happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,442
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on Feb 13, 2018 18:21:46 GMT -5
Well, that's your take. Mine is that several of Trump's top team members - Manafort, Page, his son in law, and himself - previously had a lot of business dealings with the Russians. Page was a gushing admirer of Putin. Manafort laundered money for them. Trump even asked the Russians, on the campaign trail, to please, please hack whatever they needed to hack to get Hillary's lost emails, a pretty astonishing thing for a candidate to say. Then there is his Black Sea resort deal that he pulled out of in 2017. The resort never got built, but Trump got paid a million dollars for it. And a lot of other money - a LOT of other money - exchanged hands on a piece of property in a blue collar backwater that every other realtor said was a horrible location and terrible plan. Speculation is that the resort was never actually intended to be built, it was simply a means to launder money. www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/21/trumps-business-of-corruption But the deal, for which Trump was reportedly paid a million dollars, involved unorthodox financial practices that several experts described to me as “red flags” for bank fraud and money laundering; moreover, it intertwined his company with a Kazakh oligarch who has direct links to Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin. Then, of course, we have the US congress wanting to apply sanctions to the Russians for their involvement in the 2016 elections - and Trump refusing to sign the sanctions into law. No, that doesn't look fishy at all, does it? What was that pro-sanction vote? 419 - 3 in the House? And Trump refused? Does it seem that strange that Trump and his fellow Russian loving associates kept bumping into Russians? Or are you still going with your theory that it's all some 'plant' by the opposition? Which seems more likely? See how easy it is to spin something in the opposite direction?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,321
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 13, 2018 19:45:50 GMT -5
there is also the RNC platform getting rewritten to remove the sanctions language. apparently that happened at Manaford's direction.
they have a lot of explaining to do.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,321
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 13, 2018 19:46:56 GMT -5
yesterday at 9:22am SpaceCoastPaul said:
"Oh, and new policy- if you haven't specifically addressed the substance of any of my posts, I won't be reading yours. Enjoy conversing with yourself."
A threat?......
or, advice. it is, after all, what he does.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 13, 2018 20:55:33 GMT -5
ibid.: I think the Democratic fallback position will be to point to the career carnage at the FBI and DOJ as punishment enough.
Director Comey was fired. Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was forcibly retired. FBI lawyer Lisa Page was reassigned and demoted. FBI general counsel James Baker resigned. Senior agent Peter Strzok was reassigned and demoted. The former FBI director’s chief of staff, James Rybicki, resigned. Mike Kortan, FBI assistant director for public affairs, took retirement. Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr was reassigned and demoted. Justice Department’s counterintelligence head, David Laufman, resigned. A cadre of others “unexpectedly” have left, allegedly (or conveniently) for private-sector jobs. Such career implosions do not happen without cause.
And if that is not enough, Democrats may further tsk-tsk that if there were perhaps zealotry and excesses, they were in the distant past. An out-of-office Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes, Samantha Power, James Clapper, John Brennan — and Barack Obama — may have stepped over the line a bit in matters of surveillance, unmasking, and leaking. But do we really wish to go back and put another administration on trial, politicizing governmental transitions?
And if that is not enough, Democrats will also shrug that the collusion mess was analogous to another Republican Benghazi hearing: lots of embarrassing smoke of “what difference does it make” admissions, but little fire in proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the main players engaged in prosecutable crimes.
