Sol Rosenberg

Drip Drip Drip

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Spatial Ed said:

It's time for the adults in the GOP to correct course and take out the Trump cancer that is eating their party.  Gowdy took the high road today.  So have McCain and graham.  Slippery slope.  

Many of the adults have been evicted from the GOP. The TMSails were fine with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Many of the adults have been evicted from the GOP. The TMSails were fine with that.

The Rino hunt was devastating.  Lots of blood lines ended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps some of us consider her wedding vows and our own to be disqualifiers . . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

Nothing disingenuous about it. The GOP is not "the right". I have no arguments with you pointing out a political PARTY is about power & control, with country being a distant priority to those two properties. Had you kept your comparison between the Democratic Party and the GOP, you'd have a point. Instead you made a childish taunt directed at the entirety of a a vast, internally diverse political ideology - many of whom serve their countries with pride and care for it deeply.

Typical.

And this is why I try NOT to respond to your dribble.    In the US PEOPLE regularly interchange left for democrats (DNC) and right for republicans (GOP).  As a non American you must have missed that.   In the big scene not all members of either party fall into left or right.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gouvernail said:

Perhaps some of us consider her wedding vows and our own to be disqualifiers . . 

The vulgarian nullified those vows.  He said moving on married women like a bitch was AOK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TMSAIL said:

And this is why I try NOT to respond to your dribble.    In the US PEOPLE regularly interchange left for democrats (DNC) and right for republicans (GOP).  As a non American you must have missed that.   In the big scene not all members of either party fall into left or right.   

But they all get on their knees for money 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Spatial Ed said:

The vulgarian nullified those vows.  He said moving on married women like a bitch was AOK.

Not my president

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TMSAIL said:

And this is why I try NOT to respond to your dribble.    In the US PEOPLE regularly interchange left for democrats (DNC) and right for republicans (GOP).  As a non American you must have missed that.   In the big scene not all members of either party fall into left or right.   

bullshit. only assholes do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gouvernail said:

But they all get on their knees for money 

That was my point as an American you understand.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gouvernail said:

Not my president

But his daughter is fair game.  I'd move on her like a bitch.  She is totally hot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Spatial Ed said:

But his daughter is fair game.  I'd move on her like a bitch.  She is totally hot.

Some of us respect her marriage vows  and her support for Gropenfuhrer disgusts me anyway. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

How many surgery's has she had?

Don't care, she's had enough to get my pecker hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

Some of us respect her marriage vows  and her support for Gropenfuhrer disgusts me anyway. 

 

I'd fuck some of that support right out of her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TMSAIL said:

And this is why I try NOT to respond to your dribble.    In the US PEOPLE regularly interchange left for democrats (DNC) and right for republicans (GOP).  As a non American you must have missed that.   In the big scene not all members of either party fall into left or right.   

And you were wrong to do so. Not all right-wingers in the US are Republican, not all left-wingers in the US are Democratic. Many US members of "the right" have explicitly & repeatedly stated on these forums they are not GOP. That they choose the candidate based on ideology & track record, not party.  It has nothing to do with being a non-American TMS. Unless your point is that "the right" (which includes you) do not care about country, preferring instead power & control - then you created a false equivalency with a party on one side and believers/adherents to a broad sociopolitical ideology on the other. 

And, no, I don't expect you to man up to that. You've shown a penchant for fucking up then running from the adult action of admitting to "mistake" & correcting yourself. This is just another in the long line of trivial shit you can't bring yourself to concede. Fact remains, you have no moral authority to whine about childish taunts given you just made one. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Spatial Ed said:

I'd fuck some of that support right out of her.

You seem to have no appreciation for the history of mobster fathers whose daughters have been violated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bent Sailor said:

And you were wrong to do so. Not all right-wingers in the US are Republican, not all left-wingers in the US are Democratic. Many US members of "the right" have explicitly & repeatedly stated on these forums they are not GOP. That they choose the candidate based on ideology & track record, not party.  It has nothing to do with being a non-American TMS. Unless your point is that "the right" (which includes you) do not care about country, preferring instead power & control - then you created a false equivalency with a party on one side and believers/adherents to a broad sociopolitical ideology on the other. 

And, no, I don't expect you to man up to that. You've shown a penchant for fucking up then running from the adult action of admitting to "mistake" & correcting yourself. This is just another in the long line of trivial shit you can't bring yourself to concede. Fact remains, you have no moral authority to whine about childish taunts given you just made one. :rolleyes:

And that is the reason people create videos of you in your basement.   You have no moral authority to fucking judge anyone but yourself.  Yet you do it repeatedly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TMSAIL said:

And that is the reason people create videos of you in your basement.   You have no moral authority to fucking judge anyone but yourself.  Yet you do it repeatedly. 

no moral authority? fuck you GOP supporter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Modernrate Buai said:

Hillary butt hurt syndrone... nothing to see... all fake collusion nuewz

Meanwhile some important #MAGA shizz

Quote
  •  
 

Working hard to get the Olympics for the United States (L.A.). Stay tuned!

