Joe Bauer Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 4 minutes ago, Andrew Prutsok said: Rod Rosentein, who has said he will stay at the Justice (sic) Department until Mueller probe is finished, did an about face this morning and instead of leaving DOJ as planned this month, will stay on indefinitely. Another sure sign the end is near and Mueller has nothing? Andrew, could you expand upon your post and especially your last sentence? How does Rosenstein's staying on possibly indicate Mueller having nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 (edited) Joe: Andrew is being sarcastic at Wheeler's expense. He does not mean it that way. But he ignores the fact that nothing Mueller has done comes close to indicating any kind of conspiracy between Trump and Putin. And this is now about two years. Almost every crime that Mueller has indicted anyone on is what is called a process crime. Or in the case of Manafort they are crimes which usually do not get prosecuted since you could indict half of Washington lobbyists for what he is going to jail for. Same with Cohen. I would say that the problem with Andrew's argument is the longer this goes on, the worse it gets for people who are caught in the line of fire. Plus, Pelosi has already said she will not OK impeachment hearings. So, what is this all about then? So far as I can see, its pretty much a sideshow for the liberal blogosphere and the cable companies. BTW, its now clear that someone on McCain's staff got the Steele dossier from Glenn Simpson and gave it to Buzzfeed. It is not clear as to if McCain knew about this but Trump assumes he did. Edited March 19, 2019 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: Almost every crime that Mueller has indicted anyone on is what is called a process crime. Or in the case of Manafort they are crimes which usually do not get prosecuted since you could indict half of Washington lobbyists for what he is going to jail for. Same with Cohen. This assumes no other charges arrise from the relationship of the process crimes and underlying conduct. Even if the conduct does not rise to an indictable offense, Trump apparently was willing to illegaly pay large sums of money to hide legal conduct. The "process crimes" they're charged with aren't meaningless. They're serious and could be found to further more serious crimes. Pelosi's statement on impeachment volleys the ball back to Meuller's side of the court. In essence she's saying the will isn't there yet and these investigations need to generate bipartisan agreement by way of evidence, not necessarily charges. Falling short of that, the ultimate penalty will be determined at the polls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 (edited) There is no doubt about that Bob. This will hurt Trump in a serious way in the elections. Heck, the GOP may get someone to run against him. With a 24/7 online, TV/radio unquenchable news cycle we have, this was made to order for it. Its really a win, win situation for them and the Democrats. But I am just not sure its the right way to win. Edited March 20, 2019 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 22 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: There is no doubt about that Bob. This will hurt Trump in a serious way in the elections. Heck, the GOP may get someone to run against him. With a 24/7 online, TV/radio unquenchable news cycle we have, this was made to order for it. Its really a win, win situation for them and the Democrats. But I am just not sure its the right way to win. It's not the right way to win if we go back to the status quo. But it may be the only alternative at this time. With hopefully, Some, progress in the process. Something better than now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: There is no doubt about that Bob. This will hurt Trump in a serious way in the elections. Heck, the GOP may get someone to run against him. With a 24/7 online, TV/radio unquenchable news cycle we have, this was made to order for it. Its really a win, win situation for them and the Democrats. But I am just not sure its the right way to win. Yeah I just think the GOP hasn't run a decent candidate for years (excepting McCain minus Palin). It's not like there aren't any reasonably acceptable options for centrist types who are more reflective of the country's true political majority. The yapping poodles like me get the airplay on both sides but I think the divisiveness would be mitigated quite a bit with more rounded candidates. Trump was/is flat out over his head and HRC was up to her ass, to put it anatomically hahaha! 1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said: It's not the right way to win if we go back to the status quo. But it may be the only alternative at this time. With hopefully, Some, progress in the process. Something better than now. IMO the status quo ante (just I'd throw that in hahaha) mo betta than what we've got now. I'm really not certain what progress has been made? Maybe the attack on the hyper-sensitive political correctness is overdue for instance. A case can be made for that. The racist subtext of the Presidential message? Hmm... Continuous and unrelenting lies spewing forth? We've seen sociopathic presidents before but clinically narcistic sociopaths with fingers on the big red button I'm not keen on. I could go on... Edited March 20, 2019 by Bob Ness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 (edited) President Trump ... "Have you no sense of decency?" While listening to the following CNN broadcast commentary by Colonel Ralph Peters regards Donald Trump and Trump's continual attacks on the integrity of John McCain, I felt a Deja Vu recollection of the U.S. Army hired Boston attorney Joseph Welch's moment regards his hearing response to Senator Joe McCarthy as follows: The army hired Boston lawyer Joseph Welch to make its case. At a session on June 9, 1954, McCarthy charged that one of Welch's attorneys had ties to a Communist organization. As an amazed television audience looked on, Welch responded with the immortal lines that ultimately ended McCarthy's career: "Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness." When McCarthy tried to continue his attack, Welch angrily interrupted, "Let us not assassinate this lad further, senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?" Ralph Peters: Trump's Attacks On McCain A "Classic Case Of Male ... https://www.realclearpolitics.com/.../ralph_peters_trumps_attacks_on_mccain_a_classic_... ▶ 9:33 6 hours ago - Uploaded by CNN Appearing Tuesday night on CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360," former Fox ... the memory of Sen. John McCain ... Edited March 21, 2019 by Joe Bauer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 In other words Robert, Kramer, at