Sol Rosenberg

Drip Drip Drip

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Here it Comes, Tick, Tick, Tick

Mueller to request May 14 trial date for Manafort and associate: court filing

Source: Reuters




JANUARY 12, 2018 / 2:52 PM / UPDATED 26 MINUTES AGO 
Reuters Staff 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Special Counsel in the Russia probe Robert Mueller will request a trial date of May 14 for Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort and Manafort’s associate Richard Gates, Mueller said in a court filing in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Friday. 

Manafort is charged with conspiring to launder money and failing to register as a foreign agent working on behalf of the government of Ukraine’s former pro-Russia President Viktor Yanukovych. 

Reporting by Blake Brittain; Editing by Mohammad Zargham 

So...........Mueller has put Manafort through the ringer, waterboarding, a couple of fingernails pulled, 12Kilovolts to the testes and now he's ready for trial. Curious we don't have a whole slew of new indictments. Why do you think that is????:ph34r:

Share this post


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

So...........Mueller has put Manafort through the ringer, waterboarding, a couple of fingernails pulled, 12Kilovolts to the testes and now he's ready for trial. Curious we don't have a whole slew of new indictments. Why do you think that is????:ph34r:

Mueller is slowly cooking Trump's goose.  Like a frog in a pot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, warbird said:

So...........Mueller has put Manafort through the ringer, waterboarding, a couple of fingernails pulled, 12Kilovolts to the testes and now he's ready for trial. Curious we don't have a whole slew of new indictments. Why do you think that is????:ph34r:

A great many reasons. Mueller doesn't need to be spitting them out on your schedule. Manafort could still choose to plead guilty in exchange for leniency if his trial looks to be going badly for him. Mueller is ensuring that evidence for future indictments is not covered up / destroyed by letting on who is currently under the hammer. And so on.

You guys were shouting that Mueller not indicting someone yet meant he had nothing before the recent guilty pleas, so you've kind of fucked that argument. Try a new one. See if this one can be intelligent for a change.

Share this post


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

A great many reasons. Mueller doesn't need to be spitting them out on your schedule. Manafort could still choose to plead guilty in exchange for leniency if his trial looks to be going badly for him. Mueller is ensuring that evidence for future indictments is not covered up / destroyed by letting on who is currently under the hammer. And so on.

You guys were shouting that Mueller not indicting someone yet meant he had nothing before the recent guilty pleas, so you've kind of fucked that argument. Try a new one. See if this one can be intelligent for a change.

Mueller has nothing on Russian collusion as I/we have mentioned all along. A five or ten year old banking irregularity is not a "Ground Breaking Development" in collusion with  the Russians.

Share this post


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

Mueller has nothing on Russian collusion as I/we have mentioned all along. A five or ten year old banking irregularity is not a "Ground Breaking Development" in collusion with  the Russians.

How do you know that?  Has Mueller said that?

Share this post


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

Mueller has nothing on Russian collusion as I/we have mentioned all along. A five or ten year old banking irregularity is not a "Ground Breaking Development" in collusion with  the Russians.

People said Mueller had nothing at all before it turned out he did. As we know you're too stupid to even be considered intern material for the team Mueller is leading, we know for certain you have no knowledge whatsoever of what Mueller may or may not have. You guys destroyed that argument by using it to often before it turned out Mueller actually did have something.

People don't plead guilty and turn federal witness based on something as small as a banking irregularity. Trump's lawyers wouldn't be worried about him testifying if there was nothing he could be guilty of. This is all working out wonderfully well and it shows by just how pathetic his supporters get trying to maintain the faith.

Share this post


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

How do you know that?  Has Mueller said that?

Trump told him. He told all of us, and you know he never lies. 

Share this post


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

tick tick tick......... 2006 foriegn banking irregularity?????:huh:

Who knew it would end up costing him years of freedom.

Share this post


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

So...........Mueller has put Manafort through the ringer, waterboarding, a couple of fingernails pulled, 12Kilovolts to the testes and now he's ready for trial. Curious we don't have a whole slew of new indictments. Why do you think that is????:ph34r:

Be patient grasshopper, we have five months until there's a trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JARED KUSHNER WILL BE INTERVIEWED BY SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE FOR TRUMP-RUSSIA INVESTIGATION, GRASSLEY CONFIRMS 

BY LINLEY SANDERS ON 1/12/18 AT 2:41 PM 

"The Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmed Friday that President Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, will still be interviewed as part of the committee's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. 

"Kushner is still going to be interviewed," Republican Senator Chuck Grassley said at a town hall meeting in western Iowa. "We're getting some more documents and that's not done." 