As an interesting aside, I recently read that Trump's Muslim ban idiocy is quite likely to cost us any shot at the Olympic bid, since so many athletes would have trouble coming to compete. Who wants to prep, train and pay for an Olympic bid, only to be denied entry to the host country at the last minute because of your religion and our capricious enforcement of these policies?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not screw that sheep - fake news!

Well the word screw doesn't mean what you think it means.

Well sure I have wool all over me, video of me doing it, and 15 eye witnesses, but don't Democrats do it too if they could catch one :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, TMSAIL said:

And that is the reason people create videos of you in your basement.   You have no moral authority to fucking judge anyone but yourself.  Yet you do it repeatedly. 

You're talking about Little Boy 15's video? Nah, that's cos he has personal issues with me - the guy got the shits when he couldn't get anymore attention from me anymore. Like Dabs before him, geriatric attention-whores don't take it well when their favourite toy won't play with them anymore.

People might find me annoying, but the thing they haven't been able to do is point to hypocrisy on my part. That's what your equating "the left" with "the GOP" is. Especially as you're one of those people that have stated that being on "the right" doesn't make one Republican. Keep thrashing about TMS, you're still not fooling anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Dog said:
11 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

You ARE aware that emails are not delivered to a physical address, aren't you?

Mine are, they pop up right here on my physical computer screen. I suppose it could have been a hack job but I still think it more likely the leakers worked in Trump Tower than in the White house.

Weird how they follow you around when you move your phone though, eh? Like if you go to the store and an e-mail comes in, it comes right to your phone, like magic.

Newsflash - your mail server is NOT in your computer screen. Or your iPhone. That's not where the e-mail is actually "delivered" - my e-mail comes into several different devices.

But it is delivered to the email SERVER (in my case at Google, at Zoho, or at GoDaddy...whichever account I am using), my PC or phone retrieves it from there.

One can physically install a server someplace like Trump Tower, sure. But it could be anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dog said:

You guys really need a reality check.

What you don't have, Evidence the Russian lawyer delivered any damaging information,  She denies she ever had it or any connection to the Kremlin, anything to indicate Trump asked for damaging information or offered anything in return for damaging information, Basically, you have no evidence of collusion.

What you do have: Donald Jr. took a meeting that he should not have taken, it was stupid especially in light of Rob Goldstone' s referring to the lawyer as a "Russian Government attorney" or the ridiculous reference to a "Crown prosecutor of Russia". It all makes the campaign look inept. Some have argued that simply agreeing to talk to the Russian lawyer constitutes a crime, good luck with that one.

You guys need to get a grip and a lot more drip drip.

 

If you try to rob a bank but there's no money in the vault...have you committed a crime?

If you plan a crime and try to execute it but fail...have you committed a crime?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, phillysailor said:

I don't see criminal behavior. I see the usual: unethical behavior, lies, and more lies. 

I think the proper response is to make the next head of ethics office _not_ appointed by this president. Declare emergency situation and create a bipartisan search committee, perhaps formed of members of the committee for Veterans affairs which seems to be functioning as Congress should function. I don't care if they defund the original department and create a new one to get it done.

Second, invite the Atty General, his deputy and the White House Counsel to a "friendly" meeting with the outgoing ethics chief and tell him to lay into them with a lecture on how telling the truth in the future will help America. Direct them to spread the gospel in the Administration. He should next allow an uncomfortable silence, and then walk out.

The deputy Atty General is there as a witness to the proceedings, and can sit with the ethics chief if he chooses.

Are you referring to the Attorney General that met with the Russians and lied about it? Or another one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dog said:

You guys really need a reality check.

What you don't have, Evidence the Russian lawyer delivered any damaging information,  She denies she ever had it or any connection to the Kremlin, anything to indicate Trump asked for damaging information or offered anything in return for damaging information, Basically, you have no evidence of collusion.

What you do have: Donald Jr. took a meeting that he should not have taken, it was stupid especially in light of Rob Goldstone' s referring to the lawyer as a "Russian Government attorney" or the ridiculous reference to a "Crown prosecutor of Russia". It all makes the campaign look inept. Some have argued that simply agreeing to talk to the Russian lawyer constitutes a crime, good luck with that one.

You guys need to get a grip and a lot more drip drip.

