And it Begins:Special Prosecutor To Investigate Trump And Russia

[Steeltime]

No doubt, it's great there are this many jobs to go around. Trump deserves credit for keeping national unemployment numbers on their well-established downward slope over the past year and a half. As the chart shows, Trump's done a solid job continuing the trajectory downward as has been the case for a decade. That's great.

The problem with Trump there's so much noise it's hard to just look at the economy, while ignoring everything else going on. If you're trying to get elected, or up for re-election, you toot your own horn. But to do it on the job, month after month, day after day....I don't know how anyone's able to pull that off.

True, but not very important. Does he take a lot of credit? He does. Does he give credit to the voters and industry? He does. Will he then be the subject of serious blame when things slow down? I have no doubt.

But overall, his credit-taking (while giving credit to the voters, business leaders, etc.) just does not mean anything.

I don't buy into Trump's constant peddling of half-truths about his accomplishments. Nor those from many of you on this board. We get blaring posts for every fart Trump emits either alone, or in the company of others. Forgive me for wincing a little when a serving President spends much of his time holding rallies in stadiums congratulating himself, giving out high fives. Seems absurd and ridiculous, the grandstanding, the self-congratulating. Does anyone do this type of back-slapping at their jobs?

Once again, don't take exception to the accuracy of your statement, but really think it is just not that important. Also, he gloats in significant part because he was mocked the entire Republican primary, mocked during the general election, mocked after taking office, and called every name in the book. Jeez, that scion of intellect and diplomacy, Robert Deniro, pretty much summed up what (D)'s have been saying to Trump for two years.

So he responds by saying, "Look at me! WINNING!!"

I'll give him this. There has never been a president this flamboyant, brash and reckless. Trump is 100% in-your-face, throwing elbows, screaming at the press, shouting insults, sending out angry tweets. He's putting a lot of effort into this, for a 70+ year old man. Trump's hefty frame, NY rich man swagger, the shiny suits and the bright orange skin. He is a living, breathing cartoon character. We've never had a President like Trump.

Maybe. Maybe not.

Tell me everything you know about Millard Fillmore's wardrobe and boasting. Or James K. Polk. Or Martin Van Buren. Or John Tyler. Or Millard Fillmore. Or Franklin Pierce.

Part of the problem here, Tibs, is that many seem to believe the world began with the invention of the cell phone.

The fact Trump may be severely compromised regarding Russian ties going back decades, the story becomes more action/adventure mixed w murder/mystery. Trump deserves credit for creating a TV show 1,000x better than the Apprentice. Problem is, this isn't a TV show.

Yeah, maybe Russian ties mean something. But as of right now, based on the sieve-like leaks from the DOJ about Trump, and based on what we know has been alleged against underlings, not the case.

I hope things work out for Trump. I'm obviously pessimistic, but would gladly take Trump stepping up and becoming a leader of the country. It's times like this you need the President to speak to everyone, all Americans. The fact he's out there berating the media, members of his own DOJ/FBI, the federal government, constantly hissing like a snake, or a mongoose. He's been at war with and throwing darts at the entire Democratic party, Pelosi on down.

First off, I don't give a **** how things work out for Trump. I care about how things are working for America and Americans - and only an ideologue would conclude anything other than, "Damn, so far, so good." ISIS seriously weakened. Talks with the Norks. No more missile tests over Japan. Roaring economy, with strong underpinnings. Growing income. Growing American wealth. Stable inflation. Booming stock market. Increased manufacturing. Germany, France, etc. being taken to task for foisting the cost of defense onto American taxpayers. And on and on.

Also, as to the "war." Do you believe that this war is like Italy invading North Africa and slaughtering villagers for no reason? Unbridled and inexplicable aggression?

Or perhaps this war is being fought viciously on both sides. Viciously. ON BOTH SIDES. And Trump is not backing down from the war, but sure as ****, neither are the Democrats.

Are they? Be honest.

The days of piling on George W. Bush - and pile on viciously, falsely, and malevolently, they did - without response, ARE OVER.

Never reaching out, never looking for compromise.

Not true. (D)'s shrieked about ... well, everything, but at one point shrieked about DACA. Trump gave the (D)'s everything they had asked for, as long as he got funding.

