|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 25, 2018 20:30:05 GMT -5
"Michael Cohen, the longtime attorney of President Trump, told a federal judge on Wednesday that he will invoke his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself in a lawsuit brought by adult entertainer Stormy Daniels. Cohen’s declaration, in support of his request to pause proceedings in the civil case, cited an 'ongoing criminal investigation by the FBI and U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.'” linkHere's Cohen's problem: In a criminal case, the judge will instruct the jury that they are not read anything into a defendant's claim of the Fifth Amendment privilege. However, in a civil trial, such as this one, the jury will be free to infer that he has something to hide, giving weight to the plaintiff's claims. Cohen's not in a good place if he's already pleading the Fifth.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 25, 2018 23:34:48 GMT -5
"Rudolph W. Giuliani, President Trump’s new personal lawyer dealing with the ongoing probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election, met with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III on Tuesday to reopen negotiations for a presidential interview, according to three people familiar with the talks. Giuliani, who joined Trump’s legal team last week, conveyed the ongoing resistance of Trump and his advisers to an interview with federal investigators, but did not rule out the possibility, the people said, adding that Giuliani pressed Mueller for clarity on when the probe is expected to end. In response, Mueller reiterated that he would like a chance to ask Trump questions about steps he took during the transition and early months of his administration, the people said. The special counsel emphasized, as he did in conversations in March with Trump’s team, that an interview is essential for investigators to understand Trump’s intent in making key decisions as they seek to wrap up the portion of the probe focused on potential obstruction of justice." linkReading between the lines: Mueller's team is ready to report that a number of actions taken by Trump provide prima facie evidence of obstruction of justice. If Trump talks to them, they'll note that he denies intent to obstruct; if he does not they'll just leave the inference that intent was there. Either way, it appears they'll be able to say that a case for obstruction could be made. I don't think they will charge Trump because of DOJ guidance against indicting a sitting President. They possibly could cite him as an unindicted co-conspirator if they propose charges of conspiracy to obstruct involving others in the WH or DOJ; Nixon actually was so named by that Special Prosecutor. But I think that's the most they'd do.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 26, 2018 10:38:59 GMT -5
"The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 14-7 to advance legislation that would protect Mueller after the panel’s Republican chairman backed off from changes that threatened the bipartisan support for the bill. The committee voted to approve the bill, which would delay any action to fire a special counsel by 10 days and guarantee the ousted special counsel a chance to have three federal judges swiftly review the decision, after the panel adopted an amendment from chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) to require that Congress be notified 30 days in advance of any special counsel being terminated. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has said he would not bring the bill to the floor, but the bipartisan authors of the bill, and Grassley, have said they are working to change his mind." linkThat implies that 4 Republicans joined the Dems in passing this bill to the floor. How long can McConnell keep the Senate from voting on it? Look for some Dems to put it forward as an amendment to other pending legislation if he continues to bottle it up. They'd want to put GOP senators on record through a cloture vote. That's the narrow election-politics side of it. The bigger picture is that some GOP Senators are sending Trump a message that he'd better not fire Mueller (or Rosenstein, for that matter). This morning Donny Sr. told "Fox & Friends" that he's not going to do anything with the DOJ until the investigation is over. That's being interpreted to mean that he is not going to agree to a Mueller interview, but also that he's now more focused on the New York investigation than Muller's, so likely won't waste his diminishing political capital in firing Mueller.
|
|
|
Post by goldenbucky on Apr 26, 2018 21:49:53 GMT -5
I can't escape the feeling that Giuliani's final move in this role will involve Trump's resignation.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 27, 2018 8:37:14 GMT -5
I can't escape the feeling that Giuliani's final move in this role will involve Trump's resignation. Interesting thought, gb. Giuliani is considered extremely combative, but he's got close ties to both the FBI and DOJ offices in NYC. Once he sees what they have, and if he determines it's damning to Trump, it's not at all inconceivable that he could play that role.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 27, 2018 16:58:27 GMT -5
"A federal judge on Friday dismissed a lawsuit filed by Paul Manafort, the former campaign chairman for President Trump, that tried to narrow the authority of the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election. The judge said that Mr. Manafort’s suit, which argued that the special counsel had exceeded his authorities by investigating Mr. Manafort’s past business dealings in Ukraine, was 'not the appropriate vehicle for taking issue with what a prosecutor has done in the past or where he might be headed in the future.' The ruling by the judge, Amy Berman Jackson, is a blow to a central part of Mr. Manafort’s defense strategy. The suit filed in January — taking direct aim at both Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, and Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general who appointed him — argued that the charges against him are unrelated to Mr. Mueller’s primary task of investigating whether any of Mr. Trump’s associates assisted Russia’s campaign to disrupt the election." linkThe countdown to the Manafort Flip is on!
