Thank You GOP Rep. Ken Buck ! You got the answer from Mueller which America was waiting for!!! - Politics Discussion

[–] BigWorm (683) 5 years ago

LOL, I cant wait to see how this gets spun into some how being hilarys fault.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Trumps already complaining that Mueller didn't spend any time investigating Clinton's emails on Twitter.

reply

[–] BigWorm (683) 5 years ago

I just saw that lol He really is a one trick pony.

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

The knuckle draggers who support Trump already trying to discredit Mueller and calling him "confused" and "a puppet" and a myriad of other things.

This is all the Trumpers ever have for a defense of their fat dictator: deflect deflect deflect.

Quite ridiculous. Question is--will anything actually be DONE about this.

reply

[–] LordBAElish (2015) 5 years ago

Mueller was barely involved and left it to his incompetent staff to handle the investigation, and it shows! No evidence that Russians influenced a single vote. Mueller was confused, and had no idea what was going on.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Mueller was confused, and had no idea what was going on.

Agree - and then Republican Ken Buck got down to the nitty as well as the gritty and set the place on fire.

How soon do you think T-rump and the GOP will tear apart Buck?

reply

[–] BigWorm (683) 5 years ago

Doubt it. They might take a shot at him later, but for now I dont see them risking the public backlash of taking down a sitting president. They would have to have iron clad proof of obstruction. Something they could point to, like a picture for all the simpletons. And even then, as you said, his supports would just cry foul and call it a "liberal plot by hilary", or some other nonsense.

the only way to defeat trump is to get the best candidate to run against him. The dems sorting their shit out enough to get that done though? Thats another story.

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

I'm seriously doubting they will and it just pisses me off. Donald is the worst president we've ever had and the a$$hole is just skating by, breaking laws left and right, having mental breakdowns left and right and seemingly suffering no consequences for any of it all the while 60 million of our own are championing all of it. Quite ridiculous.

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

The only thing I think is realistic to hope for is that Mueller’s testimony pushes some of the big questions and findings from his report into the public discussion from where it has largely been absent.

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Never in my life have I been as disenchanted with our government as I am now. I'm just about convinced that, if he pushed hard enough, Donald could bring about a United States dictatorship. It's the sort of thing I would have joked about in 2016...not joking now. Our system seems so damn flimsy that I could realistically see it happening, regardless of what John and Jane Q think.

I no longer have any faith that Donald will be a one-term president. Scary times are ahead.

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

You and I both. I think I'm most disappointed in the lack of leadership and spine to stand up to him. We've got prime example #1 on TV right now in Mr Mueller. Pelosi is the biggest target of my ire. Saying "I won't do my duty because others won't either" is a democracy dying in plain sight.

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Yeah, I'm quite sick of her as well. What the hell has she even accomplished lately? She seems to have adopted a "do nothing" stance on Trump. Seems like, after the shutdown fiasco, she sort of...just quit. What the hell happened? Everything hit the fan after the government reopened: Barr's sudden appointment with Mueller's sudden end of his investigation, Pelosi ceasing to fight back against Trump any longer, increasingly erratic Trump, uncooperative Trump witnesses, etc.

It really does feel like something...shifted after the shutdown ended and Barr's appointment commenced. What the hell happened?

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

According to Mueller's testimony he wasn't hindered by Barr from concluding his investigation. What we do know is that they've had their disagreements behind closed doors over Barr's public characterizations and the official last minute letter Barr sent Mueller two days ago warning him to stick to only discussing the publicly released parts of his report and not divulge the grand jury materials Barr has obstinately been refusing to release to congress. I think Barr and Trump are breathing a huge sigh of relief right now because mission accomplished. Mueller stuck to the script because he's too much of a boy scout not to.

Clearly whatever they're so worried about is buried in that grand jury material that they've successfully stonewalled from oversight. I don't expect public sentiment to change unless we ever learn what's in that material, which I don't expect either because Pelosi is worthless and unwilling to conduct aggressive oversight. She's my Rep so I take her two faced bullshit personally. I went on a long rant to Doggie about her in another thread yesterday from the insight I have on her thinking culled from her colleagues in other congressional districts. Suffice to say, she pisses me off to no end. We've got a humanitarian crises on the border and she's more interested in battling Democrats in her own caucus who want to hold Trump accountable. She needs to focus on doing her fucking job by attaching strings to the power of the purse afforded her by the Constitution instead of handing Trump a blank check so his thugs on the border can do whatever they like.