"President Trump is proposing a path to citizenship for an estimated 1.8 million young undocumented immigrants in exchange for steps to increase border security and curb legal immigration, a trade-off swiftly opposed by key Democrats." The reference to "legal immigration" involves chain migration only.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f0ac44ca7e86

Did the (D)'s say, "Hey, there's a lot here we can agree on, let's get border security taken care of"? Nope. Instead, the usual "swift opposition." No need to parlay, just reject.

Anyone crosses him on the GOP side gets instantly hassled and attacked. Trump's attacks on McCain have been shameful, same with his disparaging long-serving FBi and DOJ officials. Putting everyone on blast that dares oppose him. Not Presidential in my book, but that's my own view. Trump's a bull in the china shop if there's ever been one.

The FBI and DOJ officials in question are an embarrassment. Seriously, the FBI agent in charge of the Clinton investigation and who then immediately runs the collusion thing is sending disturbingly biased comments, in writing? What do you think he said in private?

Does that bother you at all, that Strzok prepared the excusal letter for Clinton before talking to her? And then started the Russia collusion investigation while saying that he was willing to do anything to stop Trump? Does that bother you in the least? It does me. When governments rig the game - and they do it a lot - the game stinks and people get hurt.

 

[Tibs]

Maybe. Maybe not. Tell me everything you know about Millard Fillmore's wardrobe and boasting. Or James K. Polk. Or Martin Van Buren. Or John Tyler. Or Millard Fillmore. Or Franklin Pierce. Part of the problem here, Tibs, is that many seem to believe the world began with the invention of the cell phone.

Nice post Steeltime, you make some excellent points. I kept thinking of past presidents to compare Trump to, didn't want to veer off into that as there's so much history to look at.

My general impression is Trump will easily end up on the all-time list of strangest/most bizarre Presidents ever. If he doesn't switch gears he'll end up in Ripley's next to the bearded lady and the Guinness Book of Records with 'most lies ever by a sitting President'. It sounds like I'm joking, sadly I'm not.

 

[Steeltime]

Nice post Steeltime, you make some excellent points. I kept thinking of past presidents to compare Trump to, didn't want to veer off into that as there's so much history to look at.

My general impression is Trump will easily end up on the all-time list of strangest/most bizarre Presidents ever. If he doesn't switch gears he'll end up in Ripley's next to the bearded lady and the Guinness Book of Records with 'most lies ever by a sitting President'. It sounds like I'm joking, sadly I'm not.

Most lies by a President ... that would indeed be an astonishing record.

Also, I should point out that Millard Fillmore may be the leading blowhard, "look at me" from the 19th century. The jackwagon put himself on my list TWICE!!

 

[hamster]

My general impression is Trump will easily end up on the all-time list of strangest/most bizarre

Funny how upholding the Constitution, and rule of law, is now considered strange and bizarre.

 

[Tibs]

And then started the Russia collusion investigation while saying that he was willing to do anything to stop Trump?

Just want to point out Strzok did not 'start the Russia collusion investigation." That's incorrect given the actual scope and number of people that were involved. There were leads coming in from several independent sources, including the dossier from the former MI5 operative, which is still under investigation. Regardless how badly Trump wanted it disappeared and discredited. The dossier is just one of many parts of what I presume the Mueller team is looking at. It includes mention of most, if not all of the alleged collusion activity with Russia. It's a piece of the puzzle. The end of Mueller's investigation needs to answer clearly if there were criminal acts committed, if Trump or his associates were compromised. Mueller either has evidence of that or he doesn't.

When governments rig the game - and they do it a lot - the game stinks and people get hurt.

See, we're on opposite sides of the spectrum. When you say governments rig the game, to me that's what Trump's trying to get away with. Manipulating the media, his supporters and the general public to look away from the Russian investigation, it's all a hoax, fake news. What responsible government official, much less the President, speaks like that of his own federal agencies? I may need to touch up on my history when we've seen a President in a stare-down with his own Department of Justice and the FBI. It's not a good look right now in 2018, regardless how many times it may have happened in the past.

I see fundamental issues with his persistent attacks on the press and media. Who is he yelling at? The journalists, tv crews, people watching at home? The owners of the cable news channels, the businesses that advertise? To me it's all part of an attempt to distract from what I think he knows Mueller must have on him, especially now that they have the doc's and phone/email records from the the Michael Cohen raids.

