The Investigation

[sgip]

It's just interesting to read some of the die-hard Never Trumpers and those on the Hard Left slowly but surely come out of their rage induced fever dreams only to say "Is that it?... Is this all we've got?"

If you liked the Vanity Fair article (hopefully you read it....) you'll love this one as well:

https://spectator.us/camille-paglia-hillary-trump/

There's plenty to bag on Trump, but this Rooskie Collusion hoax has been forced to the front by those who can't accept that their candidate believed her coronation was inevitable and thus didn't bother connecting with enough of the voting public - the great unwashed, those deplorable bitter clingers - who wisely voted for a game show host instead.

My .02c

 

[Irvinecommuter]

It's just interesting to read some of the die-hard Never Trumpers and those on the Hard Left slowly but surely come out of their rage induced fever dreams only to say "Is that it?... Is this all we've got?"

If you liked the Vanity Fair article (hopefully you read it....) you'll love this one as well:

https://spectator.us/camille-paglia-hillary-trump/

There's plenty to bag on Trump, but this Rooskie Collusion hoax has been forced to the front by those who can't accept that their candidate believed her coronation was inevitable and thus didn't bother connecting with enough of the voting public - the great unwashed, those deplorable bitter clingers - who wisely voted for a game show host instead.

My .02c

At this point, I am done arguing the matter.  Just waiting for Mueller to finish. 

 

[morekaos]

Wait, what the heck happened to ?Russia! Russia! Russia?? So now we pivot to campaign  finance? If I didn?t know any better I?d say they are ?Reaching! Reaching! Reaching!

 

[Loco_local]

Wait, what the heck happened to ?Russia! Russia! Russia?? So now we pivot to campaign  finance? If I didn?t know any better I?d say they are ?Reaching! Reaching! Reaching!

No. Supposedly the Russian NRA spy woman who is going to plead guilty is giving up Jr. A lot of NRA campaign contributions to Republican candidates came from Russia.

 

[morekaos]

That's gonna be more nothingness.

 

[eyephone]

If they had nothing to hide why lie. stay tuned

 

[Irvinecommuter]

If they had nothing to hide why lie. stay tuned

Trump went from knowing nothing...to saying that everyone is lying...to okay it could be true but so what.  No, we are into "yes it's true" but it's totally legal!

 

[Loco_local]

That's gonna be more nothingness.

This sounds like it's going to be a big fat delicious juicy burger

 

[sgip]

What I think we're seeing is that as Trump's odds of winning were growing during 2016, a wide assortment of grifters looked at his election as money play, no matter who would eventually pay the bill. That's not election collusion, but weaponized dumbassery. It's also not unusual for any election to see these lamprey's attach to their new host in such great numbers. That's why hairdressers are given Ambassadorships in far off lands and other quid pro quo graft within the elected class.

As for getting a conviction or an impeachment on breaking Campaign Finance laws, read up on John Edwards, Vice President nominee for John Kerry and his "conviction" for breaking Campaign Finance law. "Spoiler alert" - No one ever gets what they deserve.

As for the Russian / NRA connection - here's an article of note and was helpful in getting some perspective albeit from 2017 when this issue first came out.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-kremlin-and-gop-have-a-new-friendand-boy-does-she-love-guns


My .02c

 

[Irvinecommuter]

What I think we're seeing is that as Trump's odds of winning were growing during 2016, a wide assortment of grifters looked at his election as money play, no matter who would eventually pay the bill. That's not election collusion, but weaponized dumbassery. It's also not unusual for any election to see these lamprey's attach to their new host in such great numbers. That's why hairdressers are given Ambassadorships in far off lands and other quid pro quo graft within the elected class.

As for getting a conviction or an impeachment on breaking Campaign Finance laws, read up on John Edwards, Vice President nominee for John Kerry and his "conviction" for breaking Campaign Finance law. "Spoiler alert" - No one ever gets what they deserve.

As for the Russian / NRA connection - here's an article of note and was helpful in getting some perspective albeit from 2017 when this issue first came out.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-kremlin-and-gop-have-a-new-friendand-boy-does-she-love-guns


My .02c

1)  You assume that Trump didn't know about it and told his cohorts to go ahead and meet with the Russians.
2)  Quid Pro Quo does not include hacked information on your opponent.  That's basically what happened in Watergate.
3)  You are totally ignoring the whole cover-up by Trump...which is exactly what got Nixon in trouble.  Cohen's sentencing papers talks about investigation and inquiries into WH's efforts in 2017-2018 to coordinate with Cohen (and presumably others) to lie to the investigators.

Once again, Cohen was not on his own, deciding to lie for his own purposes. He was in regular contact with unspecified people in the White House. Cohen provided the special counsel?s office with ?relevant and useful information concerning his contacts with persons connected to the White House during the 2017-2018 time period,? which ?has been credible and consistent with other evidence obtained in the SCO?s ongoing investigation.?

https://www.newyorker.com/news/swam...-cohen-sentencing-memos-are-damning-for-trump

 

[sgip]

The NewYorker is the Breitbart of the Left. Practically DailyKos level stuff. I'll pass.

1)  You assume that Trump didn't know about it and told his cohorts to go ahead and meet with the Russians.

Everyone is assuming everything - including you! If I recall Cohen has tapes. If the tapes even have a whiff of "OK, meet the Russians..." then there's going to be an impeachment. Cohen will get real jail time. If he had the goods, he would have walked. He does not, and is going to prison.

2)  Quid Pro Quo does not include hacked information on your opponent.  That's basically what happened in Watergate.

I'm yet to be convinced that the Wikileaks files were hacked, but believe dropped by an insider. Let's say they were hacked by Them Rooskies. All Wikileaks did was give some in the orbit around the Trump campaign a heads up - hardly illegal. Hardly impeachable.

We know the DNC paid a law firm 5x the going rate for "legal services" - not "Incriminating tidbits" to Fusion GPS. Fusion hired a foreign national to get supposed Russian intel on Trump resulting in a dossier used to get a FISA warrant to spy on a campaign. That's campaign finance law breaking, 3rd party hiring of a foreign national, and accepting Russian intel - to subvert a US court to justify spying. These are assumptions, but accepted facts.

On the Right, we have scumbags who were trying to gain $$$ through their new connections. On the Left we have scumbags who did everything they are accusing the Trump campaign of doing - working with them Rooskies for an election win. What a mess...

3)  You are totally ignoring the whole cover-up by Trump...which is exactly what got Nixon in trouble.  Cohen's sentencing papers talks about investigation and inquiries into WH's efforts in 2017-2018 to coordinate with Cohen (and presumably others) to lie to the investigators.

You've totally ignored that the lie to investigators appears to be about building a Trump Tower in Moscow, not election rigging. The Trump Tower question isn't an impeachable issue, unless you have a solid foundation of financial crime. Cohen's not the kind of witness you build that kind of case on. If he had the tapes, that's 100% a different set of circumstances.

We will on the same side if there is genuine evidence of election tampering and collusion to steal an election - the original purpose of the Special Counsel. So far we have a collection of foreign shiat posters who will never see the inside of a courtroom,  a host of money grubbers with pre-2016 election ties to Russia - as Mueller had BTW at the same time, and a couple of lurid stories being bought out to keep quiet - similar to the DNC's "Bimbo Eruption" team of 1992. A tasty nothing burger, but not much else.

We didn't elect a Pope, that much is clear. We aren't getting the election investigation we were promised either.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

The NewYorker is the Breitbart of the Left. Practically DailyKos level stuff. I'll pass.

You understand that key portions of the quote is from the sentencing memo. 

And here are some more sources:

In yet another detail from Mueller's Friday memorandum that is likely to give the White House new pause, prosecutors said that Cohen provided "relevant and useful information concerning his contacts with persons connected to the White House during the 2017-2018 time period.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...obe-details-mueller-inquiry-trump/2230479002/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2018/12/08/what-we-learned-friday/?utm_term=.631ee4b63e31

?This very clearly suggests that people within the White House knew about and facilitated the false statements that were made to Congress,? said Seth Waxman, a former federal prosecutor based in Washington, D.C. ?I don?t know what other conclusion you could reasonably take from Mueller?s team including that language.?

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article...ortant-sentences-in-muellers-memo-about-cohen

Everyone is assuming everything - including you! If I recall Cohen has tapes. If the tapes even have a whiff of "OK, meet the Russians..." then there's going to be an impeachment. Cohen will get real jail time. If he had the goods, he would have walked. He does not, and is going to prison.

No tape needed.  Everything we have seen so far has been carefully disclosed by Mueller.  There is a whole lot more there.  People were all "nothingburger" until the Cohen sentencing memo...now we have real smoke.

I'm yet to be convinced that the Wikileaks files were hacked, but believe dropped by an insider. Let's say they were hacked by Them Rooskies. All Wikileaks did was give some in the orbit around the Trump campaign a heads up - hardly illegal. Hardly impeachable.

Very illegal and very impeachable.  Conspiracy to obtain and distribute classified information is very very illegal.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...3ce89036c78_story.html?utm_term=.4993eda8cd9c

We know the DNC paid a law firm 5x the going rate for "legal services" - not "Incriminating tidbits" to Fusion GPS. Fusion hired a foreign national to get supposed Russian intel on Trump resulting in a dossier used to get a FISA warrant to spy on a campaign. That's campaign finance law breaking, 3rd party hiring of a foreign national, and accepting Russian intel - to subvert a US court to justify spying. These are assumptions, but accepted facts.

Seriously...that is completely not the case.  The Steele Dossier was not the impetus for the FISA warrant...that has been debunked numerous times. 
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fb...d-to-justify-surveilling-trump-team-docs-show

No, it is not breaking finance law.  DNC is not a 3rd party...they hired an investigative firm to discover information.  That is completely different than hacking and stealing the information.  Again, what the Russians and Wikileaks did is the digital equivalent to Watergate...breaking into opposing campaign to steal information so that the candidate can win. 

You've totally ignored that the lie to investigators appears to be about building a Trump Tower in Moscow, not election rigging. The Trump Tower question isn't an impeachable issue, unless you have a solid foundation of financial crime. Cohen's not the kind of witness you build that kind of case on. If he had the tapes, that's 100% a different set of circumstances.

We will on the same side if there is genuine evidence of election tampering and collusion to steal an election - the original purpose of the Special Counsel. So far we have a collection of foreign shiat posters who will never see the inside of a courtroom,  a host of money grubbers with pre-2016 election ties to Russia - as Mueller had BTW at the same time, and a couple of lurid stories being bought out to keep quiet - similar to the DNC's "Bimbo Eruption" team of 1992. A tasty nothing burger, but not much else

.

You are still absolutely missing the entire forest.  Nixon didn't get in trouble because of the actual break-in...he got in trouble because he blocked an investigation into the break-in.  Nixon won in 1972 with 520 electoral vote...the Watergate break-in had no bearing on that election whatsoever.

Even assuming he knew nothing about the Russians pre-election, Trump efforts since being elected would put him square into obstruction of justice and witness tampering. 

I don't know why you are so hung up on "tapes".  Mueller has laid numerous traps for Trump and he has walked into pretty much every one.  Cohen is not a "clean" witness but the FBI took down the mob with informants...also not the cleanest of witnesses. 

Mueller is building multiple cases...one is relate to the Trump tower, one is related to Cohen, one is related to Flynn, one is related to post-election obstruction..there are probably several more including those relating to Kushner and DTJ.  8 dimensional chess my friend.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

I am curious to see how deep into the GOP this issue goes...Russians certainly didn't stop at Trump.

 

[sgip]

It's not the Russians (IMHO) it's plain and simple human greed for money and power. This influencing could have come from Lithuania as long as there were enough $$$ in bags being delivered. For all that everyone says about Manafort and Russian influence, Mueller has extensive ties to Russian lobbyists as well. The Clinton's have their own Russian problems that will come up in some of the speeches, etc through the Clinton Foundation. It's a mess on the right as it is on the left.... or should we just come to the agreement that Washington itself should be nuked from orbit,,, you know.. just to be sure..?

Just one reply in this round:

The FISA warrant was in the news June 22-25 (approximately). You've pulled a Fox headline saying "FBI told FISA Court Steele wasn't source of report used to justify surveiling Trump Team..." yet in that same week in July NBC says that the Dossier "was only a part of the evidence cited to get a warrant"

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/why-team-trump-wrong-about-carter-page-dossier-secret-warrant-n893666

It must be Schr?dinger's Dossier: The information is used, but not used, at the same time.

Of course there's little information either of us can get to see a convincing turn of opinion. I've stated that if the goods exist, then you and I are 100% on the same team. If the goods aren't there, let's hope we can see those on the side of impeachment for Russian collusion drop this issue and be ready to support the President.

My .02c

 

[fortune11]

Love the headlines post this shutdown clown conference today - ? Pelosi questions trumps manhood ?  . Get ready for an Orange s___ storm !

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Love the headlines post this shutdown clown conference today - ? Pelosi questions trumps manhood ?  . Get ready for an Orange s___ storm !

That exchange was embarrassing...Trump reading off cue cards because he can't retain 2 facts in his head.

 

[fortune11]

Love the headlines post this shutdown clown conference today - ? Pelosi questions trumps manhood ?  . Get ready for an Orange s___ storm !

That exchange was embarrassing...Trump reading off cue cards because he can't retain 2 facts in his head.

Anyone who has not seen the video ? highly recommend you do it ? absolutely hilarious.  The expressions (or lack of) on mike pence?s face are gold ...

 

[eyephone]

Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer they were solid in the meeting with Trump. Also, they performed well at the press conference afterwards at the White House.


Trust me: I will make a comment if they chocked it, but they didn?t.

 

[fortune11]

Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer they were solid in the meeting with Trump and the press conference afterwards.

Seeing the video ? very easy to understand why republicans hate her w a passion ? damn , the lady is effective at what she does ... gotta respect that even if I don?t agree w some of her policies

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer they were solid in the meeting with Trump and the press conference afterwards.

Seeing the video ? very easy to understand why republicans hate her w a passion ? damn , the lady is effective at what she does ... gotta respect that even if I don?t agree w some of her policies

Chuck Schumer having a backbone is a new thing though.  Pelosi is effective at what she does.  She got the house in line to pass Obamacare...that was no easy thing.