 

It's kinda of like being caught breaking into a house and claiming it 's not a crime because the homeowner took all the good stuff out before you got there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spatial Ed said:

Is it the GOP that is so corrupt or just the Trump administration?  One would think that the GOP would clean house quickly if they found rats infesting their house.

You'd be wrong if you thought that. The whole concept of "ratfuck" has become an inherent part of Republican character. Back in simpler times we called it "lack of character" but standards have changed.

There certainly are some Democratic Party leaders who are less than perfectly straight arrows; but the GOP's whole strategy is planned around ratfucking not only the Democratic Party (arguably justifiable) to ratfucking the whole country and all it's citizens. The question is, what are the citizens going to do about it? It seems just fine to about 30%, and that 30% is a very reliable enthusiastic voting block.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, TMSAIL said:

And this is why I try NOT to respond to your dribble.    In the US PEOPLE regularly interchange left for democrats (DNC) and right for republicans (GOP).  As a non American you must have missed that.   In the big scene not all members of either party fall into left or right.   

I guess if you think that only Republicans are "people" then that's a perfectly valid point of view. Oh wait some Republicans are not true-blue right-wing Republicans, so maybe "people" means only "the RIGHT people."

"People are saying."

Tends to confirm my impression that you seem to be basically an OK guy but you live in the right-wing Rush/Hannity/etc bubble and just like a fish doens't know about water, you are completely unaware of how false your environment is.

HINT: there are a lot of humans ("people" in the dictionary sense of the word) in the US whose political leanings are to the left who think the Democratic Party is really just a slightly less repulsive, slightly less fascist version of the Republican Party.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

I guess if you think that only Republicans are "people" then that's a perfectly valid point of view. Oh wait some Republicans are not true-blue right-wing Republicans, so maybe "people" means only "the RIGHT people."

"People are saying."

Tends to confirm my impression that you seem to be basically an OK guy but you live in the right-wing Rush/Hannity/etc bubble and just like a fish doens't know about water, you are completely unaware of how false your environment is.

HINT: there are a lot of humans ("people" in the dictionary sense of the word) in the US whose political leanings are to the left who think the Democratic Party is really just a slightly less repulsive, slightly less fascist version of the Republican Party.

-DSK

Another dumb fuck who thinks his guess is a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Another dumb fuck who thinks his guess is a fact.

What, like saying that saying "the right" is the same as saying "the GOP"? That kind of "fact" spat out by "dumb fucks" who cannot understand the world isn't as black and white as they'd like it to be?

Or maybe you are finally admitting that you're GOP, not a person who votes based on their principles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Saorsa said:
5 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

I guess if you think that only Republicans are "people" then that's a perfectly valid point of view. Oh wait some Republicans are not true-blue right-wing Republicans, so maybe "people" means only "the RIGHT people."

"People are saying."

Tends to confirm my impression that you seem to be basically an OK guy but you live in the right-wing Rush/Hannity/etc bubble and just like a fish doens't know about water, you are completely unaware of how false your environment is.

HINT: there are a lot of humans ("people" in the dictionary sense of the word) in the US whose political leanings are to the left who think the Democratic Party is really just a slightly less repulsive, slightly less fascist version of the Republican Party.

-DSK

Another dumb fuck who thinks his guess is a fact.

4 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

What, like saying that saying "the right" is the same as saying "the GOP"? That kind of "fact" spat out by "dumb fucks" who cannot understand the world isn't as black and white as they'd like it to be?

Or maybe you are finally admitting that you're GOP, not a person who votes based on their principles?

No, nothing like that at all. Saorsa has bolded that which he has issues with and it seems fair to me. Do you disagree? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sol, you should have copyrighted "Drip, Drip, Drip".  I've heard the news people say it a couple dozen times in the last few days.  It would have given your retirement fund a big boost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BrickTopHarry said:

If I agreed to meet with someone who told me they were going to murder my wife for me, and the purpose of the meeting was to go over the plan and to arrange payment, but then at the meeting it looked they were unable to carry out the plan and no murder happened, did a crime occur as a result of the meeting happening?

Also, do you not realize that the very fact of meeting people purporting to be agents of the Russian government to obtain political dirt (very likely illegally obtained if it was hacked DNC email etc.) under such circumstances makes Trump Jr., Manafort and company subject to blackmail and leverage.  Why do you think they, and Sessions etc. have always had as their first instinct to deny that such meetings happened and only acknowledge them when they are dug up and exposed by the press or investigators?  Not the behavior of a group that is dealing above board.

Let me put it as succinctly as I can. What you have is Donald Trump Jr. met with a woman that he may or may not have been convinced was a Russian agent based on what a third party told him.

