njbuff Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: It's already been proven to him. Thus, it can't be debunked. Sure, when you ask him for evidence he comes up empty. I've said from the beginning I'm completely open to the idea that the collusion is real - I just need to see evidence of it that doesn't come from the same talking heads who lied us into the Iraq war (Clapper, Brennan) citing unnamed sources and unknown methods. The only real evidence produced so far in all of this shows a conspiracy to undermine a legally elected POTUS, constitution and will of the people be damned. But denial is a hell of a thing. Well said. I have been asking a lot of people to point me to the evidence that Trump is Putin's lapdog, but nobody can do or say anything that shows Trump-Russia collusion. This investigation is a complete waste of my time and yours and should be shut down immediately. We all know everyone HATES this President with a passion and they can't come up with anything for over a year against a person they can't stand........... that should tell you all to need to know. I don't need to be a Trump lover or hater to see that this investigation is a sham, but the Trump haters are convinced that Trump is some sorta evil tyrant that has Putin on speed dial and you can never convince them otherwise. I give Tib as an example. He must go to the Joy Reid school of journalism or something. Provide me with something on Trump-Russia collusion or STFU. It's pretty simple.
Deranged Rhino Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, njbuff said: Well said. I have been asking a lot of people to point me to the evidence that Trump is Putin's lapdog, but nobody can do or say anything that shows Trump-Russia collusion. This investigation is a complete waste of my time and yours and should be shut down immediately. We all know everyone HATES this President with a passion and they can't come up with anything for over a year against a person they can't stand........... that should tell you all to need to know. I don't need to be a Trump lover or hater to see that this investigation is a sham, but the Trump haters are convinced that Trump is some sorta evil tyrant that has Putin on speed dial and you can never convince them otherwise. I give Tib as an example. He must go to the Joy Reid school of journalism or something. Provide me with something on Trump-Russia collusion or STFU. It's pretty simple.
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 53 minutes ago, Koko78 said: A lot of depends on when he is claiming he began representing Comey. If I'm an investigator, I would want to know if there are any retainers or letters of engagement signed. The work-around (assuming that he claims he was acting as Comey's attorney prior to the leak) is that Comey waived attorney-client privilege as to the leak issues by testifying to it and identifying the attorney as a "close friend" that he enlisted to leak the information. Once privilege is waived, there is no takesy-backsy. There is also a factual question relating to whenever the attorney claims he started representing Comey, as Comey never testified about the man being his attorney when called to help leak the memo; simply that he was a friend who worked as a law professor at Columbia. The other work-around of a privilege claim is that the attorney was actively involved in a criminal conspiracy with Comey, such as illegally leaking information to the press. I don't believe House committees are required to honor attorney-client privilege, are they?
B-Man Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 OH: It looks like the ‘James Bond’ behind the dossier let a Putin pawn do all the work. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-South Carolina) asked Steele’s Clinton-paid handler Glenn Simpson, during the House Intelligence Committee’s Nov. 14 closed-door hearing, if Steele had gone “to Russia as part of this project,” to which Simpson replied, “No, sir.” Steele, at the time he compiled the dossier, hadn’t been back to Russia in 17 years. So, Gowdy pressed, “How was he able to accumulate information in Russia if he didn’t go?” Simpson claimed that Steele ran a “network of subsources or subcontractors” who traveled around Russia and gathered information for him. But it turns out the primary subcontractor worked not for Steele but for Simpson at Washington-based Fusion GPS, and he contributed key material for the investigation of Trump underwritten by the Clinton campaign. His name is Edward Baumgartner, a British national who speaks fluent Russian and runs a p.r. shop out of London (and who spent 2016 tweeting his forceful opposition to Trump’s candidacy). While Baumgartner was working on the dossier, he was also working for Simpson on another case to smear an anti-Putin whistleblower in an effort to help Putin-tied company Prevezon defend itself against US charges of money laundering. This whole thing stinks, to coin a phrase.
Koko78 Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 35 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: I don't believe House committees are required to honor attorney-client privilege, are they? Yes. Attorney-client privilege is really tough to break (especially since attorneys tend to write the laws regarding privilege). Attorneys have ethical restrictions as well. An attorney could be subject to discipline for violating privilege.