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 27, 2018 21:39:52 GMT -5
A federal judge on Friday granted Michael Cohen’s request for a delay in a lawsuit brought against him by porn star Stormy Daniels, saying it appeared likely Cohen will be indicted in a related criminal investigation. Judge S. James Otero’s order for a 90-day stay comes two days after Cohen, President Trump’s personal attorney, said he would invoke his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself in the lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of the Central District of California...'This is no simple criminal investigation; it is an investigation into the personal attorney of a sitting President regarding documents that might be subject to the attorney client privilege,' Otero wrote. 'Whether or not an indictment is forthcoming, and the Court thinks it likely based on these facts alone, these unique circumstances counsel in favor of stay.'” linkSo, the good news for Cohen is that he's got a 90-stay on the Stormy front (assuming a planned appeal is unsuccessful). The bad news: a federal judge just said from the bench that it's "likely" Cohen will be indicted in New York. Time to consider flipping, lad.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 29, 2018 11:44:31 GMT -5
Up until this week Michael Cohen was claiming he'd dive under a bus for Trump. But now that a judge has confirmed that he's "likely" to be indicted on multiple counts, Trump apparently has decided to push him there before he changes his mind. Here's how we know: (1) Trump went out of his way in the infamous "Fox & Friends" interview on Thursday to diminish the scope of Cohen's work for him, while insisting that any legal troubles are because of Cohen's other "business" transactions. (2) This: "If the National Enquirer is a weathervane for unfolding events in Trumpland, embattled lawyer Michael Cohen may be heading for a rendezvous with a bus. The tabloid, published by Trump pal David Pecker [you cannot make this up], has been a major booster of President Trump from its perch on grocery counter magazine racks, only occasionally publishing unflattering Trump-related stories. It sticks by the former with a 'world exclusive' this week claiming Trump passed a "polygraph" test proving there was no Trump campaign collusion with Russia. "But in its cover story, the Enquirer's front page headline trumpets 'Trump Fixer's Secrets & Lies,' with a subhead reading: 'Payoffs and threats exposed.' While the two-page article inside is mostly a re-hash of events swirling around Cohen, and frequently blurs them as well, it adds enough tantalizing extras to show some emerging daylight between Trump and Cohen, his self-proclaimed 'fixer.' It notes Cohen's role as Trump's go-to guy in the past, and adds: 'But now, Cohen, 51, is under the spotlight, as scandals swirl around his boss, and some are questioning Cohen's role, alleging blackmail, threats, hush-money payoffs — and even collusion with Russia.'" link
See, it was Cohen who colluded with Russia, though why a NYC fixer would be doing that (legal question: cui bono) is left unsaid. Michael, you are about to be the next victim of the WH Slime Machine. Kellyanne, Sarah, Raj, and all the other spinmeisters now working for you former client will be spinning a yarn for credulous voters in the backwoods about how you betrayed Trump's trust by "fixing" problems he didn't even know about, not to mention doing all kinds of bad stuff that had nothing to do with him...such as meeting with Russian agents for purposes unrelated to anything happening at the Trump campaign offices in the same building where you worked. No wonder they expect you to flip and are taking action to put you under the bus first. The only question now is what color the bus will be.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on May 2, 2018 22:04:18 GMT -5
So Ty Cobb has "retired" (don't you just love this WH's use of euphemisms?) and will be replaced by a lawyer who worked on Bill Clinton's impeachment defense team. Wanna guess what the WH thinks is going to come out of the Mueller investigation?
|
|
|
Post by badgerjon66 on May 7, 2018 8:04:43 GMT -5
IIRC the original excuse for the entire illegal coup hoax had to do with accusations that someone associated with the Trump campaign had some contact with representatives of foreign governments, right? So, when will the grand Inquisitor indict John Kerry? pjmedia.com/trending/about-that-logan-act/Or does the Logan act apply only to those not affiliated with the leftist ruling class?