If I'm Trump, and I'm innocent, all I'd be doing is cooperating with the investigation from the word 'Go' and keeping my mouth shut. You have respect for the process, particularly if you're the President, and you're truly innocent. First thing you do is you walk in and give oral and written testimony, under oath. Put it in paper that you didn't collude with the Russians. Explain a few fundamental questions, clear your name. If you didn't do anything wrong yet you're being accused of it, you'd run to clear your name as soon as you could. There is no other explanation for Trump's belligerent behavior than the fact he may be neck deep in all of it. Trump's feeling the heat from the fed's.

 

[SCSteeler4life]

Just want to point out Strzok did not 'start the Russia collusion investigation." That's incorrect given the actual scope and number of people that were involved with that. There were leads coming in from several independent sources, including the dossier, which to this day is still under investigation and open to question. Regardless of how badly Trump wanted it disappeared and discredited. That I presume is what the Mueller team is looking at, quite carefully.

His testimony in my view proved the exact opposite of what Trump, Gowdy the other dipshits have been stating.

See, we're on opposite sides of the spectrum. When you say governments rig the game, to me that's what Trump's trying to get away with. Manipulating the media, his supporters and the general public to look away from the Russian investigation, it's all a hoax, fake news. What responsible government official, much less the President, speaks like that of his own federal agencies? I may need to touch up on my history when we've seen a President in a stare-down with his own Department of Justice and the FBI. It's just not a good luck right now in 2018, regardless how many times that may have happened in the past.

I see fundamental, serious issues with his persistent attacks on the press and media. Who is he yelling at? The journalists, tv crews, people watching at home? I guess it's **** like that which makes me dislike the guy, who knows?

Strzok had connections with the FISA judge , it was brought up again today they were friends and his wife also knew him. The whole thing completely stinks from beginning to end , they spent 5 minutes on Hilliary and 2 years on Trump.

 

[hamster]

J
See, we're on opposite sides of the spectrum. When you say governments rig the game, to me that's what Trump's trying to get away with. Manipulating the media, his supporters and the general public to look away from the Russian investigation, it's all a hoax, fake news. .

Trump threatens the MSM. True. And with good cause.
The MSM have been liberal apologists, way before President Trump.
Finally, someone calling them out for their bias. The veil has been lifted for all to see.

And it's uglier than I would have ever believed.

 

[Steeltime]

Just want to point out Strzok did not 'start the Russia collusion investigation." That's incorrect given the actual scope and number of people that were involved. There were leads coming in from several independent sources, including the dossier from the former MI5 operative, which is still under investigation. Regardless how badly Trump wanted it disappeared and discredited. The dossier is just one of many parts of what I presume the Mueller team is looking at. It includes mention of most, if not all of the alleged collusion activity with Russia. It's a piece of the puzzle. The end of Mueller's investigation needs to answer clearly if there were criminal acts committed, if Trump or his associates were compromised. Mueller either has evidence of that or he doesn't.

Incorrect. Strzok was the lead investigator and it was he who recommended that the investigation go forward or not. The AG and the Director of the FBI do not investigate **** and decide to move ahead - they assign the investigation to a lead investigator, who is the arbiter as to whether or not there is reason to proceed with an investigation.

Further, there were NOT multiple sources in the first 6 months of 2016. There was oppo research and the fact that Manafort had dealings in the Ukraine. That was it, Tibs. The rest of the information implicated Russia, not any American citizen. Was there reason to look into the issue? Sure, I guess.

Was there enough to launch a counter-intelligence probe on American citizens and repeatedly approach members of the Trump team to offer information? No. No, there was not. And lest you forget, it was Comey - somebody you have labeled a hero - who stated that but for the oppo research, the FBI would not have sought a warrant, would not have eavesdropped on Flynn, etc.

See, we're on opposite sides of the spectrum. When you say governments rig the game, to me that's what Trump's trying to get away with. Manipulating the media, his supporters and the general public to look away from the Russian investigation, it's all a hoax, fake news. What responsible government official, much less the President, speaks like that of his own federal agencies? I may need to touch up on my history when we've seen a President in a stare-down with his own Department of Justice and the FBI. It's not a good look right now in 2018, regardless how many times it may have happened in the past.

The lead investigator as to Russia, Trump, etc. wrote these:

“[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page texted Strzok in August 2016. “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok responded.

