Had enough yet

[HipKat]

I don't like the Sessions strategy either, but I do believe it to be a strategy. It does not shift focus from Russia as much as it shines the light on the HRC, and the apparent complicit interest in not pursuing her.

Wait...what!!?? Clinton's name has not come up in any of this.

The Republican Senators would be better served by losing their hypocrisy and bi-polar behavior, and deliver on their seven-year pledge to "Repeal and Replace" Obamacare.

These senators complain about Trump's disloyalty to Sessions, and that is fine. But, what about these election-time show-boaters lying to, and deceiving their voters in 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016?

Well, we agree Republicans lie

I think Van Jones used the phrase "Nothing Burger." Yep, I agree, it is an asinine phrase.

And Then You used it.......

[mark blazejewski]

Wait...what!!?? Clinton's name has not come up in any of this.




Well, we agree Republicans lie



And Then You used it.......

Comprehensively addressing your points: that makes me a rather objective "Deplorable," who vomits when having to excessively use the term "HRC," who occasionally exercises poor taste when quoting some of the left, in terms of form and personalities, but a sincere commentator, who will not post politically-spun excuses to the exclusion of conscience.

And you?

[mark blazejewski]

Wait...what!!?? Clinton's name has not come up in any of this.

Clinton's name has not come up? Give me a break. Who was "Blabbermouth Schultz" supporting during the primary? Who had the illegal email server? Who did Comey give a pass to? Who met with Loretta Lynch on a tarmac? Who made the Uranium deal? "Who... Who... Who..."

Pursuit of the issues means pursuing HRC. And don't forget the McAuliffe connection with Acting FBI Director McCabe, concerning campaign contributions to McCabe's wife. You do know of the connection between Der Schlickmeister, HRC, and MCAuliffe, don't you? Or, as Ricky Ricardo would say "Dun't you?"

Surely you jest HipKat.

[HipKat]

Clinton's name has not come up? Give me a break. Who was "Blabbermouth Schultz" supporting during the primary? Who had the illegal email server? Who did Comey give a pass to? Who met with Loretta Lynch on a tarmac? Who made the Uranium deal? "Who... Who... Who..."

Pursuit of the issues means pursuing HRC. And don't forget the McAuliffe connection with Acting FBI Director McCabe, concerning campaign contributions to McCabe's wife. You do know of the connection between Der Schlickmeister, HRC, and MCAuliffe, don't you? Or, as Ricky Ricardo would say "Dun't you?"

Surely you jest HipKat.

Yeah, 2016 just called, they want their HRC scandals back.

[mark blazejewski]

Yeah, 2016 just called, they want their HRC scandals back.

Like your implied Obama paraphrase alleging that Mitt Romney was wrong to identify Russia as an enemy in 2012 , your current comment suggesting an anachronistic irrelevance of HRC's "antics," are contradicted by contemporary reality.

[HipKat]

I don't know where you got that from. My whole point in this Russia deal is they ARE our enemy.

[Lee Chowaniec]

I don't know where you got that from. My whole point in this Russia deal is they ARE our enemy.

Come on HipKat, the whole Russian collusion BS did not impact any of the Trump voters that I know of. Clinton lost because the Dems had a poor message and endorsed the most corrupt and disingenuous candidate possible – as the Dems are now openly admitting.

Many felt as I did: Trump was not our first choice but after the primary he was the standard bearer for all who literally detested Clinton and then came to revile the arrogant elitists and the liberal mainstream ‘fake news’ media.

You ask why we bring up Obama and Clinton when they are not in office anymore and that we should move on; seriously, when they advocated for resistance and obstruction after leaving office and where Hillary is now writing a book that will blame everyone and anything but herself for her loss. Clinton and Obama were fortunate that they had the judicial system and media stacked in their favor.

Trump should be investigated. However, so too should individuals like Obama, Clinton, Schwartz, Comey, Lynch, Holder, etc. for their transgressions.

[mark blazejewski]

You ask why we bring up Obama and Clinton when they are not in office anymore and that we should move on; seriously, when they advocated for resistance and obstruction after leaving office

Perfect response!

The left raised some interesting speculative questions during the campaign. To Trump, and TRUMP ONLY, questions like:

(1) "Will you accept the election returns?"

(2) "Will you pursue HRC if elected."

The left strongly believed that Trump would lose in a landslide. Therefore, if Trump answered "No" to either question, Trump was boxed in for the future. If Trump seriously answered "Yes" to either, he was going to stage a coup if he were defeated, or throw his opposition in jail if elected.

The left and their media seemed to have gotten the idea that "Banana Republic" behavior was a natural outcome of a Trump candidacy, and possible in America.

Since the unthinkable took place, and Trump was elected, I have always been troubled by their use of the word "resistance." I guess they may have had something in mind all along, or perhaps a coup already took place, in 2008, and Trump's election was the legitmate counter-coup.

[mark blazejewski]

Trump should be investigated. However, so too should individuals like Obama, Clinton, Schwartz, Comey, Lynch, Holder, etc. for their transgressions.

Trump is accused of "colluding" with the Russians. Even if true, "collusion" does not appear to be a crime.

But, what does one label the Obama-Clinton publicly articulated commitment to "resist" the Trump administration, and the subsequent "leaking" of classified information by the Obama-Clinton hold-overs, such as Comey, and Comey's subordinate FBI General Counsel James Baker, serving in the Trump administration?