That's it.  Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dog said:

Let me put it as succinctly as I can. What you have is Donald Trump Jr. met with a woman that he may or may not have been convinced was a Russian agent based on what a third party told him.

That's it.  Good luck.

You need to get that play over to Senator Grassley, STAT!  He hasn't gotten the memo.  He's out in public talking about the Russian lawyer.  

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-jr-email-chain-natalia-veselnitskaya-visa-expired-chuck-grassley-2017-7

On the other hand, his play sounds more plausible than yours.  Blame Obama!  After all, he has that thought-provoking question problem that follows him everywhere....  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dog said:

Let me put it as succinctly as I can. What you have is Donald Trump Jr. met with a woman that he may or may not have been convinced was a Russian agent based on what a third party told him.

That's it.  Good luck.

 

48860B61-3E6B-440F-9CAF-314D0D12F8B2-668-000000792773083C.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I can tell, at this point we still only have Don Jr.'s word that no useful information was obtained at this meeting to be used against Clinton, and the Kremlin's word that the lawyer was not in fact representing their interests.  Both sources whose truthfulness I wouldn't put a lot of stock in.  Especially considering Don Jr. has changed his story on this over the last few days as information revealing his old story to be false has come out.  There are other people present at this meeting like Manafort and Kushner who were present (and possibly more that we haven't been told about yet!) who are under investigation and whose side of the story hasn't been heard from yet.

And Dog, you didn't answer the question.  If Don Jr. thought he was meeting with a foreign agent to help his dad's campaign, even if she turned out not to be (either was a phony, or, say, an FBI agent in a sting), did he do anything wrong or criminal?

I'm not at all convinced that that's "all we will have" at the end of the day.  But if it was "all we had" are you convinced it's nothing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

Let me put it as succinctly as I can. What you have is Donald Trump Jr. met with a woman that he may or may not have been convinced was a Russian agent based on what a third party told him.

That's it.  Good luck.

What we have is Donald Trump, Jr. is told a lawyer has information “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” and he still went ahead and met with her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BrickTopHarry said:

As far as I can tell, at this point we still only have Don Jr.'s word that no useful information was obtained at this meeting to be used against Clinton, and the Kremlin's word that the lawyer was not in fact representing their interests.  Both sources whose truthfulness I wouldn't put a lot of stock in.  Especially considering Don Jr. has changed his story on this over the last few days as information revealing his old story to be false has come out.  There are other people present at this meeting like Manafort and Kushner who were present (and possibly more that we haven't been told about yet!) who are under investigation and whose side of the story hasn't been heard from yet.

And Dog, you didn't answer the question.  If Don Jr. thought he was meeting with a foreign agent to help his dad's campaign, even if she turned out not to be (either was a phony, or, say, an FBI agent in a sting), did he do anything wrong or criminal?

I'm not at all convinced that that's "all we will have" at the end of the day.  But if it was "all we had" are you convinced it's nothing?

What letter does young Mr. Trump have behind his name these days?  There is your answer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Spatial Ed said:

Yeah right.  You'd hit it with just one coors light in your belly.  And hit it hard.

I wouldn't drink a Coors light for less than a thousand dollars..... Maybe more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Krauthammer presents the case in a very clear and logical fashion. The interviewer was doing her best, with no success, to challenge what he was saying. The rats are starting to leave a sinking ship - and with good reason.

 

An important question, if Trump were to be impeached or to resign (health reasons of course) does Pence take over? After all, he was elected as the result of a corrupt election process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, BrickTopHarry said:

As far as I can tell, at this point we still only have Don Jr.'s word that no useful information was obtained at this meeting to be used against Clinton, and the Kremlin's word that the lawyer was not in fact representing their interests.  Both sources whose truthfulness I wouldn't put a lot of stock in.  Especially considering Don Jr. has changed his story on this over the last few days as information revealing his old story to be false has come out.  There are other people present at this meeting like Manafort and Kushner who were present (and possibly more that we haven't been told about yet!) who are under investigation and whose side of the story hasn't been heard from yet.

And Dog, you didn't answer the question.  If Don Jr. thought he was meeting with a foreign agent to help his dad's campaign, even if she turned out not to be (either was a phony, or, say, an FBI agent in a sting), did he do anything wrong or criminal?

I'm not at all convinced that that's "all we will have" at the end of the day.  But if it was "all we had" are you convinced it's nothing?

It's not for Trump to prove no useful information was provided, the fact is we have no evidence it was. It's not for Trump to prove the lawyer was not from the Kremlin. It's not for Trump to prove his innocence. I'm just offering my opinion as to the strength of a case against him.

