Unfortunately for us, members of your intellectual class include dead batteries and moldy cheese, which don’t typically have message boards of their own, so you continue to troll here. Yay.
I think they’re being generous, considering most thoughts I would use to describe you sounded better coming out of Gunnery Sergeant Hartman.
Whiny baby enters Pit, gets upset. No one is surprised.
If the Pit is too hard on your fragile sensibilities, there’s another thread in Elections where you can post your compelling links and arguments on this subject.
Of course, you won’t be able to name-call over there, so there’s that.
No, I’m with things as they’re going here. I was merely commenting on the dynamics of the discussion, as I might on any other topic.
It was an observation that not many others seemed likely to make, and also happened to be correct - characterizations which apply to most of my comments on this MB. 
When asked if he would sit down for an interview, Trump responded:
“We’ll see what happens…It seems unlikely they could even have an interview.”
Not sure what that means, or why he thinks they can’t have an interview.
Like I said somewhere else: this interview will never happen. Thump will cause some big distraction. I only hope it isn’t WWIII. But it might be.
Just saw the full quote (which doesn’t really change much):
“We’ll see what happens … When they have no collusion, and nobody has found any collusion … it seems unlikely that you’d even have an interview.”
Today’s headlines:
Donald is mad at Sneaky Diane Feinsteinfor blowing up his spot and maybe also for making him look like a dope in their meeting (a fact the Whitehouse tried to censor from the transcript!):
Donald J. Trump Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
*
The fact that Sneaky Dianne Feinstein, who has on numerous occasions stated that collusion between Trump/Russia has not been found, would release testimony in such an underhanded and possibly illegal way, totally without authorization, is a disgrace. Must have tough Primary!*
Underhanded and illegal and totally without authorization! You go Dianne!
In other news,[Donald is calling on Republicans to "take over" the Russia investigation,](https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/trump-rages-grassley-responds)a move that gave Chuck Grassley the willies:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/951109942685126656
Donald J. Trump Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
*
The single greatest Witch Hunt in American history continues. There was no collusion, everybody including the Dems knows there was no collusion, & yet on and on it goes. Russia & the world is laughing at the stupidity they are witnessing. Republicans should finally take control!*
To which Grassley, a career politician, replied:
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/10/trump-republicans-control-russia-investigation-333158
[quote=Politico link just above]
“I don’t know what the president has in mind, and I don’t think I better comment until I have a discussion with the president on that,” Grassley said, when asked by reporters.
Then, seemingly catching himself, Grassley added: “And I don’t intend to have a discussion with the president on that point, and I hope he doesn’t call me and tell me the same thing that you said he said.”
[/quote]
Things are moving faster but I think more people coming to a consensus that the Fat Lady should start her warm ups.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh - and Donald is now saying that he's not sure he wants to talk to Mueller. Confusion to the enemy!
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/10/trump-russia-probe-mueller-well-see-333735?lo=ap_a1Donald Trump spelled Dianne right? I don’t know if I can believe that one.
And Bobby Threesticks hired a veteran cyber prosecutor
I’d forgotten about Trump’s operation intended to give him control over J and M…but, you’re right. Trump may be personally blackmailing Lindsey Graham.
I had been assuming it was Russian-curated material that was being used to induce Graham to work so hard to shield and defend the man he’d earlier been so dismissive of (even scathing–“kook” and “not fit”). But, yeah: it could be Trump’s own operation.
Yes, and as far as I can discover, Feinstein was within her rights to release the transcript.
Cue calls in right-wing world to Lock Her Up in 3 - 2 - 1 …
This seems likely to me, too. It can’t just be ‘Trump will sign our bills,’ because Pence would certainly sign their bills, too. There has to be some real fears of discovery motivating people like Devin Nunes.
(emphasis added)
Holy fuck, Donald tweeted something that is true!
Wrong thread?
*Folks, I’m goin’ down to St. James Infirmary
See my baby there;
She’s stretched out on a long, white table
She’s so sweet, so cold, so fair
Let it go, let it go, ohh bless her
Wherever she may be.*
Mueller added another prosecutor. A cybercrimes expert, apparently. Starting to think that they are not going to wrap this up by Thanksgiving, 2017.
I’d say that’s a given.
Do we really know that much about Steele? I’ve read that he was head of the Russia desk at MI6, but I’ve also read LeCarre, so …
I’m a bit surprised at how much speculation on the part of witnesses is allowed in senate hearings.
In the end, it just doesn’t matter. What Mueller finds is what Mueller finds. If it turns out the Steele dossier was right about all of it or most of it, that’s incidental. It’s beside the point.
But sure, I’ll defend Steele.
Just as we can only judge Mueller on a lifetime of ethical behavior and what regard others hold him in, we can judge Steele.
I’ve read what I can on the guy, but there isn’t much. In a way, that speaks well of him. If there was dirt on Steele, I’m pretty sure the Republican attack machine would have dug it up by now and spread it far and wide.
We know these things:
He doesn’t hold interviews and he has not in any way contributed to the politicization of his dossier.
He’s held in high regard by the FBI by those who have worked with him closely in years past on the FIFA scandal.
He was considered the best Russian expert in his years at MI6, a career that spanned nearly two decades, and is still regarded highly in that particular area. He seems to have been enough of a star at MI6 to be given responsibility in the Litvinenko poisoning investigation.
Comey had no problem working with him in his capacity as a Russian expert. I believe Mueller holds a good opinion of him and his work, too.
He cared enough about what he learned to bring it to the attention of an American agency that could do something about it. He had no reason to do it other than sincere alarm. It was the right thing to do, and I can’t believe there is even any debate about that. He’s paid a pretty high price for it, too. He has been at times in genuine fear for his life and that of his family. I find it shameful how he’s been treated by what should be a grateful ally.
He cares deeply about protecting his sources. Now sounds like he may have had good reason to be concerned.
Lastly, portions of Steele’s dossier have been shown to be true. Portions remain unverified. Nothing has to date been shown to be false. That speaks pretty well of him, I think.
Do we have any evidence that he’s anything other than a person of good integrity, character or reputation? I’ve seen no evidence for it. Should he be made to prove a negative?
Isn’t that the sound that a turd makes when it splashes into the bowl?
ROFL, staaahhhhpppp!!! I had to spit wine back into my glass!!
But… yeah.