigation into Watergate early on. There were a handful of Dem members that went with the Republicans, and history has shown they were blackmailed by Nixon’s goons and some were later indicted.
It chills me to the bone that, like then, the only reasonable explanation was that the Dems who voted no were beholden to some agenda with criminality at the core.
Seems like a lot of the GOP seems to be on board with something we don’t know about yet - something they are willing to get egg on their face to avoid getting out.
Giuliani talked over Tapper KAC style the whole time, maybe allowed 4-5 questions. About whether Trump & Cohen talked, he started out by saying that that was before he was Trump’s lawyer so...Jon SwaineVerified account @jonswaine
FollowFollow @jonswaine
More
Rudolph Giuliani tells @CNNSotu that Trump may indeed have spoken to Michael Cohen about his congressional testimony beforehand. "And so what if he talked to him about it?" Denies Trump told Cohen to lie.
6:09 AM - 20 Jan 2019
Yea, same thing. Would you prefer to be taken into custody by Russian agents or the FBI?NFL2DF said:Sounds similar to what the FBI did to Papadapolous. Remember when they laid in wait at the DC airport and dragged him away as soon as he stepped off the plane?
Was that terrifying?
I don't think BF is lying per se. More likely (if the story really is 100% false) they were duped.Just watched all the Buzzfeed stuff this morning...Jesus can`t trust the media, can`t trust the POTUS..everybody is lying about something.