I'll have to leave it to those who know the law better to decide if the meeting would be illegal if Trump believed Goldstone's story.  His  response of "If it's what you say I love it" indicates both skepticism and a willingness use it if it panned out. That's it as I see it, that's the case. Stupid absolutely, illegal...good luck.

Compared to the well documented assistance provided to the Democrats by the Ukrainian government or the use of Kremlin sources in the production of the Democratically funded "dossier" this one strikes me as weak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

You need to get that play over to Senator Grassley, STAT!  He hasn't gotten the memo.  He's out in public talking about the Russian lawyer.  

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-jr-email-chain-natalia-veselnitskaya-visa-expired-chuck-grassley-2017-7

On the other hand, his play sounds more plausible than yours.  Blame Obama!  After all, he has that thought-provoking question problem that follows him everywhere....  

The lawyer was an illegal?

Dabs will be all over this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Spatial Ed said:

Why does Jarod still have his clearance?

From what I understand he never got official security clearance....It's just "Temporary"....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Turd Sandwich said:

I guess someone is going to have to rewrite the criminal law books to include stupid dumb fuck as treason. Perhaps make being a moron a felony

 

 

Yup, some of my liberal brethren are going postal with the treason talk. That said, based on what's public, there's seems to be enough "there" there to bring charges if the powers that be want to (doubtful). 

I imagine that there's a whole lot more to come from Mueller, but that will take some time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mrleft8 said:

I wouldn't drink a Coors light for less than a thousand dollars..... Maybe more.

There is a reason they spend so much advertising their mountain water.  That's all that's in the can.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

There is a reason they spend so much advertising their mountain water.  That's all that's in the can.

 

Q: Why is making love in a canoe like Coors?

A: Both are f*c*ing close to water

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

If you try to rob a bank but there's no money in the vault...have you committed a crime?

If you plan a crime and try to execute it but fail...have you committed a crime?

Is meeting with someone who you were told robbed a bank and expressing an interest in the money breaking the law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dog said:

Is meeting with someone who you were told robbed a bank and expressing an interest in the money breaking the law?

If the law prohibits solicitation, yes it is illegal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That appears to me to be the only case here, whether or not Trump's actions constitute solicitation?

Unless of course there are more drips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jonathan Turley offers his typically sober assessment.

"Washington began its week again with its collective Rorschach test: another Russian-related meeting that was immediately declared to be the “smoking gun” of criminal collusion or even “treason.” In the 1960s when Swiss psychologist Hermann Rorschach created his projective test, he found that people could reveal their motivations and perceptions in describing what they saw in amorphous inkblots.

In the continuing Russia Rorschach test, it turns out that every amorphous blob looks like a crime to media and many legal experts"....

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/341461-opinion-don-jrs-russia-meeting-wasnt-collusion-just

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dog said:

That appears to me to be the only case here, whether or not Trump's actions constitute solicitation?

Unless of course there are more drips.

What do you admit in terms of Russian involvement in the 2016 election and how does that compare to your position of 48 hours ago or farther back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

Are you referring to the Attorney General that met with the Russians and lied about it? Or another one?

Yep. He and the White House Attorney need a lecture, or better yet, a caning, by the outgoing ethics chief. Deputy Rosenstein is there as a witness to the proceedings. Not sure I was clear on my scenario. The thing is, there has been such degradation of ethics and truthiness in politics, these two need a public humiliation of this sort on the order of Puritans putting townsfolk into the stocks for a day. Kids should aspire to be president, not because of the family advantages or the chance to undo the work of years of statecraft in order to enrich billionaire buddies, but because it is the highest aspiration of the free world. And with great power needs to come great responsibility, to quote the webbed crusader's uncle. This administration, and their GOP enablers, show no responsibility to truth, good morals, the health or welfare of the majority of US citizens or to the work of millions of civilian scientists and educators. Their example today will teach a generation of youngsters that lying and public theft is ok as long as no one leaks the story. 

"Home of the Free and Land of the Brave" shall be cast aside for "Stop Snitching"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Dog said:

That appears to me to be the only case here, whether or not Trump's actions constitute solicitation?

Unless of course there are more drips.

Conspiracy to defraud the United States has a good ring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ease the sheet said:

I interpret 'a thing of value' to be a thing, which includes, but doesn't need to be money. But I won't be on that jury.

I'm guessing there is no case law? Donny and his elk seem to be breaking new ground.

Et Tu Mike Pence?

"After Tuesday’s major revelations that Donald Trump, Jr. met with a Russian lawyer last July for dirt on Hillary Clinton after receiving an email describing the information as “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” Vice President Mike Pence’s press secretary Marc Lotter went on America’s Newsroom on Fox News on Wednesday to remind the nation that Pence was not yet part of the ticket at that time. 

But even in the friendly confines of Fox News, host Bill Hemmer repeatedly pressed Lotter to say whether Pence himself has met with representatives of Russia during the campaign. And repeatedly, Lotter did not say no. 


Hemmer first asked, “Did the vice president ever meet with representatives from Russia?” Lotter dodged this, noting that Pence’s focus “was on talking to the American people” about Trump and his agenda. 

Hemmer tried again: “Did he ever meet with representatives from the Russian government during the campaign?” Lotter oddly responded that question was “stuff that the special prosecutors and the counsels are all looking at,” before again noting that Pence’s focus was “talking to the American people, taking his case to the people, and making sure the people knew why they needed to send President Trump and Vice President Pence to Washington.”

https://thinkprogress.org/pence-russia-meetings-non-denial-e62cfeb0ddb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

Is meeting with someone who you were told robbed a bank and expressing an interest in the money breaking the law?

Here ya go Dog, this might help clear up your persistent question -

 NY Times 

Donald Trump Jr. and Russia: What the Law Says

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/us/politics/collusion-trump-russia-campaign.html

What is collusion?

In general parlance, “collusion” means working together, usually in secret, to do something illicit. But the term has no defined legal meaning. Lawyers instead talk about the offense of “conspiracy.”

 

What is conspiracy?

In criminal law, the offense of conspiracy is generally an agreement by two or more people to commit a crime — whether or not they do. A powerful tool for prosecutors, conspiracy charges permit holding each conspirator responsible for illegal acts committed by others in the circle as part of the arrangement.

Is the meeting enough to prove conspiracy?

The events made public in the past few days are not enough to charge conspiracy, said Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor. Still, he said, the revelations are important because if further evidence of coordination emerges, the contents of the emails and the fact of the meeting would help establish an intent to work with Russia on influencing the election.

“What this email string establishes is that Don Jr. was aware that the Russian government wanted to help the Trump campaign and he welcomed support from the Russian government,” Mr. Mariotti said.

What else is needed?

Evidence of an agreement to violate a specific criminal statute — in other words, a conspiracy to commit a certain crime.

“Anytime you are talking about coordinating or collusion, you are talking about the possibility of conspiracy charges,” said Samuel W. Buell, a former federal prosecutor who teaches criminal law at Duke University. “But conspiracy is not a crime that floats by itself in the air. There has to be an underlying federal offense that is being conspired to be committed.”

Was election law violated?

A federal law, Section 30121 of Title 52, makes it a crime for any foreigner to contribute or donate money or some “other thing of value” in connection with an American election, or for anyone to solicit a foreigner to do so. Legal experts struggled to identify any precedent for prosecutions under that statute, but that phrase is common in other federal criminal statutes covering such crimes as bribery and threats, said Richard L. Hasen, an election-law professor at the University of California, Irvine. Courtshave held, in other contexts, that a “thing of value” can be something intangible, like information.

Robert Bauer, an election-law specialist who served as White House counsel in the Obama administration, argued that this statute covers the Russian government’s paying its spies and hackers to collect and disseminate negative information about Mrs. Clinton to help Mr. Trump win the 2016 election.

“There are firms in the United States that do negative research and sell it to campaigns,” Mr. Bauer argued. “There is no way to take information someone has compiled using resources and say it’s just information and dirt. It’s valuable information and counts as a contribution when given to or distributed for the benefit of a campaign.”

But Orin S. Kerr, a George Washington University professor and former federal prosecutor, said the notion struck him as a stretch.

“The phrase ‘contribution or donation’ sounds like a gift to help fund the campaign or give them something they otherwise would buy,” Mr. Kerr argued. “If that is the standard, that doesn’t seem to be met, based on what we know so far, because this wasn’t something that someone else could have gathered that was for sale in a market or would be otherwise purchasable.”

What about illegal hacking?

There is no public evidence, as things stand, of any clandestine discussions between Russian officials or surrogates and the Trump campaign about disseminating the emails of Democrats that American intelligence officials say Russia hacked. In July 2016, however, the elder Mr. Trump publicly urged Russia to hack Mrs. Clinton’s emails; his spokesman later insisted that was a joke.

But the Justice Department investigation is still unfolding. If it were to come to light that Russian officials did consult Trump campaign officials about the timing or tactics of the release of the stolen emails, that could raise the possibility of conspiracy charges under Section 1030 of Title 18, which bars unauthorized computer intrusions, specialists said.

 

Are there other possibilities?