He whitewashed Hillary, gave the go-ahead on an investigation of the Trump team on the flimsiest of evidence, and repeatedly wrote about his hate of Trump. Who the hell would trust his investigation or decisions??

Would you trust a judge who told you before the beginning of the trial, "Hey, look, I just want it known I hate your guts, find you a vile person, and will do everything in my power to stop you"??

See, we're on opposite sides of the spectrum. When you say governments rig the game, to me that's what Trump's trying to get away with. Manipulating the media, his supporters and the general public to look away from the Russian investigation, it's all a hoax, fake news. What responsible government official, much less the President, speaks like that of his own federal agencies? I may need to touch up on my history when we've seen a President in a stare-down with his own Department of Justice and the FBI. It's not a good look right now in 2018, regardless how many times it may have happened in the past.

I see fundamental issues with his persistent attacks on the press and media. Who is he yelling at? The journalists, tv crews, people watching at home? The owners of the cable news channels, the businesses that advertise? To me it's all part of an attempt to distract from what I think he knows Mueller must have on him, especially now that they have the doc's and phone/email records from the the Michael Cohen raids.

If I'm Trump, and I'm innocent, all I'd be doing is cooperating with the investigation from the word 'Go' and keeping my mouth shut. You have respect for the process, particularly if you're the President, and you're truly innocent. First thing you do is you walk in and give oral and written testimony, under oath. Put it in paper that you didn't collude with the Russians. Explain a few fundamental questions, clear your name. If you didn't do anything wrong yet you're being accused of it, you'd run to clear your name as soon as you could. There is no other explanation for Trump's belligerent behavior than the fact he may be neck deep in all of it. Trump's feeling the heat from the fed's.

Oh bunk. No possible explanation for his reaction to being called a traitor, and colluding with an enemy to affect the election?? How about the fact that he was not treated fairly, ever, at all, in any respect and where the lead investigator and his girlfriend wrote, “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page texted Strzok in August 2016. “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok responded.

I don't suggest that Strzok was saying he would falsify the investigation, but his adamant hatred of Trump - and he wrote several times how much he hated Trump - made him clearly ineligible to be the lead investigator. The FBI has specific protocols on this. It's why Strzok is no longer an active FBI agent, Tibs.

Are you suggesting that Strzok's well-documented bias played no role in his investigation and recommendations? If so, why was he suspended? Why did he fail to answer questions yesterday after promising to cooperate? Strzok has a lot to answer for.

If I'm Trump, and I'm innocent, all I'd be doing is cooperating with the investigation from the word 'Go' and keeping my mouth shut. You have respect for the process, particularly if you're the President, and you're truly innocent. First thing you do is you walk in and give oral and written testimony, under oath. Put it in paper that you didn't collude with the Russians. Explain a few fundamental questions, clear your name. If you didn't do anything wrong yet you're being accused of it, you'd run to clear your name as soon as you could. There is no other explanation for Trump's belligerent behavior than the fact he may be neck deep in all of it. Trump's feeling the heat from the fed's.

In an ordinary investigation, sure. Where the FBI has already demonstrated blatant bias in favor of Hillary and is playing extremely fast and loose with the law as to Trump? No freaking way. Mueller is looking to justify the year-long probe. Ask Trump a thousand questions. He testifies falsely on three? PERJURY.

It's a set-up. Was Hillary subjected to this process? No. Why not? Because the game is rigged. Was Hillary prosecuted for destroying subpoenaed evidence? No. Why? The game is rigged. Would Trump be allowed to destroy tens of thousands of subpoenaed e-mails? Of course not. Be honest here.

And you believe Trump should just "trust these guys"? **** that. The independent counsel is now a group of climate scientists, looking for evidence of global warming. Oh, yeah, I'd trust those findings, right, you bet.

Further, look at the known "facts" as to collusion. Russians bought ads on Facebook. Russians presented anti-Hillary ads. Why? They, like everybody else, thought she would win and were trying to impugn her before she took office. Trump's role in this? NOTHING.

Meanwhile, Hillary's camp paid a foreign operative, Steele, for salacious allegations against Trump. Credible evidence shows that the Hillary people paid millions for the information. The FBI used this information to obtain a warrant from a FISA judge to spy on ... well, Trump staff members. Remember when we were told that the spying was "on the Russians" and Flynn was just caught in the draft? Yeah, that was false. The spying was directed at Manafort, Papadopolous, and others yet to be named, apparently including Flynn.