Grassley assured constituents Friday that the interview would happen just days after expressing hesitation that his committee could easily secure a voluntary interview with Kushner after his Democratic counterpart, Senator Dianne Feinstein, published a 312-page transcript detailing a private interview with the founder of Fusion GPS, the organization behind the so-called Trump dossier. Grassley said Friday that the committee is just waiting on documents that Kushner has delayed in handing over before conducting the interview. 

"We're going to do that," Grassley said as an Iowan rebuked him over the committee's five-month delay in interviewing Kushner. "Right now, Senator Feinstein is wanting more documents, and we wait until we get the documents, go through the documents, then we have a basis for the interviews that we're going to have." 

http://www.newsweek.com/jared-kushner-interviewed-russia-invesitgation-780069

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The American Embassy in London puts out an official statement and blows Donald Trump's excuse for not going to England.

DTXYcNJXcAEFt-L.jpg

Trump was afraid of going to England and being confronted by mass protesting. So he came up with this BS excuse to get out of it. The London embassy just blew his story out of the water and exonerated Obama who had nothing to do with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

The American Embassy in London puts out an official statement and blows Donald Trump's excuse for not going to England.

DTXYcNJXcAEFt-L.jpg

Trump was afraid of going to England and being confronted by mass protesting. So he came up with this BS excuse to get out of it. The London embassy just blew his story out of the water and exonerated Obama who had nothing to do with it.

Apart from the Royal Wedding, I think he’s the biggest draw for getting people on the streets of London waving flags and banners this year. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have we covered this snippet.

That pesky dossier 

Simpson's allegations about Trump's business relationships, particularly with convicted felon Felix Sater, contradicted statements Trump had previously made under oath.

Trump "testified under oath he wouldn't know Felix if he ran into him in the street," Simpson said. "That was not true."

In a 2013 deposition, Trump had distanced himself from Sater, saying, "I don't know him well at all," and "if he were sitting in the room right now, I really wouldn't know what he looked like."

"He knew him well," Simpson said, "and, in fact, continued to associate with him long after he learned of Felix's organized crime ties."

Simpson's claim stunned some observers.

"It's an allegation of perjury," said Elizabeth McLaughlin, a retired lawyer and founder of the left-leaning Gaia Project for Women's Leadership. "It's eye-popping."

The White House did not respond to CNBC's request for comment.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/13/trump-dossier-testimony-financial-ties.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Trump was afraid of going to England and being confronted by mass protesting. So he came up with this BS excuse to get out of it. The London embassy just blew his story out of the water and exonerated Obama who had nothing to do with it.

Trumpsters don't care about facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Trumpsters don't care about facts.

Facts are just fake news.

Here's the deal on information; If it comes from Hannity, it's probably true. If it comes from the NYT, WaPo, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, or NPR, it's almost definitely fake news.

 Evangelicals always tell the truth.

 Mexicans are rapists.

 Haitians all have AIDS.

Norway has the best immigrants. (If you overlook that the PM is a fat cow, most of the chicks there are smokin' hotties!)

When Trump plays golf, it's considered "working".

Steak should be burnt until it's gray through, and through, and then moistened with copious amounts of ketchup.

 KFC is it's own food group.

Women should be born with knee pads and cup holders.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

let's be fair, a thalidomide baby could hold Trump's cup. His EPA is making sure there are more to enable this.

I think you mean FDA. 

Share this post


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

I think you mean FDA. 

Soon to be the Department of Food, Drugs, Agriculture, Health and Safety Department. 14 people in a strip mall in Whitefish, Montana.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Soon to be the Department of Food, Drugs, Agriculture, Health and Safety Department. 14 people in a strip mall in Whitefish, Montana.

That is bad why????

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, warbird said:
25 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Soon to be the Department of Food, Drugs, Agriculture, Health and Safety Department. 14 people in a strip mall in Whitefish, Montana.

That is bad why????

This is why we make fun of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Trumpsters don't care about facts.

There are alternatives to facts.

Share this post


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

 

This is why we make fun of you.

So..... the question remains unanswered.....not uncommon in a lefty circle jerk....

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

So..... the question remains unanswered.....not uncommon in a lefty circle jerk....

It's a stupid question.

There are no answers that are not ridicule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, warbird said:

So..... the question remains unanswered.....not uncommon in a lefty circle jerk....

It's not our fault that you like being on the receiving end of Bukakke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a real treat coming up this afternoon, a screening of 'All the President's Men' followed by a "talk back" by Carl Bernstein. I don't expect much breaking news, but it should be fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, warbird said:

So..... the question remains unanswered.....not uncommon in a lefty circle jerk....

A few weeks ago you posted a pic of your neighbor's house showing the snow.  My first thought was Archie Bunker.  i assume you live in a similar shithole and you are our Archie Bunker.  Why don't you join the Wisconsin principle and stay drunk all the time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, warbird said:
13 hours ago, Ishmael said:

Soon to be the Department of Food, Drugs, Agriculture, Health and Safety Department. 14 people in a strip mall in Whitefish, Montana.

That is bad why????

It's not bad at all if you like all the extra lead in your drinking water. Shitfire how bad can it, cars ran on it for decades, right??!?

Oh and by the way, the interstate highway system called, it wants you to pay for your fucking share of the public roads.................

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/12/2018 at 3:51 PM, badlatitude said:

Here it Comes, Tick, Tick, Tick

Mueller to request May 14 trial date for Manafort and associate: court filing

Source: Reuters




JANUARY 12, 2018 / 2:52 PM / UPDATED 26 MINUTES AGO 
Reuters Staff 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Special Counsel in the Russia probe Robert Mueller will request a trial date of May 14 for Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort and Manafort’s associate Richard Gates, Mueller said in a court filing in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Friday. 

Manafort is charged with conspiring to launder money and failing to register as a foreign agent working on behalf of the government of Ukraine’s former pro-Russia President Viktor Yanukovych. 

Reporting by Blake Brittain; Editing by Mohammad Zargham 

How many college graduations is this going to disrupt?

"Sorry honey, Daddy can't be at your graduation ceremony...... No dear he won't be off screwing his secretary in Vail. Please stop talking that way..... He'll be part of a defense team trying to keep our beloved President, and his cronies out of prison.... Yes dear, that's the truth this time...... Yes dear..... No I've met her, she's a very nice young woman, and I'm sure your father would never do that...... Yes dear.... Of course I re-upped your debit card. Just enjoy yourself, and try not to get anyone pregnant in the next 5 months..... Yes dear, love you too....." CLICK.

Share this post


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

How many college graduations is this going to disrupt?

"Sorry honey, Daddy can't be at your graduation ceremony...... No dear he won't be off screwing his secretary in Vail. Please stop talking that way..... He'll be part of a defense team trying to keep our beloved President, and his cronies out of prison.... Yes dear, that's the truth this time...... Yes dear..... No I've met her, she's a very nice young woman, and I'm sure your father would never do that...... Yes dear.... Of course I re-upped your debit card. Just enjoy yourself, and try not to get anyone pregnant in the next 5 months..... Yes dear, love you too....." CLICK.

You do understand this trial has nothing to do with President Trump?   Oh never mind everything is about Trump.   

Share this post


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

You do understand this trial has nothing to do with President Trump?   Oh never mind everything is about Trump.   

You do understand that these trials have everything to do with Trump, his campaign, and the people that Trump surrounded himself with, right?

If it weren't for Trump, Manafort, Gates et al would probably never have come under indictment. It's working for Trump (And the Russians, and the corporate robber barons) that got these guys in trouble.

Share this post


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

You do understand that these trials have everything to do with Trump, his campaign, and the people that Trump surrounded himself with, right?

If it weren't for Trump, Manafort, Gates et al would probably never have come under indictment. It's working for Trump (And the Russians, and the corporate robber barons) that got these guys in trouble.

Nope nothing to do with Trump or the election.  Wasn’t  the TDS dream that Manafort would give Mueller all kinds of dirt on Trump to AVOID trial?  

Share this post


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

Nope nothing to do with Trump or the election.  Wasn’t  the TDS dream that Manafort would give Mueller all kinds of dirt on Trump to AVOID trial?  

so now you go full Iraqi Information Minister.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Nope nothing to do with Trump or the election.  Wasn’t  the TDS dream that Manafort would give Mueller all kinds of dirt on Trump to AVOID trial?  

Not that I know of. Perhaps you have inside information that those of us on earth are denied.

Share this post


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

Not that I know of. Perhaps you have inside information that those of us on earth are denied.

I guess you don’t know very much. 

Here is just one of many articles about the exact thing 

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-us-investigators-seek-to-turn-manafort-in-russia-probe-sources-2017-7

Share this post


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

Nope nothing to do with Trump or the election.  Wasn’t  the TDS dream that Manafort would give Mueller all kinds of dirt on Trump to AVOID trial?  

No. That was the Flynn reality. Your mixing up the corrupt people who worked for Trump again. Understandable... there having been so many.

Share this post


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

Indeed. Now point to the part that makes it a "TDS dream" and where I am wrong about the "Flynn reality". I dispute your characterisation, not the article. 

Now take your time, try not to squirm too much, and then tell everyone how you don't pay attention to my posts whilst replying within five minutes to them. That never gets old :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Business Insider's CEO and Editor-In-Chief Henry Blodget is a Yale history graduate who previously worked on Wall Street until he was banned for life from the securities industry because of his violations of securities laws and subsequent civil trial, which ended with a $2 million fine plus a $2 million disgorgement and the permanent ban in 2003.[

 

Gosh.................:rolleyes:

Share this post


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

Indeed. Now point to the part that makes it a "TDS dream" and where I am wrong about the "Flynn reality". I dispute your characterisation, not the article. 

Now take your time, try not to squirm too much, and then tell everyone how you don't pay attention to my posts whilst replying within five minutes to them. That never gets old :lol: 

You win I’ll ignore you from now on. 

Share this post


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

Business Insider's CEO and Editor-In-Chief Henry Blodget is a Yale history graduate who previously worked on Wall Street until he was banned for life from the securities industry because of his violations of securities laws and subsequent civil trial, which ended with a $2 million fine plus a $2 million disgorgement and the permanent ban in 2003.[

 

Gosh.................:rolleyes:

And that matters how?

plenty of other articles say the same thing.   I would bet that in this thread posters have expressed the same hope.  

Share this post


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

And that matters how?

plenty of other articles say the same thing.   I would bet that in this thread posters have expressed the same hope.  

Hope is not fact.

Share this post


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

Hope is not fact.

Are you saying that no one in this thread expressed the position that the charges to Manafort were  part of an effort by Mueller to get him to turn witness against Trump?   

Share this post


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

Are you saying that no one in this thread expressed the position that the charges to Manafort were  part of an effort by Mueller to get him to turn witness against Trump?   

Did I say that?

Share this post


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

You do understand this trial has nothing to do with President Trump?   Oh never mind everything is about Trump.   

Yes and Howard Hunt, Gordon Liddy  et.al. had nothing to do with Nixon.

Share this post


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

Nope nothing to do with Trump or the election.  Wasn’t  the TDS dream that Manafort would give Mueller all kinds of dirt on Trump to AVOID trial?  

I don't support Trump but...

The dream would be that our intelligence services would not have found evidence of Russian  involvement in our election, in an effort to get New York's Finest elected, and there would have been no need for an investigation at all.  The dream would be that the former National Security Adviser was not compromised by the Russians, and did not feel the need to lie about it when questioned.  Wishing to live in a country that is not subject to those niceties is not derangement, though it might be naivete.  

Any white collar criminal prosecutor is going to try to flip a target, to get him to testify against a bigger fish, as Mueller has done with Former National Security Adviser Flynn and Papadoc.  They don't flip to avoid trial, they do it to avoid Federal-Pound-Me-In-The-Ass-Prison.  

Share this post


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

You win I’ll ignore you from now on. 

Who said I wanted that? 

I simply pointed out you tell everyone you ignore people... but never bring yourself to actually follow through. :lol: 

Share this post


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

The dream would be that our intelligence services would not have found evidence of Russian  involvement in our election, in an effort to get New York's Finest elected, and there would have been no need for an investigation at all.  The dream would be that the former National Security Adviser was not compromised by the Russians, and did not feel the need to lie about it when questioned.  Wishing to live in a country that is not subject to those niceties is not derangement, though it might be naivete.  

So you are suffering from TDS... Trump Defence Dyndrome ;)

 

18 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

They don't flip to avoid trial, they do it to avoid Federal-Pound-Me-In-The-Ass-Prison.  

As a few of us have said elsewhere when questioned why Mueller might be holding off further indictments until further into this trial. People will often not make a deal until they see the look on the jury's faces when they feed them their line of bullshit and they know they're fucked.

Share this post


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

Got a real treat coming up this afternoon, a screening of 'All the President's Men' followed by a "talk back" by Carl Bernstein. I don't expect much breaking news, but it should be fun.

Wow! That was terrific! I heartily recommend watching All the President’s Men again. It’s aged well.

Bernstein is still on top of his game, very articulate and quite obviously following what’s going on very closely.  

The most interesting take-away for me was Bernstein’s comment on the difference between then and now - basically that in the Watergate era, we had a Congress that put Country above Party, noting that when Nixon asked Goldwater how many votes he could count on in the Senate (regarding impeachment), Goldwater said something like “maybe four”. Shortly thereafter Nixon resigned.

Bernstein doubted that such an outcome would happen today under the same circumstances.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sean said:

Wow! That was terrific! I heartily recommend watching All the President’s Men again. It’s aged well.

Bernstein is still on top of his game, very articulate and quite obviously following what’s going on very closely.  

The most interesting take-away for me was Bernstein’s comment on the difference between then and now - basically that in the Watergate era, we had a Congress that put Country above Party, noting that when Nixon asked Goldwater how many votes he could count on in the Senate (regarding impeachment), Goldwater said something like “maybe four”. Shortly thereafter Nixon resigned.

Bernstein doubted that such an outcome would happen today under the same circumstances.

 

Today it would be "maybe four" that Trump couldn't count on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Sean said:

Wow! That was terrific! I heartily recommend watching All the President’s Men again. It’s aged well.

Bernstein is still on top of his game, very articulate and quite obviously following what’s going on very closely.  

The most interesting take-away for me was Bernstein’s comment on the difference between then and now - basically that in the Watergate era, we had a Congress that put Country above Party, noting that when Nixon asked Goldwater how many votes he could count on in the Senate (regarding impeachment), Goldwater said something like “maybe four”. Shortly thereafter Nixon resigned.

Bernstein doubted that such an outcome would happen today under the same circumstances.

 

I don’t support Trump but

among senators of his own party, I think that “maybe four” comment would be accurate for how many votes the President doesn’t have, this time around, as long as he doesn’t develop a penchant for the D. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Any white collar criminal prosecutor is going to try to flip a target, to get him to testify against a bigger fish, as Mueller has done with Former National Security Adviser Flynn and Papadoc.  They don't flip to avoid trial, they do it to avoid Federal-Pound-Me-In-The-Ass-Prison.  

It appears that TM is not a fan of this tactic, often used in the investigation of crimes.

Now, if the situation being described involved a low ranking individual from Hillary's camp turning and providing evidence against Mme. Clinton, well - you know....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering how come you weren't all over that...

Seth Abramson got so carried away, his twitter thread "hot take" ended up over 200 tweets.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2018 at 6:58 PM, Sol Rosenberg said:

I don’t support Trump but

among senators of his own party, I think that “maybe four” comment would be accurate for how many votes the President doesn’t have, this time around, as long as he doesn’t develop a penchant for the D. 

You’re right, but there are other ways Trump could lose his mandate. That’s the danger which could come from Deutchebank, from a Russian oligarchs mistress (better yet, his accountant’s mistress), or testimony from a fly on the wall. 

With the heat on, the killing blow could come from a totally unexpected direction. 

Nixon didn’t lose all support until the Sunday nite massacre. We can’t anticipate the moves, but the same trend of erosion of support is occurring. And if we believe in America, then it doesn’t have to be Senators and Reps who lead us out of this debacle. They could just be the next to last domino this time. 

A year ago, Harvey Weinstein was king of the hill. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/01/2018 at 5:00 AM, warbird said:

So..... the question remains unanswered.....not uncommon in a lefty circle jerk....

If it was serious question as opposed to blatant troll you might get further.

Share this post


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

You’re right, but there are other ways Trump could lose his mandate. That’s the danger which could come from Deutchebank, from a Russian oligarchs mistress (better yet, his accountant’s mistress), or testimony from a fly on the wall. 

With the heat on, the killing blow could come from a totally unexpected direction. 

Nixon didn’t lose all support until the Sunday nite massacre. We can’t anticipate the moves, but the same trend of erosion of support is occurring. And if we believe in America, then it doesn’t have to be Senators and Reps who lead us out of this debacle. They could just be the next to last domino this time. 

A year ago, Harvey Weinstein was king of the hill. 

Popularity is fickle. And Trump is wildly exposed a dozen ways. Our country will spasmodically reject this nightmare, and will be better for it. 

The administration is unstable, even without the Mueller factor. IMO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

That explains why every news source is so busy talking about shitholes.  

Anything to prevent a detailed comparison of what's in it, and what Grassley said was in it. 

Can you imagine?

 

Share this post


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

Anything to prevent a detailed comparison of what's in it, and what Grassley said was in it. 

Can you imagine?

 

That is what I find most disappointing about this particular chapter. The Senate was supposed to be the moderation point. The place where the hot soup cooled a bit. Sure the House might be overrun by the moronic rabble now and again, but the Senate would make sure that we did not codify the stoopid. 