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on May 7, 2018 9:40:10 GMT -5
IIRC the original excuse for the entire illegal coup hoax had to do with accusations that someone associated with the Trump campaign had some contact with representatives of foreign governments, right? So, when will the grand Inquisitor indict John Kerry? pjmedia.com/trending/about-that-logan-act/Or does the Logan act apply only to those not affiliated with the leftist ruling class? I realize that Trumpistas are getting desperate as the noose tightens, jon, but let's be clear: this talking point ain't gonna exonerate anybody from Trump to Cohen for colluding with the Russians before or after the 2016 elections. This "hoax" is just like all the other "hoaxes" you complain about in that it's actually real. The only hoax is the nonsense you swallow from the right-wing media chorus, lol! BTW, Flynn was not charged with violating the Logan Act, under which no one has been convicted ever because of its vagueness. Rather he pled guilty to lying to the FBI over his contacts with Kislyak. He was fired by Trump earlier because he lied to Pence about this same incident, creating with the DOJ said was an opportunity for blackmail by the Russians. He also was being investigated for getting more than $500,000 from the Turkish government to work for their interests without registering as a foreign agent. There is, quite literally, no comparison between Flynn and Kerry.
|
|
|
Post by badgerjon66 on May 13, 2018 8:52:14 GMT -5
¨no comparison between Flynn and Kerry.¨ Finally, OB tells the truth. Flynn is an honest man who has served his country well all his like. Kerry is a not-very-bright opportunist who is happy to sell out his country for partisan points. BTW why is Mueller suddenly reluctant to go into court and reveal his previously hidden exculpatory evidence? Who recused Contreras & gave the case to an honest judge---Sullivan---with a record of holding lying fed prosecutors accountable? Conyers? Roberts? Looks like Mueller blatantly lied about agents' claims, and likely made them alter 302ś. Worthy of prison time. theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/01/31/robert-mueller-requests-postponement-of-general-mike-flynn-sentencing/
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on May 13, 2018 15:10:53 GMT -5
Kerry is a not-very-bright opportunist who is happy to sell out his country for partisan points. Kerry's combat awards: Which medals did you win, Chickenhawk? I LOL'd at that stupid blog post you linked. Seriously, Flynn's already pleaded guilty, and the judge in the Manafort case has said clearly that there's virtually no chance the claim against the investigation will prevail. None of them is likely to get off on a technicality the way that Ollie-the-Ayatollahs'-Arms-Dealer did.
|
|
|
Post by surlyjoe on May 13, 2018 16:28:35 GMT -5
When all else fails, Trump will pardon everyone he can, resign, and let then president Pence pardon Trump. This is all too much like Nixon and Watergate. Few, if any, of Trump's loyalists will do any time or suffer serious consequences. The Dems will make a lot of noise, accomplish nothing, and the Repubs will simply state that it is all behind us and we should move on.
Bottom line, it's disgusting and unless we vote every incumbent Senator and Representative out of office in the next election it simply won't matter.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on May 13, 2018 16:56:47 GMT -5
Bottom line, it's disgusting and unless we vote every incumbent Senator and Representative out of office in the next election it simply won't matter. Well, only 1/3 of the Senate is up for election, so that's not practical. Nor is it desirable; I'd have thought the dysfunction wrought by the political neophytes elected 2010 would have made that clear. All that said, it is possible that Trump will try to pardon all his cronies, but most of them likely still will face state charges, particularly those who've done business in New York. That includes Trump. And in any case it's less important whether any of these people goes to jail than that we just get them out of our government before they cause still more damage.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on May 13, 2018 17:30:36 GMT -5
BTW, jon, here's a reality check for you: "The grand jury witnesses arrive one by one at the windowless room in the federal courthouse on Constitution Avenue in downtown Washington. They are struck first by how commonplace the setting feels — more classroom than courtroom, two witnesses said. One of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s prosecutors stands at a lectern. The jurors, diverse by age and ethnicity, are attentive and take notes. The questioning is polite yet aggressive, surprising witnesses with its precision and often accompanied by evidence — including text messages and emails — displayed on a large, old-fashioned overhead projector... "The probe is a steaming locomotive, already delivering indictments or guilty pleas involving 19 people and three companies, while soliciting interviews with most of the president’s closest aides and outside associates...'This has moved at a lightning speed,' said Christopher Ruddy, a Trump friend and chief executive of Newsmax. 'They’re not messing around. They’re going very quickly. The number of indictments, pleas and other moves is just amazing. I think it will come to a head quicker than other investigations.'” linkYes, jon, even Newsmax's CEO says Mueller is moving quickly. And to get a sense of where this is going just compare how each side is behaving: "The Mueller operation, like the former Marine Corps platoon commander who leads it, is secretive and methodical. Ten blocks west in the White House, President Trump combats the probe with bluster, disarray and defiance as he scrambles for survival. The president vents to associates about the FBI raids on his personal attorney Michael Cohen — as often as '20 times a day,' in the estimation of one confidant — and they frequently listen in silence, knowing little they say will soothe him. Trump gripes that he needs better 'TV lawyers' to defend him on cable news and is impatient to halt the 'witch hunt' that he says undermines his legitimacy as president. And he plots his battle plans with former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, his new legal consigliere." On one end of Constitution Avenue, an ex-Marine diligently carrying out a professional investigation; on the other end, a deranged, chaotic draft-dodger blusters and shouts at subordinates, while trying to beat the law through TV lawyers. Who's your money on: the Marine or the draft-dodger?
|
|
|
Post by buckybasser on May 13, 2018 18:23:33 GMT -5
When all else fails, Trump will pardon everyone he can, resign, and let then president Pence pardon Trump. This is all too much like Nixon and Watergate. Few, if any, of Trump's loyalists will do any time or suffer serious consequences. The Dems will make a lot of noise, accomplish nothing, and the Repubs will simply state that it is all behind us and we should move on. Bottom line, it's disgusting and unless we vote every incumbent Senator and Representative out of office in the next election it simply won't matter. I absolutely love the skepticism about our federal government! I believe the reason it is this horrible SJ is that it was never intended do be doing most of what it is doing! It was supposed to play only a very minor role in the lives of citizens, while their state government could decide whether to play a large or minor role. If they did not like the role of their state government, they could either take it or move to another state. Pretty simple stuff... I blame both parties almost equally and think they are essentially the same mess of big government. There is one option outside of elections. An Article V Convention of States can change the way government is run without Congress... I hope one occurs in my lifetime. Post more often and stay surly! >O
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on May 13, 2018 21:51:11 GMT -5
I believe the reason it is this horrible SJ is that it was never intended do be doing most of what it is doing! It was supposed to play only a very minor role in the lives of citizens, while their state government could decide whether to play a large or minor role. The idea that the Constitution was designed so that the federal government "was supposed to play only a very minor role in the lives of citizens" while leaving most powers to the states stands history on its head. Indeed, Alexander Hamilton, in The Federalist No. 15, quite explicitly rejected that idea: "The great and radical vice in the construction of the existing Confederation is in the principle of LEGISLATION for STATES or GOVERNMENTS, in their CORPORATE or COLLECTIVE CAPACITIES, and as contradistinguished from the INDIVIDUALS of which they consist...There is nothing absurd or impracticable in the idea of a league or alliance between independent nations for certain defined purposes precisely stated in a treaty regulating all the details of time, place, circumstance, and quantity; leaving nothing to future discretion; and depending for its execution on the good faith of the parties...If the particular States in this country are disposed to stand in a similar relation to each other, and to drop the project of a general DISCRETIONARY SUPERINTENDENCE, the scheme would indeed be pernicious, and would entail upon us all the mischiefs which have been enumerated under the first head; but it would have the merit of being, at least, consistent and practicable Abandoning all views towards a confederate government, this would bring us to a simple alliance offensive and defensive; and would place us in a situation to be alternate friends and enemies of each other, as our mutual jealousies and rivalships, nourished by the intrigues of foreign nations, should prescribe to us. But if we are unwilling to be placed in this perilous situation; if we still will adhere to the design of a national government, or, which is the same thing, of a superintending power, under the direction of a common council, we must resolve to incorporate into our plan those ingredients which may be considered as forming the characteristic difference between a league and a government; we must extend the authority of the Union to the persons of the citizens, --the only proper objects of government." "Superintending power" with a direct relation to individual citizens rather than state governments is exactly the antithesis of your statement. Moreover, if your view had prevailed, we likely would have slavery to this day in some parts of the country, if we even had one country. As I've noted several times before, your idea of the Constitution actually describes the Articles of Confederation, which the Framers most definitely rejected as the basis for the United States Government.
|
|
|
Post by buckybasser on May 14, 2018 2:23:03 GMT -5
You & I have argued this Madison / Hamilton debate ad nauseam in another thread here Professor and we will simply never agree...
If general welfare meant essentially regulating every single aspect of citizen's lives & stealing their liberty (i.e. tax $), then why have enumerated powers in Article I Section 8?
I looked for the thread on here without luck, but I will link it if found.
My only point here was that while you love a big beltway government - like this ridiculous Russia Probe - most citizens despise everything about D.C.
They have no faith in these institutions you so cherish - regardless of party.
You are blind to this because you live in the belly of the beast & regularly consume the largest sources of pro-government propaganda.
>O
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on May 14, 2018 16:18:00 GMT -5
My only point here was that while you love a big beltway government - like this ridiculous Russia Probe - most citizens despise everything about D.C. They have no faith in these institutions you so cherish - regardless of party. It is true that the public's "confidence in government to do the right thing all or most of the time" has been running at historic lows in the past decade or so; most recently, it was at 18 percent. Yet, this is not reflected in voters' demands for government services, as a Pew Research report last year found "broad support for maintaining or increasing federal spending across 14 specific program areas." For example, 59 percent wanted more spending on Medicare, vs. 9 percent who wanted less; on Social Security it was 46 vs. 6.. A staggering 67 percent wanted more federal spending on education, vs. 9 percent who wanted less. Even environmental protection did very well, at 46 vs. 19. Indeed, the only areas on which more respondents wanted less spending than wanted more was on aid to the needy overseas (29 more vs. 31 less) and the State Department and embassies (15 more, 23 less). So, if the public's not happy with US politics it's not because of the size and scope of federal policies. So, what is the problem? Well, mostly, it's about partisan politics. Another Pew report from last month outlines the problems and some of what the public thinks is needed to fix them; you won't like it, probably: Americans generally agree on democratic ideals and values that are important for the United States. But for the most part, they see the country falling well short in living up to these ideals, according to a new study of opinion on the strengths and weaknesses of key aspects of American democracy and the political system. The public’s criticisms of the political system run the gamut, from a failure to hold elected officials accountable to a lack of transparency in government. And just a third say the phrase “people agree on basic facts even if they disagree politically” describes this country well today. The perceived shortcomings encompass some of the core elements of American democracy. An overwhelming share of the public (84%) says it is very important that “the rights and freedoms of all people are respected.” Yet just 47% say this describes the country very or somewhat well; slightly more (53%) say it does not... Despite these criticisms, most Americans say democracy is working well in the United States – though relatively few say it is working very well. At the same time, there is broad support for making sweeping changes to the political system: 61% say “significant changes” are needed in the fundamental “design and structure” of American government to make it work for current times." [Major examples:] A majority (55%) of Americans say the Constitution should be amended so that the candidate who wins the most votes in the presidential election would win, while 41% say the current system should be kept so that the candidate who wins the most Electoral College votes wins the election. A large majority of Americans (76%) say the government is run by a few big interests looking out for themselves; fewer than a quarter (21%) say it is run for the benefit of all the people...A wide majority of Americans continue to believe that there should be limits on the amount of money political candidates can spend on campaigns: Roughly three-quarters (77%) feel that such limits are appropriate. A somewhat smaller majority (65%) think that new campaign finance laws could be effective in limiting the amount of money in political campaigns. [Goodbye Citizens United.] A 55% majority of the public now says the U.S. Supreme Court should make its rulings based on what the Constitution “means in current times,” while 41% say the court should base its rulings on what the Constitution “meant as originally written.” This reflects a shift in public opinion: In surveys dating back more than a decade (from 2005 to 2016), the public was roughly evenly divided in its views of how the Supreme Court should interpret the Constitution.
|
|
|
Post by buckybasser on May 14, 2018 17:02:01 GMT -5
I would suspect the Medicare & Social Security numbers are so high because older folks have more time to take surveys and are now on the feeding trough.
I would also suspect that they were not given a calculation of what was stolen from them in "payroll deductions" over their lifetime - and how it could have compounded with investments.
Gee you think someone (other than me) will call environmentalism a sham to a pollster? Not when the radical left holds up a cute & cuddly little deer or the entire planet!
How many surveyed even know the Education Department just takes & redistributes tax dollars as they see better fit than the states?
But hey, I figured you would go to the scientific political polling, and I will thus tap out on the mat because I cannot match the brilliance of your pollsters...
Russia! Russia! Russia! Marcia! Marcia! Marcia!
>O
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on May 14, 2018 22:02:50 GMT -5
I would suspect the Medicare & Social Security numbers are so high because older folks have more time to take surveys and are now on the feeding trough. You "suspect"? You didn't open the links, then, huh? Yeah, I know, trying to follow actual data after years of turning your brain to mush by playing Dittohead is hard, so here's something for you to ponder: Percent who say they would prefer to have smaller smaller government/fewer services, vs. bigger government/more services, by age group: 65+: smaller - 50; bigger - 40 50-64: smaller - 56; bigger - 38 30-49: smaller - 38; bigger - 54 18-29: smaller - 39; bigger - 57 Oh wait! That's just the opposite of what you predicted. My, how could a smart guy like you be 180 degrees wrong yet again? Could it be that who Dittohead thing?
|
|
|
Post by buckybasser on May 15, 2018 6:06:22 GMT -5
You are correct that I did not go to the methodology, but when I did, I found a 10% leftist bias & perhaps a major error in how many were even polled (1501/1401).
Either there was a typo or exactly 100 respondents did not answer the question about political lean - either way the bias makes the survey simply worthless liberal propaganda.
You are also correct that I no longer look at this garbage because Mr. Limbaugh has taught me to view most all surveys & science as utterly worthless leftism.
I never view anything political (like polling) as "science" Professor - it is all just a different iteration of liberalism. To me the term political science is an oxymoron.
In the same manner, even what I used to consider hard sciences (like meteorology) are also now just liberalism to me.
The terms Superstorm & Bomb Cyclone are simply leftist propaganda to make the public concerned about Global Warming.
Thinking people know the entire "science" shell game played by radicals like you Professor - thanks in part to true patriots like Mr. Limbaugh.
>O
|
|
|
Post by surlyjoe on May 15, 2018 8:15:04 GMT -5
The notion that those in Congress are even trying to do the right thing escapes me. Congress has become a whore to their donors. They promote and support what they are paid to support. Expecting better is foolish.
