Deranged Rhino

Omidyar -- again. (Those who scream the loudest have the most to hide)

As a JOKE — which it clearly was. A joke about current events at the time. No serious person took it as anything more. Holding it up now, with all we know 4 years later, is partisan nonsense, nothing more.

Not "you people", the evidence and facts deny this happened. Did Russia meddle? Yup. Did they meddle with the cooperation of the Trump campaign? Nope. ZERO have been charged, indicted, or convicted of anything having to do with the 2016 election or Russian collusion. Not Manafort, not Flynn, not Stone, not Cohen, not Popadopolous...

And yet, you are pretending that didn't happen in 2016. Except it doesn't invalidate it -- as accepting dirt in and of itself STILL wouldn't be a crime or "wrong doing". Still missing the point. If the meeting was a set up, it is relevant no? False. If the entire premise of the meeting was to entrap a political rival in a smear campaign it absolutely matters and changes the entire story.

Not a real thing. Prosecutors do not exonerate, that's not the job nor how our system of justice is supposed to work. Stating this proves you either do not know this, or do not care enough to understand what you're advocating for is a complete undoing of the rule of law. 17+ times the FBI/DOJ committed fraud in their warrant applications to the FISC proves you wrong. But you don't want to talk about evidence or fact, you only want to talk about what you've been instructed to talk about by those who programmed your feeble mind. 1) That's not illegal. 2) The Trump Tower meeting proves that it was a set up. You've been had. Because you're a very dumb person.

Even easier than that, if there was collusion/conspiracy, why wasn't a single person charged or indicted with it? @Nineforty wrongly states the OLC opinion prevents this (it does not), but even if it did and the ONLY reason Trump wasn't charged was because he was in office that wouldn't extend to any of the others involved in the plot. But @Bob in Mich and the low information folk don't want to think. They want to be told what to think.

Why cite the report itself when you can read... (checks notes) "Time magazine" instead? Reason 10004 why Bob continues to be woefully underperformed. As for the bolded, how bout that projection?!

That's not an answer, though it is telling. It's a very simple, and on topic, question to ask. Why won't you answer it honestly?

They are far too invested in the outcome as an institution. They lied for three years, knowingly, and now are scrambling to distract anyone from asking about that whole "Trump is a traitor" meme they pushed. If they report the latest developments honestly (like FISA abuse), it shines a bright light to the malfeasance they pulled on their viewers/readers. So they can't/won't do that. Instead, they're going to go down with the ship. The people are already tuning them out, distrust of the media is lower than Congress right now (which is saying something).

My personal opinion remains the same as it was when this started: history/tradition/precedent says the most likely outcome is they will skate -- but this is a different administration/world post 2016. I am still of the mind that there will be justice doled out to a slew of folks in the DOJ/FBI/IC. Going higher up the food chain, into cabinet officials and the like, gets murkier. The people I trust most who are in the trenches on this issue haven't changed their tune, which gives me some confidence. I never expected, nor wanted, them to wait until 2020 because of the election and the "political persecution" angle the left would (and is) trying to play. But circumstances forced them to wait, countering the moves of the opposition. Either way it goes, there's very little chance this is done and wrapped up by November -- with or without a Trump win. There's too many fish on the hook, it's going to take more than one term to do properly. (We'll find out soon enough if this truly is a different world/administration, or just more of the same)

And the rank and file in the LAPD are not pleased about this.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/doj-opens-news-investigation-into-james-comey-andrew-mccabe-peter-strzok-former-top-official-says Andrew Weissmann, a former top lawyer at the Justice Department who played a central role in Robert Mueller's investigation, said Friday the Justice Department has begun a new investigation into several former top FBI officials. Weissmann, speaking to MSNBC host Chuck Todd, said the Justice Department has swapped its "loser case" against Andrew McCabe — in which the DOJ declined to pursue charges against McCabe for lying to investigators — for a new case against former FBI Director James Comey, McCabe, and Peter Strzok. "All they did was swapped out a loser case for starting an investigation that is going to be of Comey, McCabe, Pete Strzok," Weissmann said, the Washington Examiner reported.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/doj-opens-news-investigation-into-james-comey-andrew-mccabe-peter-strzok-former-top-official-says Panic for nothing. Andrew Weissmann, a former top lawyer at the Justice Department who played a central role in Robert Mueller's investigation, said Friday the Justice Department has begun a new investigation into several former top FBI officials. Weissmann, speaking to MSNBC host Chuck Todd, said the Justice Department has swapped its "loser case" against Andrew McCabe — in which the DOJ declined to pursue charges against McCabe for lying to investigators — for a new case against former FBI Director James Comey, McCabe, and Peter Strzok. "All they did was swapped out a loser case for starting an investigation that is going to be of Comey, McCabe, Pete Strzok," Weissmann said, the Washington Examiner reported.

Found @Bob in Mich

Yes, Brian, it was stupid. But, to be fair, it was no more stupid than the rest of your content...

Honest question: You think a bloated administrative state, comprised of unelected and unaccountable intel officers and analysts dictating policy from the shadows is a good thing? Are you at all familiar with the history of the CIA and the IC? And if you are, why would you ever be okay with the above?

March/April per Barr in December.