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Would you mind linking me to that rant? I'm sorry, but I've been away for a while and there's a mound of sh!t on this board I'm trying to wade through to find discussions by you guys.

Also--so, what do you think is Pelosi's deal? Why is she essentially doing nothing and aggressively preventing others from doing anything about Trump? She seemed to be fighting him for a while but suddenly and curiously stopped cold in her tracks after the shutdown fiasco. Any ideas on what the hell happened? It just seems to me that, ever since Barr was installed, everything shifted quite dramatically. EVERYTHING.

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/5d376268269daf334d7b913b/I-feel-like-taking-the-day-off-tomorrow-and-getting-popcorn-for-the-Mueller-Show?reply=5d37fbb4269daf334d7b95c1

It's easy to find former posts from specific users. Just go to their user profile and you'll see their reply history.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Also--so, what do you think is Pelosi's deal? Why is she essentially doing nothing and aggressively preventing others from doing anything about Trump?

That's my question, too. I've read everything eyeDef has shared with us, and it paints a very disturbing picture of Pelosi right now. Yet, I still hold hope that she has some kind of game plan where she/we will come out ahead.

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

Sadly there really is no game plan. She's a politician and she's doing what she thinks will protect her majorities in the House in 2020.

What she said in her press conference with Schiff and Nadler yesterday made it loud and clear. She spelled out her strategy forward will continue to be the same one they've utilized to underwhelming results thus far. Relying on courts to pry new evidence out of the administration while not exerting maximum leverage and urgency she has available to her now to do it. It's a plan designed to muddle things along and slow walk investigations until 2020. If Dems win in 2020 it will be in spite of her efforts, not because of them. But by dragging her feet on conducting oversight and refusing to put Trump's crimes front and center in an impeachment inquiry because she thinks it's "too divisive" for the country she's really only hurting Dem chances. How can impeachment be "divisive" in a country that’s already divided? The Civil Rights movement was divisive. Was it a bad thing to have engaged in? Her logic is nonsensical.

If she's not willing to open an inquiry she needs to make this clear and move on by putting forward another message (corruption, Russian puppet, child abuse are ALL out there) and use that to frame Trump’s actions and hammer it home. The conflict over impeachment has neutralized the Dems ability to do cogent messaging at all.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I was reading online today (forgot which site) that Pelosi wants to continue with House investigations, and gather enough evidence before working on impeachment - that way they have the evidence to prove to the Senate he has to be impeached. Apparently, the House is not at that point yet - but they're gaining ground.

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

Looks like we've got a ray of hope on this. Nadler, who has been the committee chair who has been pushing Pelosi hardest behind the scenes on an impeachment inquiry, held a press conference flanked by nine members who have all come out in support of impeachment. It was to announce they've filed a petition with a judge for the grand jury materials they seek in order to determine whether to open an impeachment inquiry. This is a major escalation to seek materials under the rubric of impeachment, which would imply Nancy changed her mind in the last 24 hours. Just yesterday Schiff was forcefully stating his position as anti-impeachment. Looks like Nancy might allow Nadler to proceed with an inquiry.

"that way they have the evidence to prove to the Senate he has to be impeached."

There's no hope of a fair proceeding in a McConnell led Senate anyway, Republicans will never vote to impeach. Impeachment is about presenting the evidence to the American people in the House he is unfit and too corrupt for office in order to give the 2020 Dem candidate the best chance to win. The key is the grand jury material and potential smoking gun buried in the redactions that they need to get their hands on.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Slow and steady wins the race.

Personally, I think the best time to start impeachment hearings is a year from now, when he's running for re-election.

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

Yeah well there's the inquiry and the hearings themselves. It's important to start the inquiry ASAP in order to gather all the evidence necessary to hold the hearings.