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, Koko78 said: Yes. Attorney-client privilege is really tough to break (especially since attorneys tend to write the laws regarding privilege). Attorneys have ethical restrictions as well. An attorney could be subject to discipline for violating privilege. I could have sworn I heard Congressman Gowdy state that "this body does not acknowledge most privileges under subpoena" which included not acknowledging attorney-client during Simpson's recent testimony; but I fully admit ignorance here, and know I may be wrong.
B-Man Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 Be Honest...................... .You know how that would be covered.......................................................... . 1
Deranged Rhino Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 Click on the tweet to see his whole thread on the subject if interested: 1
row_33 Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 The media will totally ignore anything that makes Hillary look bad. 1
snafu Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 6 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Re: Russian bots - oops. https://www.thedailybeast.com/source-twitter-pins-releasethememo-on-republicans-not-russia So the Russians are in America!? Its worse than I imagined. 2
/dev/null Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 6 hours ago, row_33 said: The media will totally ignore anything that makes Hillary look bad. The Media is over Hiliary. She failed them Right now it's a matter of damage control and protecting the Narrative
Tiberius Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 54 minutes ago, /dev/null said: The Media is over Hiliary. She failed them Right now it's a matter of damage control and protecting the Narrative Somewhere out there in a meeting room, The Media is planning how to protect the Narrative. Everything will be decided at the meeting. In other news, the presidents lawyers must be terrified at the thought of Mueller interviewing the addle minded Trump. Trump's team has been trying to get it so they --probably his lawyers--can respond in writing. That's wrong and Mueller should refuse and threaten to haul the blow hard fool in front of a grand jury if he refuses. He is almost certain to perjure himself. Can they just claim he is not competent to give an interview? 1
Taro T Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 58 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Somewhere out there in a meeting room, The Media is planning how to protect the Narrative. Everything will be decided at the meeting. In other news, the presidents lawyers must be terrified at the thought of Mueller interviewing the addle minded Trump. Trump's team has been trying to get it so they --probably his lawyers--can respond in writing. That's wrong and Mueller should refuse and threaten to haul the blow hard fool in front of a grand jury if he refuses. He is almost certain to perjure himself. Can they just claim he is not competent to give an interview? Were it your lawyers, that could be a very effective strategy. 2
Keukasmallie Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 22 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Somewhere out there in a meeting room, The Media is planning how to protect the Narrative. Everything will be decided at the meeting. In other news, the presidents lawyers must be terrified at the thought of Mueller interviewing the addle minded Trump. Trump's team has been trying to get it so they --probably his lawyers--can respond in writing. That's wrong and Mueller should refuse and threaten to haul the blow hard fool in front of a grand jury if he refuses. He is almost certain to perjure himself. Can they just claim he is not competent to give an interview? _________________________________________________________________________ Does the noise from the dehumidifier in your parent's basement confuse you that much?
Tiberius Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 1 hour ago, Taro T said: Were it your lawyers, that could be a very effective strategy. At least I can make a coherent argument. You have to resort to dribbling out ab hominem attacks because you are an idiot. You are a Trump supporter. Nice win by the Sabres though.
3rdnlng Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 15 minutes ago, Tiberius said: At least I can make a coherent argument. You have to resort to dribbling out ab hominem attacks because you are an idiot. You are a Trump supporter. Nice win by the Sabres though. No, no you can't. It's rare that you can even convey an ignorant post clearly.
Tiberius Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 11 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: No, no you can't. It's rare that you can even convey an ignorant post clearly. Good morning worthless! Seems like you Trumpbots are finally starting to lose it.
Taro T Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 2 hours ago, Tiberius said: At least I can make a coherent argument. You have to resort to dribbling out ab hominem attacks because you are an idiot. You are a Trump supporter. Nice win by the Sabres though. You must not have had your morning coffee yet. Only 4 incorrect items in your first paragraph; but don't worry, we're sure you'll be able to up that count once you're back on your game. But, yes, the Sabres played very well last night, which was a good thing.
Tiberius Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 Trump asked FBI official Andrew McCabe how he voted in 2016 In an Oval Office meeting, McCabe, who at the time was acting FBI director, told President Trump that he didn’t vote in the election, officials said. The president also vented his anger over donations that McCabe’s wife, a Democrat, received for a failed bid for the Virginia state Senate. The conversation is said to be of interest to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. Oh that sounds ethical.
Recommended Posts