The unprecedented issues raised by the Trump-Russia affair have led criminal law specialists to delve into other, more creative theories. For example, the federal conspiracy statute also prohibits conspiracies to “defraud” the United States by impeding the federal government’s lawful functions. Randall D. Eliason, a former federal prosecutor who teaches at George Washington University, has argued that this could include a conspiracy to undermine a federal administration of a presidential election, although administering elections is largely a state government task.

 

Several legal experts cautioned that the public does not know everything that Mr. Mueller’s investigation has uncovered and that it is not yet complete, so evidence of other potential crimes may emerge that have not yet been the subject of much discussion.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, My name is Legion said:

No, nothing like that at all. Saorsa has bolded that which he has issues with and it seems fair to me. Do you disagree? 

Yet more leg humping from the Lesion. I'm happy for Saorsa to answer for himself. You have a habit of trying to tell me what people mean and think, when they've been happy enough to provide clarification without your fixated "assistance". They don't need you jumping in to mind-read for them. I don't need you latching onto anything and everything you can to get some attention from me - it's pretty creepy actually.

Do find someone else to pine over, it's never going to happen with me. I don't know just how much clearer I need to make it. I've already described just how low my regard is for your spineless, dishonest, snivelling, attention-whoring shit-post schtick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Saorsa said:
  11 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

I guess if you think that only Republicans are "people" then that's a perfectly valid point of view. Oh wait some Republicans are not true-blue right-wing Republicans, so maybe "people" means only "the RIGHT people."  ...   ...

 

Another dumb fuck who thinks his guess is a fact.

Are you agreeing with TMSail:, non-Republicans, and Republicans who don't lean far enough right, are not "people"?

Or what?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump's FBI boss nominee has some sage advise for Fredo Trump and his elk

 

Quote

“If I got a call from somebody saying the Russian government wants to help Lindsey Graham get reelected, they’ve got dirt on Lindsey Graham’s opponent, should I take that meeting?” Graham asked.

“I would think you would want to consult with some good legal advisers before you did that,” Wray said.

“So the answer is, should I call the FBI?” Graham pushed.

“You are going to be the director of the FBI, pal,” Graham said, seeming a bit agitated. “So here is what I want you to tell every politician. If you get a call from somebody suggesting that a foreign government wants to help you by disparaging your opponent, tell us all to call the FBI.”

“To the members of this committee, any threat or effort to interfere with our elections from any nation state or any non-state actor is the kind of thing the FBI would want to know,” Wray responded.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/12/christopher-wray-confirmation-hearing-key-moments-240452

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Clove Hitch said:

Trump's FBI boss nominee has some sage advise for Fredo Trump and his elk

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/12/christopher-wray-confirmation-hearing-key-moments-240452

Remain calm. All is well. Nothing to see here. File neuz. Please disperse. Some cheese for your nothing burger?   

No conviction, so nothing to investigate. I don't support the Pride of NY. Hillary was worse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

Are you agreeing with TMSail:, non-Republicans, and Republicans who don't lean far enough right, are not "people"?

Or what?

-DSK

Still spouting lies I see.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is becoming more and more obvious, 2nd worst major party POTUS nominee Hillary was no where near as bad as Gropenfuhrer 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She used email. She could have been compromised by the rooskies because of that. And she had a D. Much worse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

She used email. She could have been compromised by the rooskies because of that. And she had a D. Much worse. 

Gouv: It's becoming more and more obvious, 2nd worst major party POTUS nominee Hillary was no where near as bad as Gropenfuhrer 

What about Behghazi? Whitewater alone almost got her in the joint. How many blue dresses became stained because of her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The boys need to doggy style this up before folks get around to asking how many other meetings took place. 

Dance boys. Tell people your orange lips are from Cheetos. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

As an interesting aside, I recently read that Trump's Muslim ban idiocy is quite likely to cost us any shot at the Olympic bid, since so many athletes would have trouble coming to compete. Who wants to prep, train and pay for an Olympic bid, only to be denied entry to the host country at the last minute because of your religion and our capricious enforcement of these policies?

 

Reminds me of an old joke about the LA 84 games, and the lack of a Mexican team because any Mexican that could run jump or swim was already there. 

Something tells me that the Administration isn't concerned about losing the task of hosting. We are busy making America great again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

June 7, 2016, 5:16 pm: Donzo Jr. confirms meeting with Russian lawyer. 

June 7, 2016, 9:13 pm: Donzo Sr. promises a press conference the following week with the dirt on Clinton. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/yashar/status/884900796957171712

Richard Painter caught it. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/RWPUSA/status/884904739414183939

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Reminds me of an old joke about the LA 84 games, and the lack of a Mexican team because any Mexican that could run jump or swim was already there. 

Something tells me that the Administration isn't concerned about losing the task of hosting. We are busy making America great again. 

Except 2 scoops is taking credit for the Olympics likely coming to LA is 2024 or 2028.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/l-expects-chosen-host-olympics-trump-prepares-take-credit-143811787.html

Of course if LA is not chosen the blame will fall everywhere but close to 2 scoops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep an eye on Pence........... I think he's the loose nut that will cause the whole tower to collapse......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

Keep an eye on Pence........... I think he's the loose nut that will cause the whole tower to collapse......

I guess that's something about Pence I will always hope to regard fondly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

June 7, 2016, 5:16 pm: Donzo Jr. confirms meeting with Russian lawyer. 

June 7, 2016, 9:13 pm: Donzo Sr. promises a press conference the following week with the dirt on Clinton. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/yashar/status/884900796957171712

Richard Painter caught it. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/RWPUSA/status/884904739414183939

Collusion.  Treason.  Corruption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ruh-roh.  You know things are getting bad for Team Trump when Rupert Murdoch's newspaper, the New York Post, publishes an Op-Ed piece clearly calling Donald Trump, Jr an idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Ruh-roh.  You know things are getting bad for Team Trump when Rupert Murdoch's newspaper, the New York Post, publishes an Op-Ed piece clearly calling Donald Trump, Jr an idiot.

That's The Party line on saving this presidency. Throw the kid under the bus, and hope nobody asks about other meetings, why Manafort and Kushner were there too, or why the candidate was promising dirt on Clinton just a few hours after Junior confirmed the meeting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep an eye on Pence........... I think he's the loose nut that will cause the whole tower to collapse.....

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sixty million faithful are going to fight for whatever Gropenfuhrer says

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They went to Jared!

No, not the diamond store. Justice and the committees are looking into whether the Pride of New York's son in law gave the Rooskies info on which voting districts might be in play. 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/341613-report-investigators-turn-to-kushners-digital-campaign-operation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dog said:

Is meeting with someone who you were told robbed a bank and expressing an interest in the money breaking the law?

I'm fairly certain that conspiring to receive stolen goods is not legal, even if you don't actually take receipt.

http://www.defenselawyerfederalcrime.com/white-collar/stolen-property/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Yep. He and the White House Attorney need a lecture, or better yet, a caning, by the outgoing ethics chief. Deputy Rosenstein is there as a witness to the proceedings. Not sure I was clear on my scenario. The thing is, there has been such degradation of ethics and truthiness in politics, these two need a public humiliation of this sort on the order of Puritans putting townsfolk into the stocks for a day. Kids should aspire to be president, not because of the family advantages or the chance to undo the work of years of statecraft in order to enrich billionaire buddies, but because it is the highest aspiration of the free world. And with great power needs to come great responsibility, to quote the webbed crusader's uncle. This administration, and their GOP enablers, show no responsibility to truth, good morals, the health or welfare of the majority of US citizens or to the work of millions of civilian scientists and educators. Their example today will teach a generation of youngsters that lying and public theft is ok as long as no one leaks the story. 

"Home of the Free and Land of the Brave" shall be cast aside for "Stop Snitching"

No, the Evil Keebler Elf needs to be chucked out of office, and maybe investigated and imprisoned for perjuring himself on his security forms. That man has no business in the AG's office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SV Airlie said:

Not as well as everyone in the Trump admin. I think all of them have hired lawyers. Why is that if they haven't done any wrong and they feel this is a "nothing" burger?

Trump did say he was going to boost employment. He didn't say it would be for lawyers needed to defend him, his family, and associates. I think it is wise that they have lawyered up. If Junior had listened to a good lawyer he would not be in the deep shit he finds himself in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Trump did say he was going to boost employment. He didn't say it would be for lawyers needed to defend him, his family, and associates. I think it is wise that they have lawyered up. If Junior had listened to a good lawyer he would not be in the deep shit he finds himself in.

He was listening to a good lawyer...... Trouble is, she was with the Russians (Too)

 

 

 

(Apologies to the late great Warren Zevon)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

As an interesting aside, I recently read that Trump's Muslim ban idiocy is quite likely to cost us any shot at the Olympic bid, since so many athletes would have trouble coming to compete. Who wants to prep, train and pay for an Olympic bid, only to be denied entry to the host country at the last minute because of your religion and our capricious enforcement of these policies?

 

That will save some American city millions of dollars.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

WTF? I quoted exactly what you said.

-DSK

I never said anything of the sort.   WTF indeed.  

Edit:   This your post

Quote

 

Are you agreeing with TMSail:, non-Republicans, and Republicans who don't lean far enough right, are not "people"?

Or what?

 

 

point out where I said that or apologize.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites