Robert Mueller, Former F.B.I. Director, Is Named Special Counsel for Russia Investigation

I think that some of the snowflake right wingnut SCWs that post here are driven by a single ideology. They hate the other tribe. They search out narratives that feed the hatred.

 

And their only concern is their own pocket above everything else.

DD

 

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion...conspirator/BSTHmaIPpmOzRAHP7EyS2H/story.html

 

The entire Trump family...huh? What are Baron and Melania being charged with?

 

I could post dozens of articles not written by Alan Dershowitz that state the alternative but I don’t have to do that...

You know why....

Because you can argue semantics but you still cannot argue against the FACT that Michael Cohen walked into a federal court room and implicated Trump in two election fraud crimes.

Arguing technicalities just proves you are looking for anything to create grey area into the argument of what is right and what is wrong.

The biggest question ... again... is about people like you. What the evidence provides to public to change what you believe what is good or bad after what we’ve already seen says more about you than Trump.

 

I could argue due process but that flies over your head. Just like with the Kavanaugh ambush. Don't act like you know me with your people like you bs.

You can't argue you didn't post something that did not happen as you stated it did.

 

So Cohen didn’t pay off a p*rn star? Was presidential candidate #2 actually Hillary Clinton?? I’m confused. Please tell me your set of facts according to your trusted legal source Alan Dershowitz.

Please ... instead of lazily linking legal scholars as prestigious as Alan Dershowitz with no context, please explain to us neophytes how Trump was NOT implicated in the court of law.

FYI being an un-indicted co conspirator does not mean you will be convicted in front of a jury and sentenced. How far can you possibly move the goal posts in order to maintain an argument that this man is still fit to be president. Nixon was never convicted but still refered to as a co-conspirator given the fact that he was implicated in the court documents which led to his removal from office when he polled in the 20’s.

But again.... the fact that being only implicated vs being personally charged is something you feel you personally need to stand up for says more about you and the others in your cult vs what the new evidence means about Donald Trump now vs who he was pre-Mueller report evidence and convictions.

 

You said he was an unindicted co-conspirator. That's not true. Quit crying, you were wrong on that point. Read the article. Which grand jury found probable cause? And give the "that says more about you and others" **** up. It says a lot about you that you can't admit you framed your argument wrong.

 

Maybe those two get to walk - but the rest who are involved in the Fraudulent charity in NY that they used as a bank account....are torched.

DD

 

Maybe they can indict the Trumps and Clintons at the same time.

 

If I framed it wrong (that he’s an un-indicted co-conspirator) so did former watergate attorney Nick Ackerman, a former US attorney at the district office of NJ, a Cornell law professor, and countless mainstream media legal analysts who refer to Trump as an un indicted co-conspirator.

The term was coined during watergate to describe someone who is implicated in a crime but cannot be charged because they are a sitting president.

I framed my point correct as that’s exactly what I later described as an implicated co conspirator who isn’t charged, convicted, or sentenced because they have presidential protections.

.....

Which grand jury found probably cause??

Michael Cohen pleaded guilty. A grand jury doesn’t have to find probable cause if a defendant pleaded guilty.

That being said, there is still an on-going investigation despite that fact which points towards more people being charged in the near future.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/25/politics/michael-cohen-grand-jury-investigation-ongoing/index.html

....

I’m sorry it hurts your feelings to bring up Trump fanatics like yourself about this issue because it’s true. The Mueller and SDNY finding reactions do say more about you and the Trump cult than Trump who everyone who isn’t drinking the Kool Aid understands is unfit to be president. Trump is protected as president legally (for now) and unlike every other American is only really subject to poltical scrutiny. The American president can do whatever he wants as long as he has a large enough cult following to keep Congress from removing him or her.

In many ways the Mueller report is all about you. To someone like me it would just add evidence to the facts I already have that formulate my opinions of this president.

 

I see you didn’t bother to read Dershowitz’s piece. Nixon’s situation was different because there was a grand jury that handed down an indictment. Cohen pleaded guilty to an information prepared by a prosecutor that didn’t name Trump. What law enforcement person has named Trump as a co conspirator ? That may happen when Muller completes the investigation but he hasn’t and he will need more than Cohen’s word.

To someone like you...,, just shut up already. You started crying the day he was elected and haven’t stopped since.

 

I could give two ***** about the Clintons, but if a Republican House, Senate, Supreme Court, and POTUS cant indict her on anything it's time to put that fantasy to bed lol.

 

You need to stop believing the lies about the Clinton Foundation which is rated as giving one of the highest percentage of contributions to programs. Do your homework a bit before making reckless accusations about things you are ignorant about.

 

So you don't give a 3rd **** about the Justice Department current investigation in regard to pay for play allegations with the Clinton Foundation? You speak as if that has concluded. That and the aforementioned Trump Foundation allegations may end in nothing but it won't stop the left from giving multiple ***** about anything alleged about Trump.

 

So when Bob Woodard says that the Clinton Foundation is corrupt, it's all just an ignorant lie?

 

Can you point me to the book he wrote on this?

I'm sure it's a real page turner. Is it available on Amazon?

Anyway, to answer your question - any Republican who says they care about corruption is ignorant or a liar, chief among them the President of the United States.

Corruption is of no import to them, other than to the extent it can be used against their enemies.

The "corruption" itself is to be encouraged and amplified, so as to better to be able to implement their vastly unpopular upwardly redistributive agenda while little people like you are distracted with diversions like this.

 

Except he never called the Clinton Foundation corrupt. He was saying the alleged access Hillary Clinton gave to people for donating to the Clinton Foundation was corrupt. He actually said the Foundation does good work and never put forward the Foundation was a means to funnel money into Clinton's pockets unlike the Trump foundation which does exactly that.

 

Even better, here he is calling the foundation corrupt.

 

Actually he is not calling the foundation corrupt, you just can't listen properly.