Mueller turns up the heat on impeachment

[Idolater]

So you are going to ignore the fact that YOU CHANGED WHERE YOU quoted me?

Bush and Colin did lie and then attacked a country he had no business attacking.

Now the psychopathic Bush paints pictures of the US Military men that got maimed because of HIM.

If you were in charge back then, we'd have let the savage Indian tribes roam free, just accept that occasionally they'd suddenly early some Sunday or Monday morning invade our neighborhoods and towns, kill every man, woman, and baby child, wiping us out, just every now and again, and you'd think we're doing right because "we have no business attacking", afraid that we'd "upset their natural habitat", or some developmentally delayed idea like that.

 

[annabenedetti]

If you were in charge back then, we'd have let the savage Indian tribes roam free, just accept that occasionally they'd suddenly early some Sunday or Monday morning invade our neighborhoods and towns, kill every man, woman, and baby child, wiping us out, just every now and again, and you'd think we're doing right because "we have no business attacking", afraid that we'd "upset their natural habitat", or some developmentally delayed idea like that.

White supremacism is so ugly. Take your ugliness somewhere else.

 

[Idolater]

White supremacism is so ugly. Take your ugliness somewhere else.

=/

I'm going to go with "savagery" when someone asks me, "which one's uglier: savagery, or calling savages savages?" every time. Cutting up a baby is savagery. Calling that savagery---is not "white supremacism" whatever that means in your developmentally challenged brain. It's just savagery, to remove a woman's still-beating heart, and it's not "white supremacism" to say so.

 

[ok doser]

That loss . . . still feels really, really good. No matter what else happens, that was awesome.

Rachel Madcows on-air meltdown was worth the price of admission alone. :chuckle:

As well as that of that fat turk Cenk Uyger

 

[ok doser]

Cutting up a baby is savagery.

According to Biden and Harris and Cuomo and the Democrats it's a medical procedure to get rid of a clump of cells.

 

[God's Truth]

If you were in charge back then, we'd have let the savage Indian tribes roam free, just accept that occasionally they'd suddenly early some Sunday or Monday morning invade our neighborhoods and towns, kill every man, woman, and baby child, wiping us out, just every now and again, and you'd think we're doing right because "we have no business attacking", afraid that we'd "upset their natural habitat", or some developmentally delayed idea like that.

Bush and Colin Powell lied and because of them many people are dead and others maimed.

So you want to ignore that and start talking about Indians?

 

[Idolater]

Bush and Colin Powell lied and because of them many people are dead and others maimed.

So you want to ignore that and start talking about Indians?

You don't know the difference between barbarism and not-barbarism though

 

[God's Truth]

You don't know the difference between barbarism and not-barbarism though

Prove it I don't.

 

[The Barbarian]

Here's something Trump is not happy about...

'Obamagate' backfires: Documents show Biden, Obama acted properly
Republicans and right-wing media are in a conspiracy theory-spewing meltdown. In the wake of selective, politically motivated "leaks" of sensitive documents, conservative pundits are launching an avalanche of baseless attacks against President Trump's political opponents.

But the reality is brutally obvious: Trump is weaponizing the American government to distract from his catastrophically incompetent pandemic response and the crushing economic fallout.

While right-wing media continue to whip their audiences into hysteria over a nefarious Obama-led plot to undermine Trump, the documents - strategically released by Trump's political lackeys atop the intelligence and law enforcement communities - do absolutely nothing to further such asinine conspiracy theories. In fact, they prove the opposite.

The recently disclosed files show the Obama administration's diligence and focus in the wake of Russia's sweeping assault on American democracy. Moreover, contrary to unhinged right-wing conspiracy-mongering, the materials demonstrate Obama's dedication to upholding the FBI's independence from improper political influence.
...
Some context is in order. In late 2016, then-President Obama slapped aggressive sanctions on Moscow in retaliation for Russia's sweeping assault on American democracy. Flynn, coordinating with "senior members" of the Trump team, then colluded - in the truest sense of the term - with a high-level Russian government official to undermine U.S. pressure on the Kremlin.

Putin's uncharacteristically tepid reaction to Obama's sanctions - including the expulsion of 35 Russian spies living in the United States - left America's foreign policy, intelligence and law enforcement agencies stunned. After sifting through reams of intelligence, the FBI finally made sense of the normally combative Russian leader's tame response. Thanks to routine, legal surveillance of foreign government officials, the bureau found that Flynn asked Putin, through a Russian ambassador, not to respond to Obama's sanctions.

In other words, Trump cozied up to Vladimir Putin (via Flynn) only months after Russia's brazen attack on the 2016 election.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...cted-properly/ar-BB14jFdr?ocid=ob-fb-enus-580

Read the whole article; it gets even more interesting.

 

[User Name]

Here's something Trump is not happy about...

'Obamagate' backfires: Documents show Biden, Obama acted properly

But I thought Trump said Obama committed "the biggest political crime in American history!" You're telling me that was just bluster? Well, I'll be...

 

[annabenedetti]

Justice Dept. Never Fully Examined Trump’s Ties to Russia, Ex-Officials Say

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department secretly took steps in 2017 to narrow the investigation into Russian election interference and any links to the Trump campaign, according to former law enforcement officials, keeping investigators from completing an examination of President Trump’s decades-long personal and business ties to Russia.

The special counsel who finished the investigation, Robert S. Mueller III, secured three dozen indictments and convictions of some top Trump advisers, and he produced a report that outlined Russia’s wide-ranging operations to help get Mr. Trump elected and the president’s efforts to impede the inquiry.

But law enforcement officials never fully investigated Mr. Trump’s own relationship with Russia, even though some career F.B.I. counterintelligence investigators thought his ties posed such a national security threat that they took the extraordinary step of opening an inquiry into them. Within days, the former deputy attorney general Rod J. Rosenstein curtailed the investigation without telling the bureau, all but ensuring it would go nowhere.

 

[ok doser]

You losers will have four more years to try again :chuckle:

 

[annabenedetti]

Judge orders DOJ to publish info redacted as privileged from Mueller report

A federal judge on Wednesday ordered the Department of Justice (DOJ) to publish information redacted from the Mueller report that had been designated as privileged.

District Judge Reggie Walton said the Trump administration had failed to justify certain redactions from the report on the special counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The specific redactions he took issue with cover the decisionmaking process within former special counsel Robert Mueller's team over whether to charge certain people with crimes during the probe.

"Based on the Court’s review of the unredacted version of the Mueller Report, the Court concludes that the Department has failed to satisfy its burden to demonstrate that the withheld material is protected by the deliberative process privilege," Walton, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, wrote in his 40-page opinion.

"The inconsistencies between Attorney General Barr’s statements, made at a time when the public did not have access to the redacted version of the Mueller Report to assess the veracity of his statements, and portions of the redacted version of the Mueller Report that conflict with those statements cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary," Walton wrote in March.

"These circumstances generally, and Attorney General Barr’s lack of candor specifically, call into question Attorney General Barr’s credibility" and the DOJ's arguments in the FOIA lawsuit, the judge added