I'm kidding. I think this rage towards the other end of the spectrum is insane. I can't stand Trump, but I hope he loves this nation (and am looking for that proof). GOP lawmakers have done many great things for this nation, GOP voters are great Americans (even with their guns, and sickness of greed, and homophobia, and sexism), there are many fine points in the Republican platform (small, fiscally responsible government, States rights, strong military). There are in the Democratic platform as well. People need to drop the us versus them bs.....it's gotten way out of hand. I think Trump is responsible, I think Clinton is responsible, I think Fox is responsible, I think MSNBC is responsible, Obama played a role, Bush played a role, Hannity, and Madow......fvcking bs is making me sick now. Americans should be better than this by now.
Investigation now officially involves obstruction
- Thread starter DvlDog4WVU
- Start date
Four top lawyers hired by Mueller have contributed tens of thousands of dollars over the years to the Democratic Party and Democratic candidates, including former President Barack Obama and President Donald Trump's 2016 opponent, Hillary Clinton.
One of the hires, Jeannie Rhee, also worked as a lawyer for the Clinton Foundation and helped persuade a federal judge to block a conservative activist's attempts to force Bill and Hillary Clinton to answer questions under oath about operations of the family-run charity.
James Quarles, who worked on the Watergate investigation as a young prosecutor, has an even longer history of supporting Democratic politicians. He gave $1,300 to Obama in 2007 and $2,300 in 2008. He also gave $2,700 to Clinton last year.He has supported a number of other Democratic candidates, including Van Hollen, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), former Rep. John Spratt (D-S.C.), former Vice President Al Gore, 2004 presidential candidate John Kerry, former Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), and Colorado congressional candidate Gail Schwartz.
A fourth lawyer on Mueller's staff, Michael Dreeben, donated to Clinton.
All I know is if they charge "obstruction of Justice" on Trump, they better have an air tight case or else they will be laughed off the stage as the political joke they will be seen as.
This situation is that you can't trust the employees underneath of you to perform the jobs they are hired to do without undercutting your objectives as their boss. Clean house.
Just because you're in a government job doesn't mean you have the right to make your own little kingdom because you know better. Know your role.
Am I wrong in believing that Mueller himself is a Republican, appointed FBI director by Bush and held over by Obama? Maybe he is bringing in democrats on his team.....so what?......are they all democrats? No republican supporters on his team at all?
Last edited:
I don't care about the team makeup, as long as they do their job and their job only. But an independent counsel leaking to the lib press... not so independent.
If there's no obstruction proof for them to find, they can be Martians as far as I'm concerned.
I'd keep an eye on them, but I'm not for disbanding them because then more scurrilous charges of "collusion" or "obstruction" will be thrown around.
Just investigate, clear Trump (Libs won't be able to charge bias) and then let's get on with the work of dismantling that giant D.C. sucking machine.
I proposed termination of Comey a few weeks prior to Trump acting. Comey keeping himself center stage went out with J.Edgar when he maintained control after setting up the agency.
Mueller should not have been retained until there was some verifiable proof that he was guilty of the charge. Mueller should have rejected the offer if he were the man of integrity he is offered as.
Sally had no claim to the job. When she rejected a direct order by her super, she knew she had screwed the pooch.
Last edited:
Mueller was the first person on trump's list to be the new FBI director.
[laughing][laughing][laughing]
Personally, I think Trump loves these leaks. It helps him control message. He wants the credibility of the MSM destroyed, so having false information leaked to the press aids that goal.....has aided that goal, which has been achieved (at least amongst his base). Now it's the credibility of the Special Counsel, so all findings will be shredded by the partisan bs....and we get nowhere.
If they produce facts, backed up by hard evidence, no one will question their "partisanship", and heads should roll.
If they produce more scurrilous charges, based only on speculation, with no real evidence backing any of it up, Trump should immediately fire all of them and stop the obvious political charade.
How did he interfere with the investigation? Comey was fired but the investigation continued. Yates was fired for not enforcing/defending his travel ban. Who said he considered firing Meuller?
Please stick to facts, you may do better on the board.
HAHAHAHA. It doesn't matter if he was successful or not to determine whether or not a crime was committed.
