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

What, did paul ryan wake up this AM and discover he did have a pair? I guess talanver and commodore will need to order a black hat for speaker of the house ryan...

Ryan backs Gowdy on FBI’s use of informant to contact Trump associates

https://www.politico.com/story/2018...-informant-to-contact-trump-associates-628693

 

trumpy... you have some more 'splaining to do!

 

That's one heck of a coincidence!

 

Awkward...

Ivanka Trump Was In Contact With A Russian Who Offered A Trump-Putin Meeting

https://www.buzzfeed.com/anthonycor...-cohen-tower?utm_term=.rmomwNxqN5#.selJG1oj1O

 

That's a hell of an article.

"I athlete, no political". Just like Mr. Trump lol

 

But can they keep their burner phones?

 

dindu nuffin

 

Wow... dershowitz must be on the payroll...trump isn't in the wrong complaining about his AG, the U.S. constitution is...

 

he wants the roles split. it would eliminate the need for special prosecutors. I doubt trump would pay for someone to say this.

 

Hannity advises potential investigation witnesses to obstruct justice by destroying evidence...

Fox's Hannity advises witnesses in Mueller probe smash their phones to 'little itsy bitsy pieces'

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/3...eller-probe-smash-their-phones-to-little-itsy

 

This story got swept under the rug yesterday but was an important one in the understanding of how the Trump campaign colluded. Here’s essentially what the article reports-

-the Russians hacked the DNC and Podestas emails
-the Russians gave that info to Assange to disperse
-The Trump campaign hires Cambridge Analytica and is run by none other than Steve Bannon
-Assange disperses
-Cambridge Analytica pays Julian Assange


I mean... that’s collusion at the end of the day. It might be circumstantial in the court of law without being given context of communications and intent evidence but it all right here in front of your eyes.

This is what collusion looks like folks. Trump and his campaign are either witting or un-witting/ignorant traitors at the end of the day.

You just can no longer credibly argue that one is so much better than the other and you sure can’t argue that none of this ever happened and the press is creating fake news to get Trump and muh guns and muh culture.

You either care or you don’t care at this point and you can no longer carry that false patriotism around that you like to use when it’s convenient to prove how right and righteous you are all the time. Either you are okay with this just because you think you are getting something out of Trump (even as low as OWNING LIBS on the Internet) or you aren’t. It’s just that simple now.

 

That’s how I took it as well. I think the one thing Trump has taught me is that our constitution maybe isn’t as bullet proof as we’ve been raised to believe it is.

I said this months ago when he was first elected and I’ll say it again, I think there needs to be some serious change in poltical appointments to the DOJ to separate that power from the presidency. A confirmation hearing is just not enough to provide much needed independence insurance.

Dersh is right in that sense that unfortunately the Presidency is givin a ton of power over the Justice department. The forefathers wouldn’t have had any idea hundreds of years ago how important it would be to have an independent law enforcement in 2018.

However Dersh is wrong in the sense that corrupt intent, obstruction of justice, and abuse are power are still a thing that should supersede in this country unless Congress refuses to do their duty in oversight. He technically has the constitutional power but he doesn’t have the constitutional authority to NOT be held accountable for abusing his constitutional rights as president. Important context for the discussion that Dersh is conveniently leaving out of the argument.

 

Sweet. They’re going to take the Tom Brady defense

 

No complex system with human involvement is bullet proof. It depends on human doing their job and the “right” things.

Machine needs to be involved for true independence and a bullet proof system. Kidding.

 

In light of recent history, seems like closing the barn door after the horses escaped, but... who would have even thought we'd need such a law. But thanks trump!

 

LOL...

 

There's a broader change needed. Our whole civil service basically turns over when a new president is elected. This is counter to how most countries work. Most countries have a continuous civil service that operates as independent agencies. So EPA might get a new administrator and a few other appointments (all of which should require confirmation votes) but that should be it. Everything else would be unchanged with permanent civil servants. The same goes for every other department. There are thousands of presidential appointments (most of which avoid senate confirmation) that shouldn't exist. Continuity of government agencies and functions should be independent of whoever is president. We literally cause mass upheaval across the federal government every time we get a new president. That's nuts. People with years of expertise are basically forced out every four or eight years because we have a 200 year old process that never got updated.

 

I agree, but what you described is exactly what the wacko conspiracy theorists label as the "Deep State" and try to link these normal everyday career government employees as some sort of secret society Illuminati BS.

One idea I'd like to see possibly is going with odd number year appointments for deputy staff leaders. Such as Deputy AG, etc. That way when a Donald Trump comes in and appoints Jeff Sessions, his number 2 he cannot just fire outright without cause would be an Eric Holder. If Bernie Sanders got elected in 2020, his AG would be working with Rod Rosenstein for at least another year.

Since this isn't SUPPOSED to be a political arm of the government it would make sense to do so to help with continuity from one admin to another, and would force everyone to play by the rules... especially the rule of law. It would also help cut down on the backlog of appointees needed to jam through the first two years of an administration.