Did the FBI tell the FISA judge that the allegations were paid-for oppo research? No. Did the FBI (Strzok) tell the judge that the allegations came from a source (Steele) no longer used by the FBI based on suspicions of leaking information? No. Did the FBI tell the FISA judge that the allegations were multiple hearsay from a foreign source who was paid to conduct political opposition research? NO.

Meanwhile, Hillary is not put under oath, Huma is not put under oath, Hillary destroys subpoenaed materials, Hillary lies to the FBI, Huma lies to the FBI, and ... nothing. Not one goddamn thing. Not a single charge, not even for obstruction for destroying subpoenaed materials or for lying to the FBI - the only allegation against Flynn and Papadoupolis, by the way.

And Trump should just rely on the FBI to be fair?!? Are you serious?

The "just go under oath and tell the truth" meme is a schtick, Tibs. ******* Strzok said he thought Flynn was truthful and had minor misrecollections.

His life is ruined.

Seriously, Trump should just testify for 7 hours and rely on the investigators to be fair? Yeah, that sounds good.

How about this, Tibs. He be given the same deal as Hillary - not under oath, followed by an immediate whitewashing. What, that's not fair?

Well neither is a blatantly biased, skewed investigation powered by leaks, untruths and misrepresentations.

 

[Tibs]

Steeltime I appreciate your lengthy response but have to say I disagree with most of it. You're rehashing a lot of the tired talking points, making an attempt to create a false equivalency between Hillary and Trump as if this is some sort of clinical lab experiment comparing subject A with subject B, side by side. That's pure fantasy, to suggest anything of the like.

Trump's unique set of circumstances, decades of business deals and relationships, political ties both domestic and foreign, led to an FBI investigation into his matters. It raised enough flags - with or without Strzok's involvement - and was completely isolated from and independent of the multiple and extensive inquires into Hillary. From what I've seen and read, the genesis of this investigation would have been the same with or without Strzok, I truly believe that. So you can state point blank Stzrok and other agents were biased against Trump, and you could be right, but I don't believe it affected or shaped this investigation one bit. I understand that's the current flavor of the week argument coming from Trump's camp, but I don't buy it.

Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and then Presidential candidate came under intense scrutiny - Benghazi, email servers, Clinton foundation et al. The feds and Congress spent ample time and resources looking into her affairs. You can't possibly argue the opposite. Gowdy spent what seemed like years trying to pin her down.

Your (er, Trump's) argument that Clinton got let off easy and the investigation(s) against Trump have been unfairly skewered and politically biased simply doesn't stand up. All I see is a desperate, perhaps last ditch effort to delegitimize the case Mueller is building against him. I say let the facts bear out and let the investigation reach whatever conclusion it does.

 

[SCSteeler4life]

Steeltime I appreciate your lengthy response but have to say I disagree with most of it. You're rehashing a lot of the tired talking points, making an attempt to create a false equivalency between Hillary and Trump as if this is some sort of clinical lab experiment comparing subject A with subject B, side by side. That's pure fantasy, to suggest anything of the like.

Trump's unique set of circumstances, decades of business deals and relationships, political ties both domestic and foreign, led to an FBI investigation into his matters. It raised enough flags - with or without Strzok's involvement - and was completely isolated from and independent of the multiple and extensive inquires into Hillary. From what I've seen and read, the genesis of this investigation would have been the same with or without Strzok, I truly believe that. So you can state point blank Stzrok and other agents were biased against Trump, and you could be right, but I don't believe it affected or shaped this investigation one bit. I understand that's the current flavor of the week argument coming from Trump's camp, but I don't buy it.

Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and then Presidential candidate came under intense scrutiny - Benghazi, email servers, Clinton foundation et al. The feds and Congress spent ample time and resources looking into her affairs. You can't possibly argue the opposite. Gowdy spent what seemed like years trying to pin her down.

Your (er, Trump's) argument that Clinton got let off easy and the investigation(s) against Trump have been unfairly skewered and politically biased simply doesn't stand up. All I see is a desperate, perhaps last ditch effort to delegitimize the case Mueller is building against him. I say let the facts bear out and let the investigation reach whatever conclusion it does.

Your hate for Trump has made you totally blind. I may have always been on the opposite side of the political fence as you but at least I read your opinions and gave them respect. But how you can type what you typed and totally dismiss all the evidence as talking points shows that you are truly delusional now. I hope you get well soon Tibs.

 

[IndySteel]

Steeltime, you are talking to Tibs like he is capable of comprehending facts with rational, unbiased thought. He is not. You are wasting your time.

 

[hamster]

Steeltime laid out the facts, quite expertly. Tibs, all you have are opinions. Your argument failed miserably.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[Superman]

Steeltime I appreciate your lengthy response but have to say I disagree with most of it. You're rehashing a lot of the tired talking points, making an attempt to create a false equivalency between Hillary and Trump as if this is some sort of clinical lab experiment comparing subject A with subject B, side by side. That's pure fantasy, to suggest anything of the like.

Trump's unique set of circumstances, decades of business deals and relationships, political ties both domestic and foreign, led to an FBI investigation into his matters. It raised enough flags - with or without Strzok's involvement - and was completely isolated from and independent of the multiple and extensive inquires into Hillary. From what I've seen and read, the genesis of this investigation would have been the same with or without Strzok, I truly believe that. So you can state point blank Stzrok and other agents were biased against Trump, and you could be right, but I don't believe it affected or shaped this investigation one bit. I understand that's the current flavor of the week argument coming from Trump's camp, but I don't buy it.

Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and then Presidential candidate came under intense scrutiny - Benghazi, email servers, Clinton foundation et al. The feds and Congress spent ample time and resources looking into her affairs. You can't possibly argue the opposite. Gowdy spent what seemed like years trying to pin her down.

Your (er, Trump's) argument that Clinton got let off easy and the investigation(s) against Trump have been unfairly skewered and politically biased simply doesn't stand up. All I see is a desperate, perhaps last ditch effort to delegitimize the case Mueller is building against him. I say let the facts bear out and let the investigation reach whatever conclusion it does.

that right there is your problem, tibs.
we all know Trump has property all over the ******* planet. If he was doing so many shady deals, why wasn't he investigated and jailed PRIOR to throwing his hat in the (R) race?

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Steeltime, you are talking to Tibs like he is capable of comprehending facts with rational, unbiased thought. He is not. You are wasting your time.

And Tibs is the best of the Leftys we have here.

 

[Steeltime]

Steeltime I appreciate your lengthy response but have to say I disagree with most of it. You're rehashing a lot of the tired talking points, making an attempt to create a false equivalency between Hillary and Trump as if this is some sort of clinical lab experiment comparing subject A with subject B, side by side. That's pure fantasy, to suggest anything of the like.

Trump's unique set of circumstances, decades of business deals and relationships, political ties both domestic and foreign, led to an FBI investigation into his matters. It raised enough flags - with or without Strzok's involvement - and was completely isolated from and independent of the multiple and extensive inquires into Hillary. From what I've seen and read, the genesis of this investigation would have been the same with or without Strzok, I truly believe that. So you can state point blank Stzrok and other agents were biased against Trump, and you could be right, but I don't believe it affected or shaped this investigation one bit. I understand that's the current flavor of the week argument coming from Trump's camp, but I don't buy it.

So what fact did I posit - and I put forward many - is untrue? Further, the entire Hillary vs. Trump scenario is linked and tainted with unequal treatment and palpable bias. You believe that Hillary's investigation is unrelated to Trump's investigation. I disagree. Let's see why they may indeed be related:

• Strzok ran the Clinton e-mail investigation
• Strzok ran the Trump investigation before it was referred to independent counsel.
• Strzok determined that Clinton did not deserve to be charged - HE wrote the whitewash letter to Comey.
• Strzok determined that the Trump matter deserved further investigation.
• In deciding that the Trump matter deserved further investigation, he relied very, very heavily on information produced by Steele.
• Steele produced that information for the Clinton campaign.
• The Clinton camp paid Steele millions of dollars for that information.
• The spying of the Trump campaign officials - Manafort, Papadoupolis, Flynn, and others not yet named - occurred DURING the campaign.
• That spying was overseen by Strzok, who hated Trump and loved Hillary.
• That spying was done under the Obama DOJ, where Obama said he did not think Clinton did anything wrong with the e-mails before the investigation was done and where Strzok was told to keep Obama in the loop on the Trump spying.
• The evidence against Hillary on the e-mail probe was devastating - she admitted to deleting thousands of e-mails under subpoeana. That is obstruction.
• She claimed not to know the designation "C" meant the material was classified but her training as Secy of State included specific training on designation and handling of classified materials. She lied.
• She sent "C" materials to her assistant, Huma, on Huma's personal computer. She thereby used a non-encrypted device to send "C" materials to another non-encrypted device, in violation of law.
• She was not put under penalty of perjury.
• She lied repeatedly to the FBI about knowing the limits on handling "C" data, whether she in fact had "C" data on her personal computer, the contents of the deleted e-mails ("Oh, tens of thousands of e-mails about Chelsea's wedding").
• She should have been under oath, like you say Trump should volunteer to be placed.
• If so, she is charged with perjury - like Papadoupolis, Flynn.
• Funny how the FBI prepares Hillary a clearance letter before talking to her.
• The differing treatment - carte blanche to Clinton, attack dog on Trump - is the living, breathing definition of bias.
• That bias is so pervasive that Strzok no longer works for the FBI, Tibs.
• Trump's business dealings are not part of the investigation, Tibs.
• Trump's business dealings are not probable cause for any of this, Tibs. In fact, using 10-year old business dealings as some sort of excuse for a warrant would be met with a cold reception from any judge asked to issue such warrant.
• Oh,and the "business dealings"? Wow, talk about flavor of the day ... Steele information!! No, okay ... Manafort and Ukraine!! No. Flynn's phone call!! Nothing about Trump yet?? Hmm, how about Storm ... **** that. Oh, everybody already has? Okay then, business dealings!! Yeah, that's it!! What about the business dealings? Uhh, well, see ... CHILDREN IN INTERNMENT CAMPS! STORMY DANIELS!!
• And yet the DOJ and FBI say about Trump, "Trust us. We'll be fair."

Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and then Presidential candidate came under intense scrutiny - Benghazi, email servers, Clinton foundation et al. The feds and Congress spent ample time and resources looking into her affairs. You can't possibly argue the opposite. Gowdy spent what seemed like years trying to pin her down.

Your (er, Trump's) argument that Clinton got let off easy and the investigation(s) against Trump have been unfairly skewered and politically biased simply doesn't stand up. All I see is a desperate, perhaps last ditch effort to delegitimize the case Mueller is building against him. I say let the facts bear out and let the investigation reach whatever conclusion it does.

Tibs, the FBI subpoenaed her e-mails off her personal computer to see if she mishandled classified data. She deleted tens of thousands of those e-mails. That is the most obvious instance of obstruction of justice I can imagine.

Seriously, if Trump had some trove of data directly related to the Mueller thing - tens of thousands of e-mails with Russians - and then deleted those after receiving a subpoena to produce them, you would think, "Oh, no big deal, just e-mails about Melania's fall line."

Right?!?

Further, Clinton repeatedly lied to the FBI. She should have been under oath and should have been charged with perjury. Why was she not?? Because our lead investigator, Strzok, specifically wrote that he needed to "wrap up" the investigation as Hillary was nearing the nomination.

Oh, but for Trump, we need to let the investigation play out. Hillary? Clear evidence of crimes, let's wrap it up so as to not spoil her campaign. Trump? No evidence of anything remotely to do with collusion, after more than 1 1/2 years, but let's not rush to conclusions.

Know what we call these two investigations? Patent evidence of bias. A rigged game. Al Riveron may as well have run the investigations, Tibs.

 

[Tibs]

Steeltime laid out the facts, quite expertly. Tibs, all you have are opinions. Your argument failed miserably.

Yeah, so strange people actually have differing opinions about things. Really sucks, I know. I guess that's just how it will be, we're all looking at the same thing, the same set of facts, yet have different interpretations of their meaning. Human nature, I guess. I respect the fact Steeltime and others have a vastly different understanding of the Mueller probe. I don't expect the same in return, not here on this board. It is what it is. If I change my mind and buy into the conspiracy theories of the deep state and rogue Republicans in the FBI and DOJ that have it out for Trump, I'll surely let you know.

 

[IndySteel]

 

[Steelerfan]

This thread is getting into Archer territory and I don't like that. Long live the Archer thread!!

 

[Steelworth]

Tibs, the FBI subpoenaed her e-mails off her personal computer to see if she mishandled classified data. She deleted tens of thousands of those e-mails. That is the most obvious instance of obstruction of justice I can imagine.

Seriously, if Trump had some trove of data directly related to the Mueller thing - tens of thousands of e-mails with Russians - and then deleted those after receiving a subpoena to produce them, you would think, "Oh, no big deal, just e-mails about Melania's fall line."

Right?!?

Further, Clinton repeatedly lied to the FBI. She should have been under oath and should have been charged with perjury. Why was she not?? Because our lead investigator, Strzok, specifically wrote that he needed to "wrap up" the investigation as Hillary was nearing the nomination.

Oh, but for Trump, we need to let the investigation play out. Hillary? Clear evidence of crimes, let's wrap it up so as to not spoil her campaign. Trump? No evidence of anything remotely to do with collusion, after more than 1 1/2 years, but let's not rush to conclusions.

Know what we call these two investigations? Patent evidence of bias. A rigged game. Al Riveron may as well have run the investigations, Tibs.

 

[hamster]

Yeah, so strange people actually have differing opinions about things. Really sucks, I know. I guess that's just how it will be, we're all looking at the same thing, the same set of facts, yet have different interpretations of their meaning. Human nature, I guess. I respect the fact Steeltime and others have a vastly different understanding of the Mueller probe. I don't expect the same in return, not here on this board. It is what it is. If I change my mind and buy into the conspiracy theories of the deep state and rogue Republicans in the FBI and DOJ that have it out for Trump, I'll surely let you know.

And if I see any evidence that Trump colluded with Russians, I will surely let you know.

There should be enough obvious, incontrovertible evidence to appoint a special council to investigate the President of the US. Right?

 

[CharlesDavenport]

I do think we need to look into this Russia thing. I mean, they paid Trump $500,000 for speech right around the time that his wife was giving them 20% of our uranium deposits. You can't not investigate something that smells this fishy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5009373/FBI-surprised-Bill-Clinton-took-500-000-Russia.html

 

[Tibs]

Gowdy and the other puppets of the Trump regime attacking the FBI/DOJ should resign in disgrace. Since they won't, they will be held accountable for their treasonous actions and behavior.

 

[hamster]

The FBI has done a pretty good job of disgracing itself. Good bye Comey, McCabe, Strzock, Page......and a host of others. The DOJ has it coming, as well. Mueller needs to shut this farce down, and walk away with a fraction of the honor he once had

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

Gowdy and the other puppets of the Trump regime attacking the FBI/DOJ should resign in disgrace. Since they won't, they will be held accountable for their treasonous actions and behavior.

All this is, is proof of the FBI protecting Clinton. This is pretty damning in and of itself. I would not be proud of this Tibs.

 

[Steeltime]

Gowdy and the other puppets of the Trump regime attacking the FBI/DOJ should resign in disgrace. Since they won't, they will be held accountable for their treasonous actions and behavior.

So you think nobody would have been indicted relative to Benghazi if an independent investigator had been appointed? Seriously, try to be credible here.

The "16 indictments" that MSNBC brays about consist of 13 worthless indictments of Russian entities involved in pumping out information, 2 indictments for lying to investigators (Hillar ... oh, wait, no, Flynn and Papadoupolis), and 1 indictment of a guy for lying on a loan form 10 years ago or more (Manafort).

Indictments related to collusion? ZERO.

Indictments related to the reason Mueller was appointed? ZERO.

The undeniable truth of the matter is this. The Democrats simply absolve themselves from independent counsel investigations via corrupt DOJ appointees (Holder). An independent counsel clearly was called for on the running of guns to Mexican gangs, something Obama and Holder approved. Nope. Instead, Obama and Holder investigate Obama and Holder and conclude that Obama and Holder did nothing wrong.

An independent counsel OBVIOUSLY should have been appointed to investigate the IRS fraud and lies. Nope. So instead Obama and Holder investigate Obama and Holder and conclude that Obama and Holder did nothing wrong.

How many perjury charges would have been garnered with those two investigations? 5? 10? More? Given the lying liars involved in the two schemes, I say a lot.

So in conclusion, the vitriol directed at Republicans for how nasty they are is incredibly ironic where Democrats investigate themselves and simply give themselves a pass.

Maybe the (D)'s should face some of the same DOJ treatment as the Trump people.

Or even some ******* Russian entities that have less importance to America than a pimple on a cow's ***.