Here is the law:
18 USC S 1503
Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any grand or petit juror, or officer in or of any court of the United States, or officer who may be serving at any examination or other proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate, in the discharge of his duty, or injures any such grand or petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict or indictment assented to by him, or on account of his being or having been such juror, or injures any such officer, magistrate judge, or other committing magistrate in his person or property on account of the performance of his official duties, or corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
Yates has already testified that she made trump aware of Flynn's vulnerability to be bribed and/or coerced. Talk about denying facts. Your buddy at NewsMax is the one who said he was considering firing Mueller.
Trump already admitted the firing of Comey was because of the Russia investigation. He cleared the room. That provides evidence to intimidate. They had already previously discussed his employment twice and trump had already told Comey he was doing a fine job. He mentions his employment again in this private conversation, clear evidence of quid pro quo. Under testimony by both Comey and Sessions, there was never a conversation addressing poor performance on the part of James Comey, therefore they never built a case for proper termination.
Cite that all you want, no collusion, 2/3 of the country will laugh at this.
The only problem with your explanation here countryroads89 is nothing changed as far as the investigations.
Trump gave his reasons for firing both (Yates and Comey) and obviously it wasn't to stop any part of this ongoing investigation.
So where's the "intimidation" you've posted here?
What changed in the investigation as a result of his firings of both of them for the reasons he stated?
If Comey felt if was obstruction he was required by law to report it, he did not. Yates was fired for not enforcing/defending the travel ban. There is no obstruction.
The case for termination of Comey is completely unnecessary, he can be fired at will. However, a detail document was produced by the deputy AG regarding why Comey should be let go.
Keep hanging on to these threads that will go nowhere. Some of the greatest legal minds in the country agree, no obstruction (Dershowitz, Turley and McCarthy). Many others have weighed in as well, no corruption.
So if Mueller recommends charges of obstruction (and I don't think he will), you think Comey should be charged, and the charges against Trump dismissed because Mueller is compromised?
I'm still waiting for what was wrong with the election as to why we are even investigating it?
I never said that. It Meuller recommends obstruction that charge goes forward (he won't). As for Comey, if Meuller recommends charges against Trump for obstruction, then Comey should be charged for failing to inform superiors of the attempted obstruction (Comey denied knowing about this law in his testimony). Comey also needs to be investigated for his leak and any other leaks he may have perpetrated and prosecuted. The leaks must end.
So Trump obstructing justice would be.....like 3rd on your list of things that need to be dealt with then....seems about right.
Comey needs to be prosecuted for perjury. He lied several times during his testimony. Mark Levin points it out lie-by-lie right here:
https://www.crtv.com/video/ep283++j..._content=footnotes-levin-Levin283-link-060917
How did you arrive at that? I said if Meuller brings obstruction charges they need to go through the process (he won't because there was no obstruction). However, if he does bring those charges, then Comey is liable for charges since he failed to report as required under law. We are a nation of laws even for former FBI directors, right? Comey also needs to be investigated for his admitted leak and for any other leaks he may have perpetrated. Again, we are a nation of laws.
What if the obstruction occurred by firing Comey, or after, or unrelated to Comey. Such a blanket statement is silly.
The obstruction is based on Comey's firing. If obstruction occurred due to something other than their face to face meeting, than Comey is off the hook. However, his leaks are not off the hook. They should be thoroughly investigated, right?
But Paxxx has to make it, because it's all about beating the left....and Comey is the left.
What leaks?...I was only aware of the one (and I won't waste my time on that one with you). If he is suspected of illegally leaking classified materials then of course it should be thoroughly investigated.
It's not classified info, and not for the FBI to investigate. It is for the administration to have investigated, and go all Negan on the leakers.
Is that a reflection of Trumps judgement? I have zero problem with the investigation going forward. I predict that in the end no charges will be leveled at Trump. They will find that he did some questionable and maybe unethical things but NOTHING that deserves criminal charges. I do find it amusing that the media is now moving away from the collusion hysteria and now trying to gain traction on the obstruction issue........Whats next?
He admitted to one leak. There may be others. The leaks need to be investigated. We know the intel agencies have been leaking like sieves. Maybe he only leaked one time, but we won't know until a thorough investigation is completed.
Those leaks were coming from places other than the FBI. I'd look in the DOJ, NSA, CIA and even the DNC.
I think the FBI was also involved. But I agree that all the agencies should be investigated.