If true, at least one specific law may have been broken. But, in a potentially larger sense, perhaps "Conspiracy," perhaps leading to "Insurrection," may come to mind. This is widely reported this morning, and was first reported in "Circa:"

EXCLUSIVE: A top FBI lawyer is allegedly under an investigation for leaking classified information to the media

By Sara A. Carter
51
51
12 Hours Ago


FBI General Counsel James A. Baker is purportedly under a Department of Justice criminal investigation for allegedly leaking classified national security information to the media, according to multiple government officials close to the probe who spoke with Circa on the condition of anonymity.

FBI spokeswoman Carol Cratty said the bureau would not comment on Baker and would not confirm or deny any investigation.

This comes as Department of Justice Attorney General Jeff Sessions said he would soon be making an announcement regarding the progress of leak investigations. A DOJ official declined to comment on Circa’s inquiry into Baker but did say, the planned announcement by Sessions is part of the overall "stepped up efforts on leak investigations."

Three sources, with knowledge of the investigation, told Circa that Baker is the top suspect in an ongoing leak investigation, but Circa has not been able to confirm the details of what national security information or material was allegedly leaked.

A federal law enforcement official with knowledge of ongoing internal investigations in the bureau told Circa, "the bureau is scouring for leakers and there's been a lot of investigations."

The revelation comes as the Trump administration has ramped up efforts to contain leaks both within the White House and within its own national security apparatus.

Baker is a close confidant of former FBI Director James Comey, and recent media reports suggested he was reportedly advising the then-FBI director on legal matters following private meetings the former director had in February with President Trump in the Oval Office.

Baker was appointed to the FBI's general counsel by Comey in 2014 and has had a long and distinguished history within the intelligence community.

After working as a federal prosecutor in the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice during the 1990s, he joined the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review In 1996, according to his FBI bio. (https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/ne...eneral-counsel).

In 2006 Baker received the George H.W. Bush Award for Excellence in counter-terrorism—the CIA’s highest counter-terrorism award, according to his biography. During Baker's long and distinguished career he received the "NSA’s Intelligence Under Law Award; the NSA Director’s Distinguished Service Medal; and DOJ’s highest award— the Edmund J. Randolph Award."


He is a fellow at the Institute of Politics at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and a lecturer at Harvard Law School.

[BorderBob]

BTW Bob, I forgot to ask, I would also appreciate if you would check the statute of limitations on "collusion." NOT CONSPIRACY, but "COLLUSION."

Again, your fixation on FOXNEWS talking points. It will be found to be a violation of FEC statutes to accept something of value from a foreign government. "Opposition research" is a thing a value. That and of course this whole thing of how you are "OK" with Americans colluding (statute or not) with a foreign government for the purpose or tipping a free election.

Don't get caught up in the media-speak. Think for yourself.





b.b.

[BorderBob]

Yea, I'll wait for your money laundering fantasy.

Meanwhile, back at Wasserman Schultz's Pakistani Laundromat, the plot thickens: the presence of a top-down loading, tumbling, washing machine, standing right next to a "bottle" of bleach bit, and two smashed hard drives.

After giving Sanders a through cleaning, does preferred customer HRC pick-up her own laundry, or does she have future, suicidal staff to do that?

I Don't necessarily agree with Trump's style, but he may be right. The Republicans, the so-called "pure at heart Democrats," and the Sessions' DOJ should include this HRC/DNC crap in their searcrh for truth and justice.

You really are losing it.





b.b.

[BorderBob]

...from an online legal dictionary...emphasis mine

Collusion
An agreement between two or more people to defraud a person of his or her rights or to obtain something that is prohibited by law.
A secret arrangement wherein two or more people whose legal interests seemingly conflict conspire to commit Fraud upon another person; a pact between two people to deceive a court with the purpose of obtaining something that they would not be able to get through legitimate judicial channels.

Here is another

noun
1.
a secret agreement, especially for fraudulent or treacherous purposes; conspiracy:
Some of his employees were acting in collusion to rob him.
2.
Law. a secret understanding between two or more persons to gain something illegally, to defraud another of his or her rights, or to appear as adversaries though in agreement:
collusion of husband and wife to obtain a divorce.

There are more...but the point?

18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States.
If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

See Also: FEC, Money Laundering (which I know something about), False Statements.





b.b.

[BorderBob]

[QUOTE=mark blazejewski;1735951][QUOTE=HipKat;1735942]
I

nvestigate HRC?? Seriously?? [/QUOTE

Trump should have never said he wanted to let her off the hook. SHE IS A CROOK! SHE IS A LIAR, AND SHE IS A M......, it is one word, you fill in the blacks.

Seek professional help, please.



b.b.

[BorderBob]

Come on HipKat, the whole Russian collusion BS did not impact any of the Trump voters that I know of. Clinton lost because the Dems had a poor message and endorsed the most corrupt and disingenuous candidate possible – as the Dems are now openly admitting..

Trump won the election "by decision." A technicality, a Constitutional one, but not by a plurality of votes cast. Many on the right believe that had HRC made "one more trip" to Wisconsin or Michigan that it would have tipped her way, but they do not believe that the bot driven social media campaign of the FBS and GRU did not?

I have people still morning the death of Bob Denver this year. (he died in 2005). These people believe anything they see in social media and they vote.







b.b.

[mark blazejewski]

[QUOTE=BorderBob;1736599][QUOTE=mark blazejewski;1735951]

I

Seek professional help, please.



b.b.

Do you have a referral based on experience?