The impeachment inquiry during Watergate commenced on October 30, 1973, one week after the Saturday night massacre. The hearings themselves didn't begin until May 9th, after the committee had gotten most of the evidence it needed (including grand jury materials which had been denied to the Senate Watergate Oversight Committee but given to the House committee BECAUSE it was involved in a impeachment investigation) and the staff had interviewed most of the witnesses.

If they want any hope of obtaining all the evidence to hold hearings they need to get this show on the road now. This is a far more complex case than Watergate.

Unfortunately, we're entering the August recess so nothing will happen for at least the next six weeks. My hope is constituents will be protesting and attending town halls with their Reps during the recess break pounding the table to impeach. I know I will.

Bottom line is people are pissed they elected Dems in record numbers in 2018 and they're dragging their feet to do what they were elected to do. That's why primary challengers to Nadler and Richard Neal (who has been dragging his feet on subpoenaing Trump's tax returns as the sole guy in the House who has that authority) have emerged in the last week. It could be why the political calculus for Nancy changed in the last day, she's feeling the heat from her incumbent committee chairs who will be under threat from getting primaried. This is a good development.

Ari did a great sub for Rachel's Friday show explaining a lot of this, did you see it? He did a fine interrogation of Raskin over whether Nadler's presser was serious on the impeachment front. Ari clearly recognizes the fierce urgency of getting this ball rolling immediately and has been bluntly driving this narrative.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Unfortunately, we're entering the August recess so nothing will happen for at least the next six weeks. My hope is constituents will be protesting and attending town halls with their Reps during the recess break pounding the table to impeach. I know I will.

I saw this talked about on one of the cable shows Thursday night (it might have been Cuomo's). The guest was saying the Dems are going to go home for the summer, and they can't ignore their constituents' call for action of impeachment. I do hope enough people gather at these Town Halls and do something collectively.

I didn't catch Rachel's show last night - I know they repeat it on Saturday nights, so I'll DVR it tonight. Thanks for the heads up!

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

My sources are telling me it's a done deal. Nancy has changed her mind and Nadler is proceeding with an impeachment inquiry even though yesterday's press conference he wasn't eager to call it that and most of the media has yet to figure it out.

It was a legal and technical slight of hand as to how they stealthily opened an impeachment inquiry filed in petition to the courts without having to make a show of a full floor vote. That's something Nancy wanted to avoid in order to protect moderate Dems from having to take that vote. They were able to do this because the full House, in effect, authorized an Impeachment Inquiry back on June 11th by allowing the Speaker and the Judiciary Committee to act and to speak on their behalf with respect to investigation of impeachable conduct by the president. They just did it in a way that neither the mainstream media and the GOP fully comprehended at the time. Only sharp-as-a-tack Ari figured it out. Brian Williams, for instance, is still clueless.

In addition the courts have to recognize this petition for what it is; a demand for information and testimony pursuant to a judicial proceeding in the House drafting of Articles of Impeachment. It's happening. And at MUCH lower political risk for the Democrats.

I credit Nadler for devising this scheme and appreciate his persistence on Pelosi to get her to change her mind. Thanks to him it's game on!

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

I'll take a look at his post. I'm curious about this.

reply

[–] christomacin (4656) 5 years ago

Donald Barr is a creepy second generation CIA thug, from a CIA family. Something is up with his father's ties to Epstein in his early days at the Dalton School. The way the timeline at which Epstein was employed there suddenly was pushed a year ahead after a Daily Beast article claimed to be "correcting the record" despite being reported as 1973 to 1975 for years, certainly raised my eyebrows. It wasn't lost on me either that Barr, Jr. was working for the CIA from 1973 to 1977, coinciding nicely with Epstein's rise at Dalton and then Bear Stearns, and also with George Bush's tenure as Special Envoy to China (1974-75) and CIA director (1976-1977). Barr himself held a degree in Chinese studies before working for the CIA. And even it that is just my own paranoid musings, just go on wikipedia and look up his history as George H.W. Bush's fixer during his tenure as his Attorney General, and his role in the pardons of the key figures Iran Contra and Iraq Gate Scandals. Look up also his philosophy of executive power. Trumpkins speak of the "Deep State", yet this guy is about as deep as you can get.

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

See the news Epstein just tried to off himself in his jail cell? I think it's a coin flip whether it was really a suicide attempt vs attempted murder seeing as how a lot of compromised elite really want to see him dead right about now.

reply

[–] christomacin (4656) 5 years ago

I just found out the Bill Richardson was also in Epstein's "little black book", where the names of Trump, Clinton, and many, many others also reside. Need I remind you that Richardson was Gary Johnson's running mate on the Libertarian ticket in 2016. So, three out of the five party tickets in 2016 turn out to have potential ties with Epstein. Seriously, what the fuck is going on in the United States, or in the world for that matter? McMullin wasn't on the ballot in my state if I recall correctly and Stein is a political non-entity, and I didn't like Johnson. In short, I was so disillusioned and despondent in 2016 that I didn't even vote. I felt guilty at the time, but I am feeling somewhat vindicated now realizing just how lost our system really is.

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

Of course I'm familiar with Richardson. Former NM gov and Dem candidate for president in '08 too. He won't be the last big name out of that little black book if all its contents are ever revealed. The feds let the only one familiar with the details, Epstein's former butler, die rotting in prison.

I bet some people are sweating the fact that Epstein appears to have survived for the time being.

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

And that's what this entire Trump administration feels like: an amalgamation of corrupt figures from various areas in recent history.

Scary times.

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Wow...it's like something from a movie/tv show. We're living in strange times.

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

Upon further reflection, I rank the following from the most to least likely:

Self-ordered "hit" that accidentally went a bit far to convince a judge to put him on house arrest where he can make an escape (most likely)
Botched Hit ordered by Barr (quite likely)
Self-ordered "hit" to get to hospital and a chance at escape (also decent chance)
Random Attacker (least likely, but still a possibility seeing as how pedos are bottom-of-foodchain targets in prison)
Suicide Attempt (no chance. Narcissists don't try to kill themselves, it doesn't happen)

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

I'm going with the Barr one on your list. That guy scares the sh!t out of me and I'm not even afraid to admit it. Something about him...just gives me the creeps.

I'm not a huge conspiracy person but this whole abrupt end to Mueller's investigation and Mueller's odd demeanor (that goes against every aspect of the man's reputation) really makes me wonder if it has something to do with something Barr said to him. Is it outrageous to think that Barr basically gave Mueller a "shut up and play dumb" order with a threat attached if he didn't? I mean--at this point, we've already had several B-movie type scenarios play out with this corrupt administration, so who's to say the same wasn't happening here? Mueller seemed to be stalling and playing for time as you and others have suggested. "I don't know.", "Pardon?", "Could you repeat that, please?" etc.

Mueller looked STRESSED and like a deer in the headlights in that meeting. That's worrisome.

Yes, he's old, but come on...

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Many are saying it was a ploy by Epstein to fake this attack, in hopes of getting 'better accommodations' his lifestyle requires. For the record, since he's been imprisoned, he has complained about the food, flooding in his cell, and rodents which sleep with him at night. I guess the rodents are of adult age, so he has no use for them?

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

Yeah that's why I rank "self-ordered" hit as most likely, to convince a judge to transfer him ideally to home arrest or somewhere where he can make a run for it.

What's interesting is how prison officials interrogated a former NY cop involved in a cocaine ring turned murderer they suspected of orchestrating the Epstein attack. Of course the former cop denied having anything to do with it.

reply

[–] christomacin (4656) 5 years ago

On a "lighter" note, here are some recent headlines from around the world concerning Epstein's "suicide" attempt (satire alert):

"Jeffrey Epstein Overcome By Swamp Gas, Says NASA Spokesman" (The Christian Science Monitor)
"Jeffrey Epstein Slips On Soap in Shower" (The Washington Post)
"Robert Mueller Refers Us to Report On Epstein Injury" (The New York Times)
"Jeffrey Epstein Escapes From Prison Hospital, Seeks One-Armed Man" (The National Enquirer)
"C'mon, Jeff, the Prison Food Can't Be THAT Bad!" (The New York Post)
"Jeffrey Epstein: From Kama Sutra to Karma Sutra" (The Times of India)
"Epstein Fails to Deliver Jeffxit" (The Economist of London)
"Did We Get Him?" (Clinton Foundation Quarterly Newsletter)
"Never Really Knew Epstein. I Think He Brought Me Coffee Once" (@realDonaldTrump)
"Barr: 'My Father Didn't Actually Hire Epstein...Honest!'" (Office of the Attorney General)
"Dershowitz Kept His Underwear On" (Statement by Alan Dershowitz's Lawyer)
"Prince Bin Salman: 'Duh...You Want I Should Cut 'Em Into Little Pieces, Boss?'" (Al Jazeera)
"Putin on Epstein Scandal: 'Thanks, Lucifer!'" (Russia Today)

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Barr has been giving me the creeps from Day 1--more than any other Trump toadie. Everything "shifted" the day he was installed. That's when all the odd events started occurring--from Mueller's abrupt finish to Pelosi suddenly ceasing all fighting against Trump and trying to stop other dems from doing the same.

The entire group gives me the creeps, really. Sometimes it really feels like we're a few fragile steps away from a full-on Trump dictatorship. It was almost inconceivable just two years ago. Not anymore.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Barr has been giving me the creeps from Day 1--more than any other Trump toadie.

I agree 100%.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Pelosi is the biggest target of my ire. Saying "I won't do my duty because others won't either" is a democracy dying in plain sight.

I feel the same....it's so frustrating. The only thing I take a bit of comfort in is the thought that if Trump was impeached, removed from office and faced charges now, he would simply be pardoned by President Pence. If Trump is voted out in 2020 and faces charges, no such pardon will be available.

But much like dteam, I no longer have faith that Trump will be a one-term President.....it's seeming all too possible that he could win a second term. Really hope I'm wrong about this.

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

Probably the most consequential thing that happened today was Mueller's point that Trump can be charged after he leaves office. I enjoyed watching him go apeshit insulting a reporter who brought it up because it revealed just how concerned he is that it could happen.

It might take a bit to matriculate, but I see that as the only real possible action that could actually scare him into trading his presidency for a pardon.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

It's encouraging, though, to see his base is dwindling. Especially in the electoral states he needs to win re-election.

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

ARE they dwindling? I haven't noticed. The biggest thing that matters at this point are the independents/swing voters.

Yeah, things look bad for Trump ON ONE HAND but on the other...Mueller is looking worse than before, which puts his investigation in a new (and bad) light.

Unless I'm way off base here, all I see is everything looking more and more favorable for Trump. Hope I'm wrong on that, though.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/665611/gops-dwindling-base

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/426057-trumps-base-shows-signs-of-eroding-ahead-of-re-election-bid

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/17/685539207/poll-trump-approval-down-slips-with-base

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Hmm...interesting.

I wonder how that will fare after today's Mueller testimony. That's what has me concerned--that and who they decide to run against Trump. All it will take is a Hillary 2.0 to ensure the Burger King wins against, dissolving support or not.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I don't think any of it will increase, knowing that T-rump has obstructed justice and could be going to jail in 2021. Not exactly promising qualities in a Presidential candidate !

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Certainly not. But several of the democratic candidates have me worried. They need to run Bernie or Biden. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'm worried anyone else will be viewed as "Hillary 2.0" by general voters. That's the ONLY way I see the cheeto winning again.

reply

[–] christomacin (4656) 5 years ago

I don't think any one could deny that from an optics point of view Mueller's performance was disastrous, akin to Nixon's sweaty face in his televised debate with Kennedy. It didn't matter if Nixon won the debate or not, the public perception was that he lost. I think that is the case here. Mueller was perceived as the loser, because he not only performed poorly, but looked weak, doddering and confused in doing so. Compare this with the forceful, shouty performance of Gohmert (channeling his inner Pacino, perhaps?), and Trump's smirking arrogant, swagger afterwards. The average apolitical American voter sees this as Mueller - and by extension the Democrats - looking weak, doddering, and confused (or worse). Mueller got one dig in the whole afternoon (but only with a monosyllabic "yes" and a "no" answer), while the Republicans pummeled him over and over again with very flashy and damning-sounding soundbites. It's hard not to get the impression that Trump and the GOP are not only in control, but on the offensive. To be honest, even the Democrats seemed to be barely containing their frustrating and annoyance with Mueller. A very bad omen for them in 2020?

