And it Begins:Special Prosecutor To Investigate Trump And Russia

[hamster]

I hear you Sarge. The Congressional hearings are just political cover for the backlash that is bound to happen with an indictment. James Baker, former chief counsel at the FBI, has already spilled the beans. The DOJ, under Sessions, wouldn't have indicted. That has changed.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[Spike]

lol


Whitaker’s post provides ample tools to disrupt Mueller probe

Matthew Whitaker doesn’t have to fire Robert Mueller to throw a wrench in the special counsel’s investigation.

Much of the focus on President Trump’s appointment of Whitaker to temporarily replace former Attorney General Jeff Sessions has been on the possibility of Whitaker removing Mueller, a move that would undoubtedly spark public outrage and trigger full-scale investigations by Democrats, who are poised to take control of the House in January.

But federal regulations offer Whitaker, now acting attorney general, broad authority with respect to the special counsel that extends beyond the ability to remove Mueller, giving him the ability to curtail the probe in ways that would not necessarily become public knowledge until after the Russia investigation is over.

Whitaker has the power to weigh in on any major steps in the probe, such as the issuance of new subpoenas and indictments.

It will be up to Whitaker to decide which portions, if any, of Mueller’s final report are submitted to Congress or released to the public.

“He has a lot of authority, starting with his authority to remove Mueller if he finds he has good cause for doing so under the relevant regulation,” said Stephen Vladeck, a University of Texas law professor. “There are both hard and soft powers that the relevant regulation gives to the acting attorney general.”

https://thehill.com/policy/national...t-whitakers-disposal-to-disrupt-mueller-probe

----------------

the "public outrage" is that this witchhunt has gone on for 2 years

 

[Tibs]

Spike, amazes me how you loudly applaud obstruction of justice happening in plain sight. I guess now that your man is in power, might as well throw the Constitution out the window. No use for it, or for checks and balances, or for democratic institutions, or for an independant judiciary, or for a free press. The Trump cult is unbelievable, and it's getting worse day by day.

 

[Tibs]

More bad news for Donald. The jigsaw puzzle pieces continue to fall into place...

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Stone associate Jerome Corsi is in plea negotiations with special counsel, according to a person with knowledge of the talks <a href="https://t.co/boB1ISHVBC">https://t.co/boB1ISHVBC</a></p>— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) <a href="https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1066014308700774401?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 23, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" frameborder="0"></iframe>

 

[Tibs]

Btw, over the past two years I've yet to hear a single acceptable answer to the question if Trump is perfectly innocent in the Russia probe, why wouldn't he just shut his trap and let the investigation play out, which will ultimately prove he did nothing wrong? He could triumphantly claim he was right the whole time, and he'd be vindicated through and through.

Why would he need to install his lacky Matthew Whitaker to try to subvert and impede the Mueller probe if he did nothing wrong to begin with?

There is no good answer. It doesn't make sense.

His reckless, belligerent behavior and his incesstant attacks on the media, Mueller and the DOJ/FBI speaks volumes. It doesn't take a psychologist or a rocket scientist to figure out why he's been so paranoid and unglued this entire time. Take a wild guess to why that is.


<iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" frameborder="0"></iframe>

 

[madinsomniac]

Btw, over the past two years I've yet to hear a single acceptable answer to the question if Trump is perfectly innocent in the Russia probe, why wouldn't he just shut his trap and let the investigation play out, which will ultimately prove he did nothing wrong? He could triumphantly claim he was right the whole time, and he'd be vindicated through and through.

Why would he need to install his lacky Matthew Whitaker to try to subvert and impede the Mueller probe if he did nothing wrong to begin with?

There is no good answer. It doesn't make sense.

His reckless, belligerent behavior and his incesstant attacks on the media, Mueller and the DOJ/FBI speaks volumes. It doesn't take a psychologist or a rocket scientist to figure out why he's been so paranoid and unglued this entire time. Take a wild guess to why that is.


<iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Trump is a self promoting egomaniac... he loves attention whoring... again even if the claims were 100% true there isn’t any legit crime there... this isn’t watergate... watergate is closer to the fbi wiretapping the trump campaign than the Russian claims... look im not a trump fan either, but this nonsense is only political smearing because tge dems dont have any popular working policies...

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

Btw, over the past two years I've yet to hear a single acceptable answer to the question if Trump is perfectly innocent in the Russia probe, why wouldn't he just shut his trap and let the investigation play out, which will ultimately prove he did nothing wrong? He could triumphantly claim he was right the whole time, and he'd be vindicated through and through.

Why would he need to install his lacky Matthew Whitaker to try to subvert and impede the Mueller probe if he did nothing wrong to begin with?

There is no good answer. It doesn't make sense.

His reckless, belligerent behavior and his incesstant attacks on the media, Mueller and the DOJ/FBI speaks volumes. It doesn't take a psychologist or a rocket scientist to figure out why he's been so paranoid and unglued this entire time. Take a wild guess to why that is.


<iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Yes you have had a good answer you just choose to ignore it for purely partisan reasons. He has to respond and fight simply because it is a witch hunt that is not looking for the truth but looking to justify itself with prosecutions no matter what. If this had been a fair and impartial investigation it would be over already.


Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[Tibs]

Yes you have had a good answer you just choose to ignore it for purely partisan reasons. He has to respond and fight simply because it is a witch hunt that is not looking for the truth but looking to justify itself with prosecutions no matter what. If this had been a fair and impartial investigation it would be over already.

'prosections no matter what'. -- What does that even mean? If Trump is innocent of any wrongdoing, are you suggesting the DOJ/FBI would charge him with crimes he didn't commit? Really, you think that's possible? And if he committed no crimes, then again, wtf is he worried about, witch hunt or no witch hunt?

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

'prosections no matter what'. -- What does that even mean? If Trump is innocent of any wrongdoing, are you suggesting the DOJ/FBI would charge him with crimes he didn't commit? Really, you think that's possible? And if he committed no crimes, then again, wtf is he worried about, witch hunt or no witch hunt?

Yes I mean they will manufacture one. Probably perjury.


Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[Tibs]

Yes I mean they will manufacture one. Probably perjury.

How do you 'manufacture' perjury? You either commit perjury or you don't. You either commit crimes, or you don't. Mueller will lay bare the facts in this case, of that I have no doubt. Is the President - notably, this President - above the law?

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

How do you 'manufacture' perjury? You either commit perjury or you don't. You either commit crimes, or you don't. Mueller will lay bare the facts in this case, of that I have no doubt. Is the President - notably, this President - above the law?

That is incredibly naive. You really believe that? Entrapment mean anything to you?


Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[Tibs]

That is incredibly naive. You really believe that? Entrapment mean anything to you?

You're suggesting the FBI/DOJ are planning to purposefully entrap the President of the United States. Along with doctoring up whatever further charges, none of which would be true since Trump is completely clear of any wrongdoing, yet the DOJ/FBI are nonetheless preparing to frame an innocent man. In front of the whole country and world to see, in broad daylight. Ok, now I see where you're coming from.

 

[hamster]

How do you 'manufacture' perjury? You either commit perjury or you don't.?

Just ask Michael Flynn

Read:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018...aised-about-fbi-robert-mueller-investigation/


Strzok did not decide on his own to interview Flynn. We know the matter was being monitored at the highest level of the Justice Department, by then–acting attorney general Sally Yates and then–FBI director James Comey. Strzok and a colleague were assigned to interview Flynn. More importantly, Strzok apparently reported that he believed Flynn had been truthful. Shortly after the interview occurred, it was reported that the FBI had decided no action would be taken against Flynn. On March 2, Comey testified to a closed session of the House Intelligence Committee that, while Flynn may have had some honest failures of recollection during the interview, the agents who questioned him concluded that he did not lie.


Far from setting Flynn up, it seems that Strzok would exculpate him. Flynn was prosecuted not because Strzok is an anti-Trump zealot, but apparently because Strzok’s finding that Flynn was truthful was negated by Mueller’s very aggressive prosecutors. Did they decide they knew better than the experienced investigators who were in the room observing Flynn’s demeanor as he answered their questions?


Flynn’s case is back in the news thanks to Byron York’s important Washington Examiner report yesterday. He retraces the history: Because Flynn was a Trump transition official and incoming national-security adviser, there was nothing at all inappropriate about his discussing Obama-imposed sanctions against Russia with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Nevertheless, then–acting attorney general and Obama partisan Sally Yates seriously considered prosecuting Flynn under the absurd, never-invoked Logan Act. This misconception that Flynn had done something wrong led Yates and Comey to have Flynn interviewed as if he were a criminal suspect. Apparently unconcerned, Flynn agreed to be interviewed without counsel. Strzok came away from the session believing that Flynn had told the truth. Comey, Byron York reports, “told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional.”


Yet, ten months later, with Yates, Comey, and Strzok now out of the picture, Mueller decided to charge Flynn with lying to the FBI anyway. And Flynn decided to plead guilty — perhaps because he was guilty . . . or perhaps because he lacked the resources to sustain the legal fight . . . or perhaps because he feared Mueller’s team would otherwise prosecute his son.

 

[Tibs]

And Flynn decided to plead guilty — perhaps because he was guilty . . .

At the very end, I think you hit the nail on the head.

 

[Tibs]

And if the Mueller probe wasn't enough, people don't realize there was a case brought against Trump and the Trump Foundation by the NY Attorney General's office. It's like a bringing down a mobster family, a tangled web they've spun over the years. I think all Americans can rest easy that justice will be served. We are a nation of laws, after all.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Trump Foundation functioned as little more than a checkbook to serve Mr. Trump’s business and political interests. There are rules that govern private foundations, and we intend to enforce them—no matter who runs the foundation.</p>— NY AG Underwood (@NewYorkStateAG) <a href="https://twitter.com/NewYorkStateAG/status/1066036846097039360?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 23, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" frameborder="0"></iframe>

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

And if the Mueller probe wasn't enough, people don't realize there was a case brought against Trump and the Trump Foundation by the NY Attorney General's office. It's like a bringing down a mobster family, a tangled web they've spun over the years. I think all Americans can rest easy that justice will be served. We are a nation of laws, after all.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Trump Foundation functioned as little more than a checkbook to serve Mr. Trump’s business and political interests. There are rules that govern private foundations, and we intend to enforce them—no matter who runs the foundation.</p>— NY AG Underwood (@NewYorkStateAG) <a href="https://twitter.com/NewYorkStateAG/status/1066036846097039360?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 23, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" frameborder="0"></iframe>

If you really believe that, then Hillary and Bill should be facing the same or worse for their foundation. Again you want both ways. You are just looking for something anything to save the world from big bad Trump.

You really haven’t paid attention. You are way to smart to be led around by the nose by the Trump hailing media and Democrats. You offered no forward thinking or policies you only offer hate and anger at the boogie man.


Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[Tibs]

If you really believe that, then Hillary and Bill should be facing the same or worse for their foundation.

In other words you know of illegalities that took place at the Clinton Foundation and are claiming local & federal authorities are covering up for them by not investigating? You also seem to be arguing whatever laws Trump may have broken with his foundation should be ignored because you perceive the Clinton Foundation broke laws as well. Hmmm.

You are just looking for something anything to save the world from big bad Trump.

That's cute Lebanon. It's somehow my fault Trump is in a whale of trouble with multiple investigations clouding his presidency?

You offered no forward thinking or policies...

I'll keep that in mind the next time I run for President, since now it's somehow my job to offer forward thinking policies.

 

[Spike]

2 years of wasted money on this butt hurt losers witch hunt and STILL they can't find any "collusion"

bwahahahahahaha

they should of got 90 days, tops, to deliver hard evidence, they shut it down

YOU LOST, GET OVER IT!


Russians my ***, fire Mueller and prosecute anyone that stands in the way for treason

 

[Spike]

THESE are the criminals we should be going after



The New Crooked Congressional Black Caucus

Civil rights loses, corruption wins.

In the last decade, every single House Democrat sent to prison for financial crimes was a Congressional Black Caucus member. In the last twenty years, it’s been over 80%. After the midterms, the CBC has grown past a record 50 members. But that doesn’t mean it’s getting better. Power makes it worse.

The Congressional Black Caucus has achieved a record number of seats so it’s a power player in the new Dem House majority. And CBC leaders are demanding a status in the Democrat leadership commensurate with their growing numbers. The Caucus forms somewhat less than a quarter of the Dem House majority and is the core of Rep. Pelosi’s support, trading backing for House leadership positions.

Rep. Ilhan Omar is the most famous freshman member of the CBC in the 116th Congress. The CBC’s PAC boasted that she is “the first Somali-American and first Muslim woman elected to Congress”.

She’s also the first member of Congress who had to deny being married to her brother.

As historical “firsts” go, alleged incest in the House is far more historic than being an immigrant from a failed state and then crawling into Congress on the strength of the Ellison voters in Little Mogadishu.

Omar has denied being married to her brother, even though evidence suggests that she was. A complaint was even filed accusing Omar of abusing taxpayer money to divorce her own brother.

But the Congressional Black Caucus is rotten with everything from corruption to anti-Semitism. Its newfound power in the House will allow CBC leaders even more scope for corruption and abuse. Numerous CBC members have faced ethics investigations, three have been sent to prison in the last 5 years, and a significant number have met with Farrakhan or attended Nation of Islam events.

The freshman class of the CBC brings in more political radicalism, but that’s not unusual in a caucus that includes Rep. Barbara Lee and Rep. Maxine Waters. Radicalism is a mask that CBC corruption often wears. And the two have come to comfortably coexist in the corrupt arrangements of a caucus that acts as the mercenaries for the Democrat establishment and any corporation willing to pay the bills.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272026/new-crooked-congressional-black-caucus-daniel-greenfield

 

[Tibs]

2 years of wasted money on this butt hurt losers witch hunt and STILL they can't find any "collusion"

they should of got 90 days, tops, to deliver hard evidence, they shut it down

YOU LOST, GET OVER IT!

Russians my ***, fire Mueller and prosecute anyone that stands in the way for treason

THESE are the criminals we should be going after...The New Crooked Congressional Black Caucus

You know how the saying goes Spike, never let them see you sweat.

<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/VB5WwlZIt8eRy" width="480" height="199" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="https://giphy.com/gifs/VB5WwlZIt8eRy"></a></p>

 

[Spike]

hahahahahahha


round up all the usual suspects



Following Comey Subpoena, Goodlatte Confirms Lynch Ordered To Appear As Well

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) confirmed in a Friday statement that he has issued subpoenas for former FBI Director James Comey and former US Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

“The Committees have repeatedly requested to interview Mr. Comey and Ms. Lynch respectively regarding their roles in certain decisions, but they have yet to voluntarily appear,” reads the statement from the Judiciary Committee.

https://newspig.co.uk/following-comey-subpoena-goodlatte-confirms-lynch-ordered-to-appear-as-well/

 

[Tibs]

The right's favorite lawyer - and Trump lapdog - Alan Dershowitz chimes in. The Donald is not gonna like this...

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">"I think [Mueller's] report is going to be devastating to the president." -<a href="https://twitter.com/AlanDersh?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AlanDersh</a> <a href="https://t.co/QsbQErQIdr">pic.twitter.com/QsbQErQIdr</a></p>— Scott Stedman (@ScottMStedman) <a href="https://twitter.com/ScottMStedman/status/1066841807458189313?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 25, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[ZonaBurgh]

The right's favorite lawyer - and Trump lapdog - Alan Dershowitz chimes in. The Donald is not gonna like this...

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">"I think [Mueller's] report is going to be devastating to the president." -<a href="https://twitter.com/AlanDersh?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AlanDersh</a> <a href="https://t.co/QsbQErQIdr">pic.twitter.com/QsbQErQIdr</a></p>— Scott Stedman (@ScottMStedman) <a href="https://twitter.com/ScottMStedman/status/1066841807458189313?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 25, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

When did Dershowitz read Mueller's report? Aren't we supposed to allow time for all the facts to be presented first?
I'm sure someone here said something to that affect

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Once again, Tibs presenting "parts" of stories, selectively editing what he attempts to sway us with, much like the KGB media he worships.

"Dershowitz added that he believes the report, although it will have a strong political impact, is unlikely to result in criminal charges."

In addition, Dershowitz is no Trump lapdog. For the past year, Dershowitz has actively spoken out against the President on countless occasions. I've watched and witness this unfold.

Tibs and deranged Liberals are still waiting on that peach pie. Their policies fail. Their leaders fail. Their elections fail. So...must...overthrow.

Pathetic.

 

[hamster]

The right's favorite lawyer - and Trump lapdog - Alan Dershowitz chimes in. The Donald is not gonna like this...

<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Tibs, it is posts like this that reveal how far down the liberal rabbit hole that you have fallen. The fact that Prof Dershowitz has not fallen in lockstep with partisan left wingnuts, and chooses to adhere to the Constitution, does not make him a Trump lapdog. He assesses everything per the Constitution. The fact that he does not incessantly condemn the President does not make him a partisan. The fact that you can't separate the Constitution from politics reduces your credibility to the value of sawdust.

<iframe scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.c9b0d6e1ef0320c49dc875c581cc9586.html?origin=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.steelernationforums.com&settingsEndpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fsyndication.twitter.com%2Fsettings" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;"></iframe><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe"></iframe>