politics thread

[skinsdad62]

So drafting the exoneration letter weeks before the investigation being over isn’t a red flag? Changing your own work from a felony to absolutely nothing, and then making up the BS of intent isn’t a red flag? Then you don’t pursue obstruction of justice charges after subpoenaing her hard drives and records only to have her destroy them doesn’t throw up red flags on Comey’s character?

Here is my real theory on Comey. He was told by Obama, AG, to change the wording and to get Hillary off. As a fuck you to them, Comey then brought up the charges again once more evidence was found.

It isn’t obstruction, if they are let go with standing, like Comey was.

shark totally blows by these facts . he cant see why anyone would question someones motives after this ? the thing is the people that gave HRC the pass after all of this ,and who loved HRC handle trump totally different .

sorry but a fake dossier paid for by an opposition party , not corroborated at all that came from the RUSSIANS themselves isnt grounds to investigate anyone but HRC

its unbelievable that gets passed over

 

[skinsdad62]

watergate happened june 14 1972 , nixon resigned aug 8 1974 , article of impeachment were brought up july 1974. . straight up that is 2 yrs and 1 month before impeachment was brought up

now that investigation had to be done in less then 2 years

so why am i out of line thinking this should be done ? and believe me they had evidence of this crime long before the investigation ended

bill clinton 's scandal with monica lewinski started on jan 17 1998 when it first broke in the press. bill clinton was impeached in dec 1998 , less then a year shark . they failed to gain a conviction in the senate after a 21 day trial

so again where am i out of line here

 

[Sharkinva]

watergate happened june 14 1972 , nixon resigned aug 8 1974 , article of impeachment were brought up july 1974. . straight up that is 2 yrs and 1 month before impeachment was brought up

now that investigation had to be done in less then 2 years

so why am i out of line thinking this should be done ? and believe me they had evidence of this crime long before the investigation ended

bill clinton 's scandal with monica lewinski started on jan 17 1998 when it first broke in the press. bill clinton was impeached in dec 1998 , less then a year shark . they failed to gain a conviction in the senate after a 21 day trial

so again where am i out of line here

Watergate did not involve players from another country trying to change the fabric of our country.

You are out of line because you are more concerned with protecting the PResident than you are with protecting the country. And your desire to protect him is more partisan than anything else.

But other than that, yea they need to wrap this up. Because God forbid they actually do find that Trump or his close associates actually were trying to assist the Russians. Puts it in an entirely different light.

 

[skinsdad62]

Watergate did not involve players from another country trying to change the fabric of our country.

You are out of line because you are more concerned with protecting the PResident than you are with protecting the country. And your desire to protect him is more partisan than anything else.

But other than that, yea they need to wrap this up. Because God forbid they actually do find that Trump or his close associates actually were trying to assist the Russians. Puts it in an entirely different light.

i am not concerned about protecting the president , i am concerend the fbi/doj planned a soft coup . big difference

the only one who got assistance from the russians was HRC and her bought and paid for steele dossier which you gloss over since the source was "russian "

and you brought up watergate not me

 

[Sharkinva]

i am not concerned about protecting the president , i am concerend the fbi/doj planned a soft coup . big difference

the only one who got assistance from the russians was HRC and her bought and paid for steele dossier which you gloss over since the source was "russian "

and you brought up watergate not me

And here is the disconnect. You think I was a fan of Clinton. I had hoped Trump the asshole would grow into Trump the President of the United States.

Instead I see him becoming Trump the President of the Reborn Confederate Union.

And the only reason I see a PResident NOT wanting to know if Americans were involved in a conspiracy against the United States, is he fears some of the conspirators were a part of his inner circle.

 

[skinsdad62]

And here is the disconnect. You think I was a fan of Clinton. I had hoped Trump the asshole would grow into Trump the President of the United States.

Instead I see him becoming Trump the President of the Reborn Confederate Union.

And the only reason I see a PResident NOT wanting to know if Americans were involved in a conspiracy against the United States, is he fears some of the conspirators were a part of his inner circle.

again we know the russians meddled . obama could have stopped it but didnt the whole issue is BS collusion . who did it ? answer HRC comes the closest to it with fusion GPS and the clinton foundation . did you forget her husband Bill got 1/2 a mil from the russians

the fbi and the doj tried to do a soft coup on trump

now when you get over your dramatics you will see at the end of 4 years or 8 years trump will be gone just like any other president before him sans FDR ( we have an amendment to the constitution that precludes more then 2 terms now )

i dont think you are a fan of clinton . i think you arent taking in all the facts

 

[skinsdad62]

The Real Russian Collusion » The Old School Patriot

Says it all

 

[skinsdad62]

. I'm less concerned about Russian election interference, than I am my own government that weaponizes its criminal justice system to target its citizens for selective and political reasons, which it what they've done to Trump and others

 

[skinsdad62]

Not sure how it works to (A) Cheer Peter Strzok for calling Trump "horrible" and "disgusting" in text messages, only to (B) Insist said agent isn't biased and totally honest after he states, “I do not think that bias was expressed in those text messages.”

 

[skinsdad62]

problem with people like Strzok Comey rose stein lynch McCabe and Page isn't bias, it's the danger of a powerful idiot arrogantly convinced his or her cause gives him latitude to ignore the rules.

 

[skinsdad62]

GOWDY: "Do you remember how long it took for you to start talking about impeachment (of Trump) after Bob Mueller was appointed?"

STRZOK: "I don't, sir."

GOWDY: "One day."