This is precisely what's going to happen. He goes on to say "Accepting any of these obfuscations would be a grave mistake." but I think this is also what's going to happen. A year from now, the US public will be so caught up in new intrigues that throwing the book at Obama-era has-beens will come across as trying to draw blood from a stone.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 13, 2018 20:59:31 GMT -5
Well, that's your take. Mine is that several of Trump's top team members - Manafort, Page, his son in law, and himself - previously had a lot of business dealings with the Russians. Page was a gushing admirer of Putin. Manafort laundered money for them. Trump even asked the Russians, on the campaign trail, to please, please hack whatever they needed to hack to get Hillary's lost emails, a pretty astonishing thing for a candidate to say. Then there is his Black Sea resort deal that he pulled out of in 2017. The resort never got built, but Trump got paid a million dollars for it. And a lot of other money - a LOT of other money - exchanged hands on a piece of property in a blue collar backwater that every other realtor said was a horrible location and terrible plan. Speculation is that the resort was never actually intended to be built, it was simply a means to launder money. www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/21/trumps-business-of-corruption But the deal, for which Trump was reportedly paid a million dollars, involved unorthodox financial practices that several experts described to me as “red flags” for bank fraud and money laundering; moreover, it intertwined his company with a Kazakh oligarch who has direct links to Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin. Then, of course, we have the US congress wanting to apply sanctions to the Russians for their involvement in the 2016 elections - and Trump refusing to sign the sanctions into law. No, that doesn't look fishy at all, does it? What was that pro-sanction vote? 419 - 3 in the House? And Trump refused? Does it seem that strange that Trump and his fellow Russian loving associates kept bumping into Russians? Or are you still going with your theory that it's all some 'plant' by the opposition? Which seems more likely? See how easy it is to spin something in the opposite direction? There's nothing illegal about doing business with Russians that I'm aware of. Trump is an international real estate mogul worth billions of dollars. Odds are pretty good you're going to find a connection to foreign businesses. I realize a lot of people got their panties in a wad over Trump's JOKE that "maybe the Russians could find" Hillary's emails- which was a direct reference to the false claim that Hillary Clinton's illegal unsecured server could not have been hacked. Watch this video- which opens with President Obama lying about his knowledge of Hillary Clinton's illegal private unsecured email server used to evade laws requiring the preservation of all official communication, and prohibitions against removing classified materials from secure government servers. After he lies about not knowing about the email server he communicated on with her using a pseudonym, President Obama States he can guarantee Hillary Clinton won't be treated any differently. When you watch this-- do you regard Obama's statements to the effect that Hillary Clinton did nothing to jeopardize national security-- as equally serious? As in, like a directive to the FBI? That's they way Joe Scarborough read it. He's hardly a Trump fan. Just curious if you have the same standard about Obama's public statements?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 13, 2018 21:03:42 GMT -5
ibid.: I think the Democratic fallback position will be to point to the career carnage at the FBI and DOJ as punishment enough.
Director Comey was fired. Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was forcibly retired. FBI lawyer Lisa Page was reassigned and demoted. FBI general counsel James Baker resigned. Senior agent Peter Strzok was reassigned and demoted. The former FBI director’s chief of staff, James Rybicki, resigned. Mike Kortan, FBI assistant director for public affairs, took retirement. Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr was reassigned and demoted. Justice Department’s counterintelligence head, David Laufman, resigned. A cadre of others “unexpectedly” have left, allegedly (or conveniently) for private-sector jobs. Such career implosions do not happen without cause.
And if that is not enough, Democrats may further tsk-tsk that if there were perhaps zealotry and excesses, they were in the distant past. An out-of-office Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes, Samantha Power, James Clapper, John Brennan — and Barack Obama — may have stepped over the line a bit in matters of surveillance, unmasking, and leaking. But do we really wish to go back and put another administration on trial, politicizing governmental transitions?
And if that is not enough, Democrats will also shrug that the collusion mess was analogous to another Republican Benghazi hearing: lots of embarrassing smoke of “what difference does it make” admissions, but little fire in proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the main players engaged in prosecutable crimes.
This is precisely what's going to happen. He goes on to say "Accepting any of these obfuscations would be a grave mistake." but I think this is also what's going to happen. A year from now, the US public will be so caught up in new intrigues that throwing the book at Obama-era has-beens will come across as trying to draw blood from a stone. In my opinion, this can't happen. The country depends on it. We either have an honest, legitimate, viable republic with a representative government we can trust; or we have a banana republic with a government that picks and chooses the leaders THEY think are appropriate for our own good. Cynicism will increase- and rightfully so. It will literally be the end of the United States. People HAVE TO PAY. It's absolutely critical.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 13, 2018 21:06:18 GMT -5
There's nothing illegal about doing business with Russians that I'm aware of. Trump is an international real estate mogul worth billions of dollars. Odds are pretty good you're going to find a connection to foreign businesses. Until Russiagate and Red Scare 2.0 started in 2015, both parties were scrambling to establish stronger ties with Russia. Having said this, "ties" that include shady deals and money laundering aren't something that should be overlooked.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 13, 2018 21:08:17 GMT -5
In my opinion, this can't happen. The country depends on it. We either have an honest, legitimate, viable republic with a representative government we can trust; or we have a banana republic with a government that picks and chooses the leaders THEY think are appropriate for our own good. Cynicism will increase- and rightfully so. It will literally be the end of the United States. People HAVE TO PAY. It's absolutely critical. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_consequencesSorry.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 16, 2024 6:28:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 22:26:04 GMT -5
yesterday at 9:22am SpaceCoastPaul said:
"Oh, and new policy- if you haven't specifically addressed the substance of any of my posts, I won't be reading yours. Enjoy conversing with yourself."