McCain's behest, got it out there and was determined to do so. I do not buy the story that he was shocked when it was printed or that it was photographed. So Kramer was given the dossier by Simpson through McCain? Was Simpson a Democrat or Republican? Or did Fusion do work for both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 I have to say that the Nellie Ohr/Bruce Ohr/Glen Simpson circle really smells to high heaven. And she worked for the CIA? She probably connects to Brennan in some way then. So it was probably the Ohrs who started the FBI on their Russia Gate campaign. Do you agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Prutsok Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 This forum has been taken over by Q. When are the arrests coming again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 23 minutes ago, Andrew Prutsok said: This forum has been taken over by Q. When are the arrests coming again? They sure love those Trump talking points, don't they? How did the RussiaGate investigation start? Alexander Downer's secret meeting with FBI led to Trump-Russia inquiry – report https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/17/alexander-downers-secret-meeting-with-fbi-led-to-trump-russia-inquiry-report Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, Andrew Prutsok said: This forum has been taken over by Q. When are the arrests coming again? Andrew, that is really kind of beneath you. Or at least I thought it was before this. Everything I have written in this thread is based upon evidence that has emerged from either the congressional inquiry or private lawsuits. It is pretty well established that the original inquiry by Fusion was started by a representative of the anybody but Trump movement. It was then given full override by the Democratic PR firm. And this appears to be when Steele was brought in. To say the Steele Dossier was riddled with problems is really giving it too much credit. Even Cohen admitted this in his testimony. But it then seems to have been distributed by the Ohrs, and McCain and his employees. And when I say distributed, I really mean shopped around. To both the FBI and the media. Who both, instead of trying to verify what was in it, went ahead and ran with it like it was somehow brought down by Moses and parted the Red Sea. Unless you have been sleeping in a cave for the last two years, the Steele Dossier has done more to poison the air between Russia and the USA than anything I can think of in decades. Am I a fan of Donald Trump? Nope. Would I ever vote for him? Nope. In fact, he turned out to be a worse president than I thought he would. But the point is, I felt that way about Nixon also. But I do not at all condone what the Powers That Be did to get rid of Nixon. People who follow the JFK case should be very interested in that kind of thing. In very few situations do the Ends justify the Means. Most of the time they make a sick system sicker. Edited March 22, 2019 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 (edited) 21 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: Unless you have been sleeping in a cave for the last two years, the Steele Dossier has done more to poison the air between Russia and the USA than anything I can think of in decades. Nonsense. The 100+ contacts between Trump campaign/transition figures and Russian agents poisoned the air between Russia and the USA. Edited March 22, 2019 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 The Steele Dossier is what it has always been. A draft Op research memo, not yet verified, that was meant to gather damning information about a candidate. Op research is going on today with just about any candidate we could think of. All candidates are vulnerable to this activity and many people earn money gathering information to use. Hilary was subjected to this activity probably more than any person alive, for decades. That didn't work very well for her opponents so they started outright slandering her about child sex rings, murders and on and on. I know I'm stating the obvious but that is all still true. When a party decides to run a candidate who is as vulnerable as Trump is they get what they deserve. It's not a big mystery how this came about. Steel raised legitimate red flags and passed those on to people he thought should know including the DOJ's Russian Organized Crime expert, Bruce Ohr, who was exactly the person to give it to. Steele's supposed bias against Trump was almost certainly due to him not wanting a Russian mole in the White House. That would be my "guess". Most media companies sat on the dossier for a significant period of time due to the difficulty verifying the information. Regardless of any findings by the Special Counsel, Trump has shown his true colors by obstructing, lying, obfuscating, manipulating and politicizing the people and laws that are intended to protect the Country from abuses by the Executive and Legislative branches of our government. He's now complaining about "how could an unelected person hold him to account?" He's clearly trying to manipulate and groom a segment of our population to oppose any adverse finding by law enforcement and judicial bodies as that is the only course he can take and succeed. Sad. Very sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 23, 2019 Share Posted March 23, 2019 (edited) Well, Mueller came in with the verdict Dowd said he would. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/robert-mueller-no-more-indictments-russia-investigation_n_5c955a74e4b01ebeef0f479e If one adds in the fact the Gates and Manafort cases were not related to his immediate objective, that most of the other convictions are called process crimes, and the whole xxxxx farm and intel directorate are quite questionable, then what did this actually produce? What does Bob say, well this is Trump's fault somehow. And let us leave out Nellie Ohr. IMO, what is so unfortunate about this is that 1.) It diverted from the really bad things that Trump has done in places like Venezuela, and his love affair with Likud, and 2.) His disastrous tax plan which was always a way to benefit the upper classes and later steal from the middle class through Social Security and Medicare cuts. But the really negative end result is that now Trump can crow that he was right all along. As Archibald Cox said long ago, when you take aim at a king, you better bring him down. The Democrats will now rant and rave and try to make something out of the remnants. But his will invigorate Trump's base. There will be no impeachment proceedings. And it will make him harder to beat next year. All to my distress. It looks like the late great Bob Parry was right about this way back then in 2016. Edited March 23, 2019 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now