THEY ARE hypocritical whiny assholes. Can’t turn the clock back on that. trump is the leader of the pack. Jesus, he tweeted that not applauding his SOTU speech is treason? Bwaaahaahhaah.
And before one of our republican friends on this board comes up with the witty retort that we should get over it, you lost… It’s not about Clinton losing. Not at all. It’s about having a criminal in the Oval Office.
Because they know Trump won’t release it. Or if he does, it will look like this:
[DEL]Evidence/Evidence/Evidence/Trump is guilty!! Trump is guilty!! Trump is guilty!![/DEL] (There isn’t a “black out” option, at least that I know about. You get the idea.)
When Trump says he’s going to meet with Mueller, that doesn’t mean he’s going to meet with Mueller, it means that by saying it he thinks people will look on him more favorably and it will be easier for him to get what he wants.
An interview with Mueller may still happen, but Trump’s statement doesn’t make it any more or less likely.
Excellent analysis; spot on.
Well, I think it’s pretty clear that Mueller has all the docs he needs to prove money laundering by Trump, his sons and a few other players. He has the emails that may or may not prove collusion.
What is happening now is getting all the ducks in a row and making decisions about who to prosecute first and where. Despite Republican insistence that Obama could be charged with felonies outside of an Impeachment, anyone with a brain expects them to change the rules for Trump and insist that he cannot be so charged.
I just read two interesting articles in Wired.
Bob Mueller’s Investigation Is Larger—and Further Along—Than you Think
Here’s What Happens If ‘Magnificent Bastard’ Mueller Gets Fired
This is what I want to know. Anyone?
Absolutely correct.
The problem with evidence against Trump himself is that Trump famously does not really use computers or email, outside of his phone. Outside of Twitter, he apparently doesn’t even text (before he became president and of course since he became president when he was likely given a much more limiting secured government phone). That vastly limits the amount of evidence against Trump to eyewitnesses, who could testify about what Trump did, said, or was aware of, or documents that Trump actually signed.
Since Trump has shown over and over that he is not a details person, he would not likely involve himself in the nitty gritty of any financial crime or any kind of actual planning for collaboration between his campaign and Russian officials or Putin-connected operatives during the campaign. This is probably why the investigation’s focus when it comes to Trump himself seems to be mainly about obstruction of justice, since his numerous public statements and his related actions make his intent much easier to prove and Trump’s own personal involvement is readily obvious.
I’d wager that the House Intelligence Committee Democrats want to avoid even the risk of fines/jail-time from a vengeful Trump if they were to pre-emptively release classified information that had not been cleared through the proper channels. Taking such an action before even giving Trump the chance to reject it would undercut their arguments that releasing the Nunes memo in the first place jeopardized national security and such an action would not likely be viewed favorably by anyone in the FBI, even if the content of the rebuttal memo more justly painted FBI actions.
But also, one of the belated talking points of Ryan, Nunes and their public relations arm at Fox News is that Congress is responsible for overseeing the federal government and the American people deserve to know how federal law enforcement is abusing their powers through this exercise in transparency. That cobbled-together narrative loses even more steam if Trump refuses to de-classify the Democrats’ memo, particularly now that it has unanimously passed the House Intelligence Committee. If Trump approves its release, then the Democrats can say they forced Trump to correct the record and Trump himself would have a hard time saying he approved the release of a memo full of lies, after he falsely trumpeted the Nunes memo as completely exonerating him. If Trump refuses to release the memo, then it could find its way, anonymously delivered, to a newspaper a la the Pentagon Papers with a ready-made headline of “The Memo That Trump Doesn’t Want You to Read”.
Outstanding links. They outline very well my own conclusions, so I suppose it’s no surprise that I like them. 
I can see that but
Right, just leak it. Better still, leak it to a foreign paper.
Of course, one of our republican friends would note that, if Clinton had been elected, there’d STILL be a criminal in the White House.
After all, Clothahump is still convinced that she’s a felon.
The Hill is reporting that Steele received a second dossier from a man named Cody Shearer, probably via the Clinton organization.
Chuck Grassley is trying to push it as damning evidence that the Clintons were really trying to push the collusion narrative. (Though, given that they did it secretly, passing the information to the FBI, when all of the polls said that Clinton would win, seems like a bizarre move to make for a campaign unless they’d seen evidence of a crime and felt the need to report it.)
I’m less concerned about the politics of the second dossier as where the information would have come from.
The Clintons were always rather friendly with the Chinese, so I would wonder whether the second dossier wasn’t about the Kushner foreign investor stuff that has been in the news lately. Hints of things seem to precede the major revelations by a few weeks in this whole affair. The battle over whether the Steele dossier or the Papadop/Australia meeting was the genesis for everything was already fought and over with before Nunes ever published his memo.
Meanwhile… Dropbox - 4568489.jpg - Simplify your life
So are the Republicans saying that the Clintons pushed the collusion narrative during a campaign they were confident that they were going to win?
You’re trying to apply logic to Republican propaganda. That doesn’t work.
Secretly pushed the narrative, and somehow got the Republican director of the FBI, the FISA court, and Rod Rosenstein on their side.
No need to leak it, they can probably just read it into the Congressional record, which Sen Gravel did with the Pentagon Papers back in the day.
No. They pushed the narrative to influence the election after they had already lost.
Also, we now know that both campaigns were under FBI investigation. One was made public, and one was kept private. And, yet, the one that was kept private is insisting that the FBI was biased against them. Despite the fact that the president subsequently fired the head of said FBI because he was too tough on his opponent.
The things you have to believe to buy into this narrative are astounding.
My head just exploded.
Rick Gates’s lawyers ask to withdraw; prolly not good news for Mr. Gates.
The judge held a hearing today but has not yet issued a ruling.