But no bias here ? Can’t even suspect it ? Or should I dismiss it as grandstanding ? Even though his emails are on the record ?

Why hire this guy if you want a fair investigation ?

 

[Sharkinva]

. I'm less concerned about Russian election interference, than I am my own government that weaponizes its criminal justice system to target its citizens for selective and political reasons, which it what they've done to Trump and others

and yet they have been doing this for years targeting Blacks and Latinos and not a peep out of the conservative right. INteresting that its a problem NOW that the new King might be implicated or targeted. NO complaint they they are weaponizing the Supreme court.

 

[skinsdad62]

Forget about Russian collusion, it’s now all about Russian confusion.

With President Trump meeting the Russian tyrant Putin in Helsinki, the story becomes what will happen between the two countries in the future, not what has happened in the past.

Here are a few observations.

The Mueller investigation into whether members of the Trump campaign or even Donald Trump himself cooperated with Russians in subverting the 2016 election is effectively over, and FBI guy Peter Strzok finished it off.

I am now branding Strzok “Reasonable Doubt” Peter. Mueller’s criminal case hangs on providing proof of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Because Strzok was involved in the investigation and, after being dismissed by Mueller for bias-laden texts, never investigated himself by the Special Counsel, doubt about the whole case has now been firmly established. Thus “Reasonable Doubt” Peter has sunk the collusion ship.

There may be peripheral indictments but Mueller’s evidence must be incontrovertible.

The left will be deeply disappointed by the outcome.

On the policy front, President Trump does not really care about Crimea or what Putin has done in the past, he simply wants a “deal” with Russia going forward. I’m not exactly sure what Mr. Trump is hoping for, but that should soon become apparent.

An agreement about reducing nuclear weapons is certainly in play - but I don’t see Putin cooperating on much else.

It should be clear to everyone that Vlad is a menace to the world and the President should certainly be aware of that. He is trying to neutralize the martinet going forward but that is not likely to happen. It’s worth a try but Vlad is a psychotic megalomaniac. Tough to play nice with a person like that.

Finally, Putin has already won the Russian collusion campaign.

Some of his high tech hackers have been indicted by Mueller but so what? They will not likely be apprehended anytime soon.

Their interference in the 2016 election has succeeded in embarrassing our current president with ongoing allegations, gravely harming the FBI, creating partisan hatred among the American populace, and pretty much destroying the image of the American press as a seeker of truth.

I’d say that’s a huge overall victory for Putin the Disrupter. Wouldn’t you?

Too bad Vlad can’t take a victory lap. But that’s impossible.

As he will tell the world this week, he and his country did not do a thing.

 

[skinsdad62]

and yet they have been doing this for years targeting Blacks and Latinos and not a peep out of the conservative right. INteresting that its a problem NOW that the new King might be implicated or targeted. NO complaint they they are weaponizing the Supreme court.

What targeting and when ?

 

[Rowdy]

and yet they have been doing this for years targeting Blacks and Latinos and not a peep out of the conservative right. INteresting that its a problem NOW that the new King might be implicated or targeted. NO complaint they they are weaponizing the Supreme court.

Weaponizing how? With judges who uphold the constitution?

 

[Sharkinva]

Weaponizing how? With judges who uphold the constitution?

With Judges likely to overturn or repeal existing laws that the conservative right dont like.

 

[skinsdad62]

Peter Strzok admitted under questioning from Rep. Jim Jordan that Bruce Ohr, husband of Fusion GPS operative Nellie Ohr, funneled documents to the FBI related to the Russia case. Strzok refused to say what those documents were.


The dossier was counter intelligence paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Fusion GPS hired a foreign national to conduct the research. This largely discredited info was used to secure court sanctioned surveillance.

The surveillance led to the discovery of crimes not related to the original investigation (none committed by Trump & no RussianCollusion). The political and foreign influence is costing Americans millions, generated misinformation and has been a destabilizing force in our nation

Remember, Bruce Ohr's wife, Nellie Ohr, worked for Fusion GPS. Did the FBI get the dossier from Bruce?

 

[gkekoa]

and yet they have been doing this for years targeting Blacks and Latinos and not a peep out of the conservative right. INteresting that its a problem NOW that the new King might be implicated or targeted. NO complaint they they are weaponizing the Supreme court.

Weaponizing the SCOTUS. Do tell. Be exact. I would say appointing justices who actually rule on Constitutionality based on the Constitution would be highly desired.

 

[Sharkinva]

Weaponizing the SCOTUS. Do tell. Be exact. I would say appointing justices who actually rule on Constitutionality based on the Constitution would be highly desired.

He has installed or nominated two Justices with the implied (actually express) intent of overturning Roe V Wade. He said as much when asked, that it would be automatic because andI qoute" Im putting Pro Life Justices on the Bench". He is building a court to further the agenda of the conservative right.

 

[gkekoa]

He has installed or nominated two Justices with the implied (actually express) intent of overturning Roe V Wade. He said as much when asked, that it would be automatic because andI qoute" Im putting Pro Life Justices on the Bench". He is building a court to further the agenda of the conservative right.

Well, can you show me constitutionally where abortion is a power given to the fed? The original SCOTUS claim wa it fell under privacy? WTF? So if I privately murder a person, I can’t be charged? Seriously, does that SCOTUS reasoning make any sense?

Does being a pro-life judge mean you will vote that way? So are you saying only judges who are pro-choice should be allowed on the SCOTUS.

Does putting justices who are pro-life on the court mean the SCOTUS will even review Roe?

The best way to overturn this (imo) poor decision is for Congress to define a person at conception.