|
|
|
Post by badgerjon66 on May 15, 2018 8:31:42 GMT -5
So far, after a full tear with unlimited resources, HBob ¨ham sandwich¨ Mueller has, I believe, filed charges in three cases. None of them are related to any imagined Trump:Russia collusion. In each of these three cases Mueller has been hammered by the judge ( in the flynn case the clean judge assigned after th dirty crony judge was recused) for some combination of gross ethics violations and basic incompetence. If it were not a real threat to our Constitution this cluster would be quite amusing. In the latest ---to the best of my knowledge---embarrassment (Muellerś history with Russian Oligarch might be even worse www.newsmax.com/newsfront/robert-mueller-russia-probe-donald-trump-oligarch/2018/05/14/id/860312/.) Mueller indicted a Russian company not even in existence at the time of the alleged crime www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/05/mueller-team-becomes-national-joke-special-counsel-charged-russian-company-not-in-existence-at-time-of-charge/?omhide=true&utm_source=TGP+Communications&utm_campaign=97dd9f09b3-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_05_12_2018&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b3f16dae4d-97dd9f09b3-1862526 prompting the hilarious ¨ham sandwich¨ comment by defense counsel. Likely he will be forced to drop the entire case because he is afraid to go to discovery & reveal either a total absence of evidence or fraud. I will be surprised if he goes into Judge Sullivan's court re: Flynn sentencing either. he has delayed it twice now. the civil war rages on and it will be a while before we know just how much of the corrupt, partisan, deep state will be exposed---probably never exposed by old dem media no matter how bad it gets---but wheels on the Mueller witch hunt are close to falling off. November is still a long way off, but dem elation about polls & waves seems to be fading already. They can only hope for disasters for America that they can blame on Trump & those who elected him. Is it true, OB, that Mueller has prepared sealed indictments for 62,984,828 Americans for conspiring to elect Trump? At least they actually exist!
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on May 15, 2018 8:44:00 GMT -5
So far, after a full tear with unlimited resources, HBob ¨ham sandwich¨ Mueller has, I believe, filed charges in three cases. None of them are related to any imagined Trump:Russia collusion. In each of these three cases Mueller has been hammered by the judge ( in the flynn case the clean judge assigned after th dirty crony judge was recused) for some combination of gross ethics violations and basic incompetence. Wow, how can anyone be so misinformed in the 21st Century, jon?
|
|
|
Post by goldenbucky on May 15, 2018 16:48:16 GMT -5
Thinking people know the entire "science" shell game played by radicals like you Professor - thanks in part to true patriots like Mr. Limbaugh. LOL, what are you smoking? I'll stick with science any day of the week. If anybody is playing a shell game these days, it is the Rush Limbaugh/Alex Joneses of the world. I have had the occasional chuckle at Rush but I wouldn't take him seriously.
|
|
|
Post by goldenbucky on May 15, 2018 17:05:59 GMT -5
So far, after a full tear with unlimited resources, HBob ¨ham sandwich¨ Mueller has, I believe, filed charges in three cases. None of them are related to any imagined Trump:Russia collusion. In each of these three cases Mueller has been hammered by the judge ( in the flynn case the clean judge assigned after th dirty crony judge was recused) for some combination of gross ethics violations and basic incompetence. Wow, how can anyone be so misinformed in the 21st Century, jon? Fascinating. Basser mostly seems to tolerate Trump for the fringe benefits. jon actually seems to maintain that Trump is an innocent victim and Robert Mueller is a corrupt miscreant. For a while there jon was nicely paralleling the Russian influence campaign points tracked on Hamilton 68. Need to be careful where you get your news these days. That holds for the far left (the normal far left, not the Basser "far left" LOL) too.
|
|
|
Post by buckybasser on May 15, 2018 17:15:41 GMT -5
You are correct that Mr. Limbaugh does plenty of political comedy GB - similar to SNL / Colbert / The Daily Show - but much smarter... Limbaugh mostly uses leftist news stories from The Washington Post, N.Y. Times, & L.A. Times for the show, so there is a liberal media element as well. A.M Radio Listening Schedule For Thinking Americans:- The Hugh Hewitt Show to know what the leftist / liberal / beltway Republicans are planning & plotting.
- The Rush Limbaugh Show to both laugh & catch up on the latest political news with the best take ever to reach the airwaves.
- The Mark Levin Show to get pure raw policy goals based wholly upon the U.S. Constitution.
That is it - all that thinking people need to be truly informed about the politics from sea to shining sea!
Turn off the tube and burn those liberal propaganda rags that show up at your door!
>O
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on May 15, 2018 19:38:54 GMT -5
You are correct that Mr. Limbaugh does plenty of political comedy GB - similar to SNL / Colbert / The Daily Show - but much smarter... And much higher on opioids, don't forget that, 'basser!
|
|