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Democrats aren't very popular either. I wouldn't get overconfident because of news like that.

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

We'll know soon enough. If a proven criminal is voted in over whatever democratic candidate runs...that says a lot right there...and none of it good...for ANY of us.

reply

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

"The biggest thing that matters at this point are the independents/swing voters."

In my opinion it's not about the independent/swings anymore. Because in these polarized times the fence sitters who haven't made up their mind about Trump are minuscule. It's about which side more adeptly mobilizes their voters to turn out which will decide the election. Plus GOP voter suppression efforts and Russian interference will have a role too, how much is yet to be known. But Mueller made it clear the Russians are working on 2020 right now.

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

What I don't get is how in the HELL can a sitting president be allowed to even hold office after it was PROVEN a foreign enemy power influenced his election in his favor and is CONTINUING TO DO SO. It just boggles the mind.

I swear, I feel like we've slipped into the fcking twilight zone regarding these government matters.

What also bothers me is that almost NO ONE form EITHER side is bothering to stop and ask "WHY is Russia so fixated on having DONALD TRUMP as president? How do they benefit from that? What does Donald know about it?". Where the hell are all these questions?

It's like...no one cares...from either side. The dems are so busy trying to "get" Trump but aren't asking/focusing on any of the right issues/questions.

It's like--we KNOW Russians are tampering. We've known this for a while now. The next question needs to be WHY. To what end? Because, if Putin wants a certain person to be elected US President and is willing to rig elections to make it happen, that should be a giant red flag for the presidential candidate right there...yet, almost no one seems to care. His base don't care or question it AT ALL and hardly any dems of any power or authority do either. It's just about: "Trump is guilty". Yeah... WHY? To WHAT end? WHY Trump? WHY does Russia want Trump as president? Ask these damn questions and figure it out, I say. But they're not. Or, it doesn't seem as if they are.

I mean...this is scary. RUSSIA can so easily tamper with our own election system and it seems no one is making any efforts to discover HOW they're doing it and trying to THWART it.

And why doesn't his base care about any of this? I mean--I know they're partisan. I know they hate dems, but...is that really enough? That's enough of a reason to compel his supporters to choose to simply not care than an enemy foreign force is deciding the outcome of our elections? They don't care at ALL that Russia wanted Trump to be president? This doesn't concern them? This doesn't make them question the man they voted for and wonder WHY Russia was so dead-set on having him win? I don't care what side of a party aisle anyone is on--it would disturb me greatly to hear that some foreign enemy power wanted my candidate to win. That would scare me. That would make me wonder what the hell is going on. But...his base doesn't. They don't ask, don't seem to care and even go as far as to DEFEND Putin and the Russians. I've actually SEEN Trumpers on various comments sections on news sites say: "I thank the Russians for giving us the best president this country has ever had if they truly did help our elections". I mean...that's twisted beyond belief but his supporters shrug it off. No big deal to them.

It's just mind-boggling. Remember when I said I've never been this disenchanted with my own government? I'll add to that--I've never been this disenchanted with my own countrymen before. I listen to Trumpers speak about certain things and wonder in my mind: "What goes through these people's heads? They sound insane. I feel like I'm listening to cult members conspiring. It's like they're in some weird sort of trance.".

America is definitely feeling like the twilight zone these days--more than ever before.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

T-rump took an oath of Office to protect our country from foreign government invasions - and so far he hasn't held up that oath. He's allowing Russia to interfere with our elections again in 2020, since he's done nothing to prevent it.

Why isn't McConnell doing anything about this?

reply

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

It's all screwed up.

And all the Trumpers ever have to say about ANY of it is: "But Obama!", "But Hillary!", "But Uranium!" and other garbage that amounts to the Trumpers essentially saying: "I'm happy with government corruption as long as it benefits MY party.".

Sick, but true.

reply

[–] rocklyn80 (660) 5 years ago

Dems: "I'm happy with government corruption, as long as it MY party doing it"!

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 5 years ago

Mueller's follow up statement:

"I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning. I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning, by Mr. Lieu. It was said, and I quote, 'You didn't charge the president because of the OLC opinion.' That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report, and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime."

Another Doggiedaddy post goes down in flames.

reply

[–] Sandoz (2021) 5 years ago

Mueller corrected himself because he's explained countless times that unless he was able to legally charge Trump with the crime of obstruction of justice, which he was not due to the OLC rule, then he would not state one way or another whether a crime had been committed. Not being charged with a crime doesn't automatically make someone innocent of that crime.

It's easy to draw false conclusions when your logic is based on listening to the blowhards on Trump TV. So sorry to refute your claim with the truth.

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 5 years ago

Mueller corrected himself because he's explained countless times that unless he was able to legally charge Trump with the crime of obstruction of justice, which he was not due to the OLC rule, then he would not state one way or another whether a crime had been committed.

One way or the other whether a crime has been committed, huh? So that's why he did come out and say there was no crime of collusion/conspiracy committed?

Stop posting stupid shit.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Has Buck been tossed out from the GOP yet for scoring the winning touchdown for the opposite team? Isn't that something T-rump calls 'treacherous behavior' ?

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 5 years ago

Has Buck been tossed out from the GOP yet for scoring the winning touchdown for the opposite team?

Despite your delusional fantasies, Buck did a great job. All he did was have Mueller admit that if there was evidence to indict, the indictment would have to wait until after the president left office.

And then Mueller admitted the evidence wasn't there, otherwise he would have come out and said that. He actually backed off his earlier claim that the only reason he didn't indict was because of the OLC.

You need to stick to simple topics you can understand, like defaced presidential seals and Melania's Christmas tweets.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Despite your delusional fantasies, Buck did a great job.

He did indeed - for the opposite team. He scored "bigly" for the Democrats. Betcha he's no longer invited to the White House to grab Melania's pussy anymore.

Meanwhile, T-rumpanzees like you (and FOX NEWS) are going out of your minds trying to turn this all around and make it look like a 'win' for the Republicans and T-rump. Stay tuned to 'Hannity' and 'Judge Jeanine' - they'll tell you what's next on the agenda.

So knock yourselves out. It will keep you busy for weeks.

reply

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

"Another Doggiedaddy post goes down in flames."

Actually, what's going on here is that you don't understand basic concept. You take the words as words.

Because of the OLC opinion and the inability to charge the President, Mueller's team didn't bother reaching a determination because it would be irrelevant.

The people who CAN overcome this, such as through impeachment, THEY will have to finish the determination, as they aren't blocked by that OLC opinion.

Do you get it now?

Maybe I should draw this out in a crayon diagram on the wall for you?

You're just another blatant, boring propaganda artist who betrays his own lack of intellect EVERY TIME HE POSTS.

That's why I love seeing your name =D

reply

[–] SnagsWolf (1172) 5 years ago

Actually, what's going on here is that you don't understand basic concept. You take the words as words.

No, I take Mueller's clarification for what it was - backing up from the claim that the only reason he didn't indict was because of the OLC. The OLC didn't stop him from claiming that Trump broke the law. He could have easily said that the evidence showed that Trump engaged in criminal conduct, but he couldn't indict him because of the OLC.

He didn't do that, which speaks volumes. You're just too stupid to understand that.

reply

[–] Sandoz (2021) 5 years ago

"He could have easily said that the evidence showed that Trump engaged in criminal conduct"

No, he couldn't "easily" have said that. How many times must it be drummed into you Trumpsucker's thick blobs-for-brains that Mueller would NOT directly say Trump committed guilty conduct because without being allowed to formally charge him that is an accusation that no Justice Department prosecutor would ever make? Mueller presented the evidence that clearly shows Trump engaged in criminal conduct--that should be enough for anyone who's smart enough to read between the lines. But evidently not for a dolt like you.

reply

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

"Thank You Representative Buck for giving the Democrats the soundbite we needed,"

Lol... Take a bite out of crime!

reply