Sen. Grassley’s selective release of testimony is one thing, but Sens. Cotton and Perdue flat out bullshitting to provide cover is a new low. Cotton at least had the smarts to try to give himself an out by saying he didn’t hear it, but it is still a low point for the Senate. 

The Senate is the institution that will save us. Maybe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

It appears that TM is not a fan of this tactic, often used in the investigation of crimes.

Now, if the situation being described involved a low ranking individual from Hillary's camp turning and providing evidence against Mme. Clinton, well - you know....

Where did I say I don’t support it?   Please indicate the post where I stated I was against flipping witnesses.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

That is what I find most disappointing about this particular chapter. The Senate was supposed to be the moderation point. The place where the hot soup cooled a bit. Sure the House might be overrun by the moronic rabble now and again, but the Senate would make sure that we did not codify the stoopid. 

Sen. Grassley’s selective release of testimony is one thing, but Sens. Cotton and Perdue flat out bullshitting to provide cover is a new low. Cotton at least had the smarts to try to give himself an out by saying he didn’t hear it, but it is still a low point for the Senate. 

The Senate is the institution that will save us. Maybe. 

I think, due to the pervasive effects of gerrymandering, the Senate is no longer the body of wisdom and traditions it used to be. Witness the lukewarm defense of its members from presidential attacks, consistent use of filibuster and use of reconciliation rules to get anything done which speaks to abandonment of bipartisanship.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

I think, due to the pervasive effects of gerrymandering, the Senate is no longer the body of wisdom and traditions it used to be. Witness the lukewarm defense of its members from presidential attacks, consistent use of filibuster and use of reconciliation rules to get anything done which speaks to abandonment of bipartisanship.  

The propaganda machines have us hating each other like never before.  The Senate used to operate with a bit of comity.  The old timers there still try to do so, to some extent.  They disagreed with their colleagues, but did not see them as their enemies.  The new members are not similarly burdened.  If you believe that someone is your mortal enemy and question their motives, what is the point of trying to honestly talk to them or about them?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

That is what I find most disappointing about this particular chapter. The Senate was supposed to be the moderation point. The place where the hot soup cooled a bit. Sure the House might be overrun by the moronic rabble now and again, but the Senate would make sure that we did not codify the stoopid. 

Sen. Grassley’s selective release of testimony is one thing, but Sens. Cotton and Perdue flat out bullshitting to provide cover is a new low. Cotton at least had the smarts to try to give himself an out by saying he didn’t hear it, but it is still a low point for the Senate. 

The Senate is the institution that will save us. Maybe. 

2 words:

Merrick Garland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/16/us/politics/steve-bannon-mueller-russia-subpoena.html

Bannon Is Subpoenaed in Mueller’s Russia Investigation

excerpt -

 

Jan. 16, 2018

WASHINGTON — Stephen K. Bannon, President Trump’s former chief strategist, was subpoenaed last week by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, to testify before a grand jury as part of the investigation into possible links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter.

The move marked the first time Mr. Mueller is known to have used a grand jury subpoena to seek information from a member of Mr. Trump’s inner circle. The special counsel’s office has used subpoenas before to seek information on Mr. Trump’s associates and their possible ties to Russia or other foreign governments.

The subpoena could be a negotiating tactic. Mr. Mueller is likely to allow Mr. Bannon to forgo the grand jury appearance if he agrees to instead be questioned by investigators in the less formal setting of the special counsel’s offices about ties between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia and about the president’s conduct in office, according to the person, who would not be named discussing the case. But it was not clear why Mr. Mueller treated Mr. Bannon differently than the dozen administration officials who were interviewed in the final months of last year and were never served with a subpoena.

The subpoena is a sign that Bannon is not personally the focus of the investigation. Justice Department rules allow prosecutors to subpoena to the targets of investigations only in rare circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Sean said:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/16/us/politics/steve-bannon-mueller-russia-subpoena.html

Bannon Is Subpoenaed in Mueller’s Russia Investigation

excerpt -

 

Jan. 16, 2018

WASHINGTON — Stephen K. Bannon, President Trump’s former chief strategist, was subpoenaed last week by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, to testify before a grand jury as part of the investigation into possible links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter.

The move marked the first time Mr. Mueller is known to have used a grand jury subpoena to seek information from a member of Mr. Trump’s inner circle. The special counsel’s office has used subpoenas before to seek information on Mr. Trump’s associates and their possible ties to Russia or other foreign governments.