A threat?......
Bow to the "all knowing" or else. lol LAUGHABLE
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 13, 2018 22:39:31 GMT -5
In my opinion, this can't happen. The country depends on it. We either have an honest, legitimate, viable republic with a representative government we can trust; or we have a banana republic with a government that picks and chooses the leaders THEY think are appropriate for our own good. Cynicism will increase- and rightfully so. It will literally be the end of the United States. People HAVE TO PAY. It's absolutely critical. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_consequencesSorry. Whatever. We either live in a banana republic or we don't. I prefer we don't. Therefore, I will not let up-- and I think there are a lot of good men and women in public service at the State Department, in the Department of Justice, and over at the FBI who are just as horrified as I am, and who are ready to get to work straightening out this mess. In fact, I'm counting on it-- we all are.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 13, 2018 22:40:36 GMT -5
There's nothing illegal about doing business with Russians that I'm aware of. Trump is an international real estate mogul worth billions of dollars. Odds are pretty good you're going to find a connection to foreign businesses. Until Russiagate and Red Scare 2.0 started in 2015, both parties were scrambling to establish stronger ties with Russia. Having said this, "ties" that include shady deals and money laundering aren't something that should be overlooked. No, they should not be overlooked. My understanding is that the Uranium One / Rosatom / Clinton Foundation investigation has been re-opened. As it should have been.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 13, 2018 23:08:29 GMT -5
So far... FBI Director Comey- fired U.S. Attorney For The Southern District of New York, Preet Bharara- fired Acting Attorney General Sally Yates- fired Associate Attorney General Racheal Brand- resigned FBI Director Andrew McCabe- resigned (forced out) FBI Chief of Staff Jame Rybicki- resigned U.S. Attorney Dana Boente- resigned DOJ Fraud Section of Criminal Division, Hui Chen- resigned Acting Head of DOJ's National Security Division, Mary McCord- resigned Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr (who's wife Nellie Ohr worked for Fusion GPS)- sent down / demoted FBI General Counsel James Baker- reassigned FBI Agent Peter Strzok- reassigned FBI Lawyer Lisa Page - reassigned FBI Assistant Director & head of the Public Affairs office, Michale Kortan- resigned. Department of Justice, National Security Division, Deputy Assistant Attorney General in charge of counterintelligence, David Laufman- resigned Oh, and Schiff now says he doesn’t want his memo released.http://thehill.com/homenews/house/373742-schiff-were-not-going-to-revise-democratic-memo
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,352
|
Post by Tennesseer on Feb 14, 2018 0:26:13 GMT -5
|
|
dezii
Distinguished Associate
Joined: May 18, 2017 14:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 20,671
|
Post by dezii on Feb 14, 2018 11:36:38 GMT -5
Still like the idea of some low ranking what ever just leaking the Dem memo...then just run for the hills...it's not like it will be the 1st item ever leaked and our Donald was famous for leaking what ever he felt should be leaked...
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,442
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on Feb 14, 2018 12:05:10 GMT -5
There's nothing illegal about doing business with Russians that I'm aware of. Trump is an international real estate mogul worth billions of dollars. Odds are pretty good you're going to find a connection to foreign businesses. Until Russiagate and Red Scare 2.0 started in 2015, both parties were scrambling to establish stronger ties with Russia. Having said this, "ties" that include shady deals and money laundering aren't something that should be overlooked. This is exactly the problem with the Black Sea resort that Trump participated in, in 2012.
Millions of dollars were exchanged over this 'project' - a luxury resort planned for a blue collar fishing port far from the stomping grounds of the rich and famous - that never got past the 'stakes in the ground' level. This is not a project that any other developers would have touched. It didn't make financial sense to put a high end property in that location. It actually looks like there was never any intention to build the site, just to move money around.
This kind of thing can't be shrugged off as 'normal business activity.' It's illegal, and it involves some of Putin's best friends.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,442
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on Feb 14, 2018 12:17:40 GMT -5
Well, that's your take. Mine is that several of Trump's top team members - Manafort, Page, his son in law, and himself - previously had a lot of business dealings with the Russians. Page was a gushing admirer of Putin. Manafort laundered money for them. Trump even asked the Russians, on the campaign trail, to please, please hack whatever they needed to hack to get Hillary's lost emails, a pretty astonishing thing for a candidate to say. Then there is his Black Sea resort deal that he pulled out of in 2017. The resort never got built, but Trump got paid a million dollars for it. And a lot of other money - a LOT of other money - exchanged hands on a piece of property in a blue collar backwater that every other realtor said was a horrible location and terrible plan. Speculation is that the resort was never actually intended to be built, it was simply a means to launder money. www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/21/trumps-business-of-corruption But the deal, for which Trump was reportedly paid a million dollars, involved unorthodox financial practices that several experts described to me as “red flags” for bank fraud and money laundering; moreover, it intertwined his company with a Kazakh oligarch who has direct links to Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin. Then, of course, we have the US congress wanting to apply sanctions to the Russians for their involvement in the 2016 elections - and Trump refusing to sign the sanctions into law. No, that doesn't look fishy at all, does it? What was that pro-sanction vote? 419 - 3 in the House? And Trump refused? Does it seem that strange that Trump and his fellow Russian loving associates kept bumping into Russians? Or are you still going with your theory that it's all some 'plant' by the opposition? Which seems more likely? See how easy it is to spin something in the opposite direction? There's nothing illegal about doing business with Russians that I'm aware of. Trump is an international real estate mogul worth billions of dollars. Odds are pretty good you're going to find a connection to foreign businesses. I realize a lot of people got their panties in a wad over Trump's JOKE that "maybe the Russians could find" Hillary's emails- which was a direct reference to the false claim that Hillary Clinton's illegal unsecured server could not have been hacked. Watch this video- which opens with President Obama lying about his knowledge of Hillary Clinton's illegal private unsecured email server used to evade laws requiring the preservation of all official communication, and prohibitions against removing classified materials from secure government servers. After he lies about not knowing about the email server he communicated on with her using a pseudonym, President Obama States he can guarantee Hillary Clinton won't be treated any differently. When you watch this-- do you regard Obama's statements to the effect that Hillary Clinton did nothing to jeopardize national security-- as equally serious? As in, like a directive to the FBI? That's they way Joe Scarborough read it. He's hardly a Trump fan. Just curious if you have the same standard about Obama's public statements? I regard anything about Obama and Clinton as not critically important right now because it deals with a former president and a formal presidential candidate who are no longer in positions of power. Whether or not he lied about knowing about the server doesn't impact our country at this moment (although I'm sure there are people in the DOJ who are investigating this, and if something illegal happened, people will be prosecuted. Trump is loading the DOJ up with his people).
What does impact our country at this moment is whether Trump or his campaign worked with the Russians during the last election. We've already seen how that may be impacting our country by Trump's refusal to impose additional sanctions on the Russians - a country that attempted to swing our election with fake news.
I'm eagerly awaiting the conclusion of the Mueller investigation, I'm just concerned that, on the off chance that Mueller does discover something noteworthy, the RW media has done such a great job drumming up anger and skepticism against Mueller and the DOJ that the Trump minority will dismiss the findings out of hand. Good thing they're the Trump minority.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,321
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 14, 2018 12:45:21 GMT -5
he said REVISE. meaning "it is fine how it is". meaning "release it without revisions, just like you did the GOP memo". meaning "we are not going to change it to turn it into a propaganda piece for team red".
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,321
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 14, 2018 12:48:44 GMT -5
There's nothing illegal about doing business with Russians that I'm aware of. Trump is an international real estate mogul worth billions of dollars. Odds are pretty good you're going to find a connection to foreign businesses. I realize a lot of people got their panties in a wad over Trump's JOKE that "maybe the Russians could find" Hillary's emails-
you can stop right there. first of all, it is perfectly fine to do business with the Russians, so long as it doesn't create a conflict of interest. most businesses will suggest that if, for example, you are going to become CEO of company A, that you do not maintain an active relationship with company B if company B is a competitor. furthermore, IMPLEMENTING the strategic goals of company B while being employed by company A would be grounds for immediate dismissal. it is a shame that we can't just fire his ass.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 14, 2018 15:20:59 GMT -5
The GOP claimed days ago that Rep. Schiff deliberately "poison pilled" the Democratic memo, including facts about sources and methods he knew couldn't reasonably be published. Whether or not you believe this, Paul does, hence in his view, Schiff's refusal to revise the memo is tantamout to barring its release. ...Just in case everyone wasn't on the same page.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,442
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on Feb 14, 2018 15:37:02 GMT -5
The GOP claimed days ago that Rep. Schiff deliberately "poison pilled" the Democratic memo, including facts about sources and methods he knew couldn't reasonably be published. Whether or not you believe this, Paul does, hence in his view, Schiff's refusal to revise the memo is tantamout to barring its release. ...Just in case everyone wasn't on the same page. We're not even on the same continent.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,442
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on Feb 14, 2018 15:40:07 GMT -5
By the way, DOJ reviewed the Dem memo two weeks before it was submitted to Trump and had the dems redact what needed redacting, which the Dems did.
DOJ did not issue a warning to Trump about releasing the Dem memo, like they did with the GOP memo, stating potential national security problems.
Then Trump suddenly became ultra-safety conscious and wouldn't release the Dem memo, when he was giddy with delight to release the GOP memo, even when the DOJ asked him not to.
Makes it hard to stick to the 'poison pill' theory, but I have no doubt, some of us will cling to that theory to the death.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,509
|
Post by tallguy on Feb 14, 2018 16:00:41 GMT -5
The GOP claimed days ago that Rep. Schiff deliberately "poison pilled" the Democratic memo, including facts about sources and methods he knew couldn't reasonably be published. Whether or not you believe this, Paul does, hence in his view, Schiff's refusal to revise the memo is tantamout to barring its release. ...Just in case everyone wasn't on the same page. But wasn't it also unanimously recommended by the House Intelligence Committee which is probably more than half Republican? Hence why we never believe anything coming from either this White House or your boy's sources. None have a reputation for truth, or even half-truth in many cases.
|
|
dezii
Distinguished Associate
Joined: May 18, 2017 14:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 20,671
|
Post by dezii on Feb 14, 2018 17:08:43 GMT -5
There's nothing illegal about doing business with Russians that I'm aware of. Trump is an international real estate mogul worth billions of dollars. Odds are pretty good you're going to find a connection to foreign businesses. I realize a lot of people got their panties in a wad over Trump's JOKE that "maybe the Russians could find" Hillary's emails- which was a direct reference to the false claim that Hillary Clinton's illegal unsecured server could not have been hacked. Watch this video- which opens with President Obama lying about his knowledge of Hillary Clinton's illegal private unsecured email server used to evade laws requiring the preservation of all official communication, and prohibitions against removing classified materials from secure government servers. After he lies about not knowing about the email server he communicated on with her using a pseudonym, President Obama States he can guarantee Hillary Clinton won't be treated any differently. When you watch this-- do you regard Obama's statements to the effect that Hillary Clinton did nothing to jeopardize national security-- as equally serious? As in, like a directive to the FBI? That's they way Joe Scarborough read it. He's hardly a Trump fan. Just curious if you have the same standard about Obama's public statements? I regard anything about Obama and Clinton as not critically important right now because it deals with a former president and a formal presidential candidate who are no longer in positions of power. Whether or not he lied about knowing about the server doesn't impact our country at this moment (although I'm sure there are people in the DOJ who are investigating this, and if something illegal happened, people will be prosecuted. Trump is loading the DOJ up with his people).
What does impact our country at this moment is whether Trump or his campaign worked with the Russians during the last election. We've already seen how that may be impacting our country by Trump's refusal to impose additional sanctions on the Russians - a country that attempted to swing our election with fake news.
I'm eagerly awaiting the conclusion of the Mueller investigation, I'm just concerned that, on the off chance that Mueller does discover something noteworthy, the RW media has done such a great job drumming up anger and skepticism against Mueller and the DOJ that the Trump minority will dismiss the findings out of hand. Good thing they're the Trump minority.
"panties in a wad over Trump's JOKE "
I'm from the old school...just about everything that comes from a POTUS has a meaning ...probably even if they passed wind...With this POTUS it seems every gaffe uttered the press spokeswoman is poo pooing it as a joke..."so obvious to all...." she says, but it just isn't so obvious, his words do mean something where as everyman's words will not. It's getting tired these jokes that are not jokes...time to grow up...time to stop embarrassing the office...yes even time to become presidential...His base may not care but I suggest almost 2/3 of the country agree with me...time to grow up... ================================ " is whether Trump or his campaign worked with the Russians during the last election"
nope....if he and his people were aware of the Russian meddling and said nothing to any of our security services...then that is collusion IMHO...not to report a attack by a foreign power against our country...that is the same as condoning the attack..participating in the attack...that is TREASON.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,352
|
Post by Tennesseer on Feb 14, 2018 17:47:36 GMT -5
The GOP claimed days ago that Rep. Schiff deliberately "poison pilled" the Democratic memo, including facts about sources and methods he knew couldn't reasonably be published. Whether or not you believe this, Paul does, hence in his view, Schiff's refusal to revise the memo is tantamout to barring its release. ...Just in case everyone wasn't on the same page. And then paul posts a link which states no such thing. Rubbish. It's the same lies and twisted truth paul tells all the time.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,818
|
Post by NastyWoman on Feb 14, 2018 17:55:53 GMT -5
OOOOHHHHH! The title of this thread is all caps now. Waiting for the day it is in flashing multiple color text. Or, just maybe, the day there is any substance to Paul's allegations --- the latter may be a long wait though.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,157
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Feb 14, 2018 18:27:17 GMT -5
Fail. "Here- I think I've finally summed up the whole scheme as succinctly as humanly possible: President Obama and Hillary Clinton were engaged in a massive, ongoing bribery, extortion, and racketeering abuse of power scheme, or "pay to play" scandal in which, among other things, the government approved the sale of 20% of the United States' uranium production to a Russian government-controlled entity (Rosatom / Uranium One) in exchange for large "donations" to the Clinton Foundation. "
No its was at most 10% out the Uranium production potential, however in reality it ended up to be more like 5%. Which stayed in country. Had nothing to do with donations, nor was Clinton able to approve it on her own. Would appreciate you correcting these incorrect talking points one of these days. TY.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,352
|
Post by Tennesseer on Feb 14, 2018 18:31:49 GMT -5
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,509
|
Post by tallguy on Feb 14, 2018 18:38:23 GMT -5
The owner of my former company had one hanging from the ceiling in his office. It was powered so would actually "fly."
|
|
dezii
Distinguished Associate
Joined: May 18, 2017 14:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 20,671
|
Post by dezii on Feb 14, 2018 19:41:53 GMT -5
The GOP claimed days ago that Rep. Schiff deliberately "poison pilled" the Democratic memo, including facts about sources and methods he knew couldn't reasonably be published. Whether or not you believe this, Paul does, hence in his view, Schiff's refusal to revise the memo is tantamout to barring its release. ...Just in case everyone wasn't on the same page. And then paul posts a link which states no such thing. Rubbish. It's the same lies and twisted truth paul tells all the time. As I have suggested.....regarding certain posters here...best to... and ........
|
|
steff
Senior Associate
I'll sleep when I'm dead
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 17:34:24 GMT -5
Posts: 10,777
|
Post by steff on Feb 14, 2018 19:56:56 GMT -5
The owner of my former company had one hanging from the ceiling in his office. It was powered so would actually "fly." As an art project for high school, my brother made a paper mache flying pig. Herman had a 6 foot wing span & hung in his bedroom for YEARS. He had on a Motley Crue concert tshirt & 2 pairs of little kids Chucks on his feet & a really cool pair of sunglasses. He eventually was donated to a restaurant in Houston called "The Flying Pig". The restaurant is long gone & we've always wondered what happened to Herman. Where did he end up?
|
|