The subpoena could be a negotiating tactic. Mr. Mueller is likely to allow Mr. Bannon to forgo the grand jury appearance if he agrees to instead be questioned by investigators in the less formal setting of the special counsel’s offices about ties between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia and about the president’s conduct in office, according to the person, who would not be named discussing the case. But it was not clear why Mr. Mueller treated Mr. Bannon differently than the dozen administration officials who were interviewed in the final months of last year and were never served with a subpoena.

The subpoena is a sign that Bannon is not personally the focus of the investigation. Justice Department rules allow prosecutors to subpoena to the targets of investigations only in rare circumstances.

Donzo and Jared have to be happy about that turn of events.  

Share this post


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

Donzo and Jared have to be happy about that turn of events.  

You'll get him this time, tiger!

Share this post


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

You'll get him this time, tiger!

Patience, grasshopper.  Ken Starr took years to bust Clinton for getting a blow job from a big boned girl.  Within 6 months on the case Mueller already has Trump's campaign chair and Natl Security Adviser lined up to be felons.    I doubt Trump will get impeached, but Mueller has already shown Trump's administration to be the most crooked since Nixon. And he's not done yet. 

Although, what are they going to learn from Bannon-- he basically made copies and got coffee-- had nothing to do with the campaign- am I right?!  

Share this post


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

Patience, grasshopper.  Ken Starr took years to bust Clinton for getting a blow job from a big boned girl.  Within 6 months on the case Mueller already has Trump's campaign chair and Natl Security Adviser lined up to be felons.    I doubt Trump will get impeached, but Mueller has already shown Trump's administration to be the most crooked since Nixon. And he's not done yet. 

Although, what are they going to learn from Bannon-- he basically made copies and got coffee-- had nothing to do with the campaign- am I right?!  

Trump wouldn't know him if he ran into him on the street, only met him once for a couple of minutes...

Share this post


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

Donzo and Jared have to be happy about that turn of events.  

If I'm reading the implications correctly, the Subpoena is in play to get Bannon to flip to States Evidence - something like that? 

isn't this what TMSail (or was it the Minister?) was saying won't happen?

Share this post


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

Patience, grasshopper.  Ken Starr took years to bust Clinton for getting a blow job from a big boned girl.  Within 6 months on the case Mueller already has Trump's campaign chair and Natl Security Adviser lined up to be felons.    I doubt Trump will get impeached, but Mueller has already shown Trump's administration to be the most crooked since Nixon. And he's not done yet. 

Although, what are they going to learn from Bannon-- he basically made copies and got coffee-- had nothing to do with the campaign- am I right?!  

The National Security Adviser is a felon who was compromised by Russia. The Campaign chief is facing a mountain of charges, including felonies.  

And tard puppets be like

giphy.webp

Share this post


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

I think, due to the pervasive effects of gerrymandering, the Senate is no longer the body of wisdom and traditions it used to be. Witness the lukewarm defense of its members from presidential attacks, consistent use of filibuster and use of reconciliation rules to get anything done which speaks to abandonment of bipartisanship.  

The electors of the senate are gerrymandered??

Wow, who knew?

Share this post


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

The electors of the senate are gerrymandered??

Wow, who knew?

Is that a new record for incomprehension?

Share this post


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

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/16/us/politics/steve-bannon-mueller-russia-subpoena.html

Bannon Is Subpoenaed in Mueller’s Russia Investigation

excerpt -

 

Jan. 16, 2018

WASHINGTON — Stephen K. Bannon, President Trump’s former chief strategist, was subpoenaed last week by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, to testify before a grand jury as part of the investigation into possible links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter.

The move marked the first time Mr. Mueller is known to have used a grand jury subpoena to seek information from a member of Mr. Trump’s inner circle. The special counsel’s office has used subpoenas before to seek information on Mr. Trump’s associates and their possible ties to Russia or other foreign governments.

The subpoena could be a negotiating tactic. Mr. Mueller is likely to allow Mr. Bannon to forgo the grand jury appearance if he agrees to instead be questioned by investigators in the less formal setting of the special counsel’s offices about ties between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia and about the president’s conduct in office, according to the person, who would not be named discussing the case. But it was not clear why Mr. Mueller treated Mr. Bannon differently than the dozen administration officials who were interviewed in the final months of last year and were never served with a subpoena.

The subpoena is a sign that Bannon is not personally the focus of the investigation. Justice Department rules allow prosecutors to subpoena to the targets of investigations only in rare circumstances.

Do notice the slant in the article.  Connections between Trump's associates (not campaign?) and Russia (not Russian officials?).....

Share this post


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

Do notice the slant in the article.  Connections between Trump's associates (not campaign?) and Russia (not Russian officials?).....

How was Bannon affiliated with the Pride of New York, and which associates might that affiliation give him reason to know things about that would come out in testimony?  

Share this post


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

How was Bannon affiliated with the Pride of New York, and which associates might that affiliation give him reason to know things about that would come out in testimony?  

Clearly he wasn’t involved but for a short time, in a very inconsequential position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was just a low level volunteer. Everybody is saying it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Clearly he wasn’t involved but for a short time, in a very inconsequential position.

"Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my presidency," Trump said. "When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind."

So you see his testimony is worthless, can't understand Mr. Mueller wanting to question him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Clearly he wasn’t involved but for a short time, in a very inconsequential position.

He was the coffee boy. After Papadoc mysteriously disappeared leaving the position open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he really had nothing to do.

 

steve-bannon-cover-time.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Is that a new record for incomprehension?

Real sorry, biggly, realy biggly.That was a response to Philly who bemoaned the senate being elected via gerrymandered districts.......:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah.... all of you got it wrong.

Bannon is part of the deep state, he infiltrated the campaign when the nomination was certain and then once inside worked to undermine Trump...

He gave Alabama to the Rats, brought in Wolff to spew lies and now is working with Mueller towards the coup.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, VhmSays said:

Nah.... all of you got it wrong.

Bannon is part of the deep state, he infiltrated the campaign when the nomination was certain and then once inside worked to undermine Trump...

He gave Alabama to the Rats, brought in Wolff to spew lies and now is working with Mueller towards the coup.

 

Wow - that is one sneaky fucker.

Makes Kim Philby look like an amateur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bannon is the one that wants to burn the bitch down, iirc.  If one knows enough to do it, spilling the beans to a grand jury is certainly one way to make that happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Steve Bannon was subpoenaed for the second time in a week during testimony before a House panel on his time working for President Donald Trump. 

The former White House chief strategist was subpoenaed last week by special counsel Robert Mueller in his investigation of Trump campaign ties to Russia, and Bannon will be required to testify before a grand jury. Bannon testified Tuesday before the House Intelligence Committee, where Fox News congressional correspondent Chad Pergram reported he was issued another subpoena. 

Sources told the Fox News reporter that Bannon was told by the White House not to answer lawmakers’ questions about the administration or the Trump transition, although he did not claim executive privilege. However, lawmakers compelled Bannon’s testimony on those topics by issuing him a subpoena during the closed-door session. 
 

 

Sources say Bannon told by WH not to answer questions before House Intel Cmte about the White House and the transition. Did not assert executive privilege. Committee subpoenas him during the meeting to comply while in the hearing.

 
It’s not yet clear what Bannon was asked to discuss at the hearing at a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, where matters related to classified or sensitive information can be discussed in a secure setting. 

Share this post


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

Bannon is the one that wants to burn the bitch down, iirc.  If one knows enough to do it, spilling the beans to a grand jury is certainly one way to make that happen.

And the subpoena came just after they kicked him out of Breitbart. Not very strategic Donnie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, badlatitude said:

"Steve Bannon was subpoenaed for the second time in a week during testimony before a House panel on his time working for President Donald Trump. 

The former White House chief strategist was subpoenaed last week by special counsel Robert Mueller in his investigation of Trump campaign ties to Russia, and Bannon will be required to testify before a grand jury. Bannon testified Tuesday before the House Intelligence Committee, where Fox News congressional correspondent Chad Pergram reported he was issued another subpoena. 

Sources told the Fox News reporter that Bannon was told by the White House not to answer lawmakers’ questions about the administration or the Trump transition, although he did not claim executive privilege. However, lawmakers compelled Bannon’s testimony on those topics by issuing him a subpoena during the closed-door session. 
 

 

Sources say Bannon told by WH not to answer questions before House Intel Cmte about the White House and the transition. Did not assert executive privilege. Committee subpoenas him during the meeting to comply while in the hearing.

 
It’s not yet clear what Bannon was asked to discuss at the hearing at a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, where matters related to classified or sensitive information can be discussed in a secure setting. 

  I foresee an acute case of CRS in Bannon. Sessions had that stuff and pretty bad case during his testimony IIRC, and CRS has been known to spread. It's the safest way, with Ice King Mueller's transformation of the dragon Flynn into a terrible weapon, fibbing to the Feds is dangerous doo-doo.   

  I think Trump and his lawyers are smart enough to know it is very difficult to indict a sitting POTUS and will prioritize his re-election strategeries accordingly.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites