And it Begins:Special Prosecutor To Investigate Trump And Russia

[Tibs]

Just for the record, from the Quinnipiac poll that came out today. A poll that's also showing Trump's approval rating continuing to slide, down to 34%.

Seventy-three percent of respondents said they approve of Robert Mueller being named special counsel to oversee the Russia investigation, while 15 percent disapprove.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/07/trump-approval-rating-quinnipiac-poll-239250?cmpid=sf

Just to make sure we don't buy into the bs that this is some sort of far-left liberal witch hunt.

 

[SCSteeler4life]

Polls. Damn after the election you would think you wouldn't still be falling for polls.

 

[Tibs]

...this was an excuse cooked up by the Hildebeast campaign.

Just a waste of money.

Trump's ties to Russia seem to only be that he has visited there and he once said Putin was a better leader than Obama.

The whole Russian thing is just a distraction and has been from the get go.

More and more liberals are implying stuff.

Libtard Alan Dershowitz knows this is a farce.

‘No Evidence’

Whining has become the new standard of the left

The Russia thing is smoke-and-mirrors.

...the media is pushing their radical left wing agenda

100% certain the russia stuff is a joke.

This Russia thing is a Dem strategy to win some mid-terms.

All of this vitriol is planned subversion

Accusing Trump of treason based on absolutely nothing

Pretty much sums up the whole witch hunt.

Ho-hum, another day, another complete fail for the hysterical screeching moonbats

Hoax. Libtard dog and pony show.

Nothing here. Moving right along.

This is strictly a hoax, based on a lie.

It's a political witch hunt.

There is no evidence of anything nefarious.

Oh boy James Clapper, now you've gone and done it.

Watergate 'pales' compared with Trump-Russia: former U.S. intelligence head
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...N18Y0SU?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social

The Watergate scandal pales in comparison to events in Washington surrounding U.S. President Donald Trump and alleged links between his campaign and Russia, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said on Wednesday.

Clapper questioned Trump's continued pro-Russian stance, saying his sharing of intelligence with Russia "reflect either ignorance or disrespect, and either is very problematic".

"I think if you compare the two that Watergate pales, really, in my view, compared to what we're confronting now," Clapper told reporters in Canberra, Australia's capital.

 

[tapeANaspirin2it]

Then why did the Department of Justice - Trump's very own Department of Justice, led by Sessions - choose to name a Special Prosecutor in this case? It's not the ******* lying liberal media, nor the Democrats, nor Hillary Clinton, nor Obama, nor anyone else. This investigation was brought about by Trump's own Department of Justice. What gives?

Same reason why a parent opens the closet to show a child that there's no real monster in there, only the monster they made up in their head.

 

[SCSteeler4life]

Oh boy James Clapper, now you've gone and done it.

Watergate 'pales' compared with Trump-Russia: former U.S. intelligence head
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...N18Y0SU?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social

Wow Obamas boy said something bad about the POTUS. Big shocker.

Still nothing but same old ****.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

http://theweek.com/articles/703539/james-comeys-credibility-problem

At the same time, Comey might have to field some uncomfortable questions, especially if he now characterizes the February meeting with Trump and his own later firing as an attempt at obstruction of justice. After all, Comey testified to Congress a week before his termination that he had never been pressured to end an investigation for political purposes, almost three months after the Trump meeting took place. Why didn't he report it at the time, or when he first got fired, rather than waiting for the invitation from the committee to testify?

This is where Comey's in a pickle. They met in February. A week before being fired, he testified to Congress that he had never been pressured to end the investigation.

So he either steps up tomorrow and admits to obstructing justice and perjury in front of Congress and faces jail, or it's more of the same, tired, long, never-ending story drug out by the Liberal media to try to undermine our Presidency.

Unfortunately for Comey, he dissipated his credibility with both Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill during the FBI probe into Hillary Clinton. He outraged Democrats by publicly characterizing the conclusions of the investigation, and angered Republicans by not pursuing a prosecution over the secret email system and the serial mishandling of classified data. Having already done that once, Comey did it all over again just days before the election in a move which Democrats insist cost them the presidential election. And just before he was fired, Comey defended all of those actions, leading some Democrats in Congress to call for his termination.

Whether any of it moves the needle on these controversies remains to be seen, but given the damage done to Comey before this, don't expect to hear much that will stick.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/07/t...ny-that-trump-pressured-them-on-russia-probe/

Top Intel Community Officials Deny That Trump Pressured Them On Russia Probe

The directors of the Office of National Intelligence and the National Security Agency testified on Wednesday that they have not been pressured by President Trump on the ongoing Russia investigation, undercutting recent reports that they were.

Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, and Adm. Mike Rogers, the director of NSA, largely declined to discuss details about their interactions with Trump when pressed on the matter during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.

According to news reports published last month, Trump asked both Coats and Rogers to rebut stories that Trump was under investigation as part of the Russia probe.

Both Coats and Rogers reportedly felt uncomfortable with the requests from Trump.

But when asked about those interactions on Wednesday, both declined to discuss their specific conversations with Trump while stating that they have never felt pressure from the White House.

“In the three-plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything that I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate. And to the best of my collection … I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so,” Rogers told Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the vice chairman of the Senate panel.

“Did the president … ask you in any way, shape or form to back off or downplay the Russia investigation?” Warner asked.

Rogers said that he would not discuss specifics of conversations he had with Trump, but added: “I stand by the comment I just made, sir.”

Coats, a former Indiana senator who was appointed by Trump, also denied ever being pressured to downplay the Russia investigation or any other.

On Tuesday, The Washington Post reported that Coats told associates on March 22 that Trump asked him to intervene with former FBI Director James Comey to push back against the Russia investigation.

“In my time of service … I have never been pressured, I have never felt pressure, to intervene or interfere in any way, with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relationship to an ongoing investigation,” Coats testified Wednesday.

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

Ahhh, the WashPo, that bastion of fair and balanced reporting.

 

[Tibs]

The Comey hearing won't be till tomorrow, and lord only knows what the Mueller special prosecutor investigation will uncover. But from Comey's released written statement today, there are roughly eight items that can be used in an obstruction case against Trump. Again, this is presumably just a small slice of what Mueller will be looking at.

Here’s the testimony Comey will give tomorrow. It covers the period when Comey is director of the FBI, Trump is president, and, as Trump knows, Comey is in charge of an investigation into possible collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russian operatives.

As I count them, Comey relates 8 instances that could be used as evidence of Trump's intent to obstruct justice:

1. A January 27 dinner in the White House to which Trump has invited Comey. It's one-on-one between Comey and Trump. Comey senses it as a kind of job interview, even though Comey is already director of the FBI with a 10-year appointment. Trump tells Comey “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty,” to which Comey does not respond. At the end of the dinner, Trump tells Comey “I need loyalty.” Comey replies, “You will always get honesty from me.” Trump pauses and then says “That’s what I want, honest loyalty.” Comey pauses, and says, “You will get that from me.”

2. A February 14 meeting in the Oval Office the day after Michael Flynn resigns. Trump has told others to leave, and he is alone with Comey. Trump tells Comey “I want to talk about Mike Flynn.” Trump then says Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong in speaking with the Russians. “He is a good guy and has been through a lot,” adding “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” Comey replies only that “he is a good guy.” Come does not say he will “let this go.”

3. A March 30 phone call from Trump to Comey at the FBI, in which Trump describes the Russia investigation as “a cloud” impairing his ability to act on behalf of the country, and asks Comey "what we can do to lift the cloud.”

4. During that same phone call, Trump asks Comey why there had been a congressional hearing about Russia the previous week – at which Comey had, as the Department of Justice directed, confirmed the investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign.

5. During the same call, Comey reminds Trump that the FBI is not now investigating him personally, at which point Trump repeatedly says “We need to get that fact out.” At end of the call, Trump again says he hopes Comey will find a way to get it out that the FBI is not investigating Trump.

6. During the same call, Trump abruptly turns the conversation to FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, saying he hadn’t brought up “the McCabe thing” because Comey had said McCabe was honorable, even though McCabe’s wife had made a campaign donation to Terry McAuliffe’s campaign, and McAuliffe was close to the Clintons.

7. An April 11 phone call from Trump to Comey, in which Trump asks Comey what Comey had done about Trump’s request that he “get out” word that Trump is not personally under investigation. Trump says the investigation is getting in the way of his ability to do his job. Comey suggests Trump deal with the Department of Justice.

8. Trump agrees to go through the Department of Justice, telling Comey it is “because I have been very loyal to you, very loyal; we had that thing you know.” Comey does not reply or ask Trump what he means by “that thing.”

On May 9, Trump fires Comey.

Even if none of the 8 instances conclusively proves obstruction of justice, together they show a clear pattern.

This doesn't even include Trump's interview with Lester Holt on NBC and Trump's meeting with Russian officials in the Oval Office -- when in both instances he connects his firing of Comey with the Russian investigation.

https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/1592278954118028

Comey full written statement
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-jcomey-060817.pdf

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Wow Obamas boy said something bad about the POTUS. Big shocker.

Still nothing but same old ****.

Obama saying bad things about Trump? We're in a changing world where in the past former Presidents ride off into the sunset, term over, hand over the reigns. Not the "King" who feels he must rule forever.

Obama delivers a new veiled slap at Trump as he warns – in Canada – that America could descend into 'extreme nationalism and xenophobia and the politics of us-versus-them'

Former U.S. president Barack Obama delivered an extended, vicious coded critique of his successor Donald Trump on Tuesday in Canada, speaking to an audience of 6,000 fans at an event hosted by the Montreal Board of Trade.

He bashed the rise of 'extreme nationalism and xenophobia and the politics of "us-versus-them",' a clear slap at Trump in the preferred language of American liberals.

'In times of disruption we may go backward instead of forward,' he warned. 'We're going to have to replace fear with hope.'

Obama drew laughter with a thinly veiled kick at the Trump administration's famous embrace of 'alternative facts,' saying that America in the less than 20 weeks since he left office has suddenly devolved into a place 'where we don't just have disagreements based on our opinions, but now people are just disagreeing on facts.'

'And we're in an environment where we are only accepting information that fits our opinions, instead of basing our opinions on the facts that we receive. And evidence and reason and logic.
Obama claimed that in an age when some world leaders are willing to 'violate our principals because of fear and uncertainty,' progress – measured by the work of multinational coalitions and institutions' can't continue.

'We have to sustain our alliances. We have to help other countries with their own development,' he said, without explicitly mentioning Trump's 'America First' philosophy.

The alternative, Obama suggested, would see anti-democratic forces swooping in to fill the voids left by globalist cooperation.

He said the result could be 'intolerance and tribalism and organizing ourselves along ethnic lines.'

'The disruptions that are happening globally are going to continue to accelerate,' Obama warned. 'And what's more, in an age of instance information, where TV and Twitter can feed us a steady stream of bad news – and sometimes fake news – it can seem like the international order that we've created is being constantly tested, and that the center may not hold.'

'And in some cases that leads people to search for certainty and control, and they can call for isolationism or nationalism, or they can consider rolling back the rights of others, or simply they can try to retreat and suggest that we have no obligations beyond our borders, or beyond our communities, beyond our tribe.

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

Does anyone else want to take the time to tear up this hypocrisy? I simply don't have enough time left today to dissect his lies and gibberish.

 

[Tibs]

Wow Obamas boy said something bad about the POTUS. Big shocker. Still nothing but same old ****.

Obama's boy?

James Clapper

Military service
Service/branch: United States Air Force
Years of service: 1963–1995
Rank: Lieutenant general
Battles/wars: Vietnam War
Awards: Legion of Merit(3), Bronze Star(2), Air Medal (2)

Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency
In office: November 1991 – August 1995
President: George H. W. Bush / Bill Clinton

Director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
In office: September 2001 – June 2006
President: George W. Bush

Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence
In office: April 15, 2007 – June 5, 2010
President: George W. Bush / Barack Obama

4th Director of National Intelligence
In office: August 9, 2010 – January 20, 2017
President: Barack Obama

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

The Comey hearing won't be till tomorrow, and lord only knows what the Mueller special prosecutor investigation will uncover. But from Comey's released written statement today, there are roughly eight items that can be used in an obstruction case against Trump. Again, this is presumably just a small slice of what Mueller will be looking at.


https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/1592278954118028

Comey full written statement
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-jcomey-060817.pdf

Again, selective outrage. Bill Clinton boarded a plane with Loretta Lynch to ask her not to prosecute Hillary for her email felonies, understanding how badly this would damage her election chances.

"If" a Republican asked the head of an agency not to pursue an investigation or prosecute, hell must rain down. If a Democrat asks the Attorney General not to pursue an investigation, well, that's just ok.

Just one of many examples of the double standard that exists across party lines and throughout the media.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Obama's boy?

He was appointed by Obama, but did serve under multiple administrations.

 

[Spike]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


Wrist slashing time for the Libs!


Comey relief buoys Wall Street; energy falls with crude

U.S. stocks rose on Wednesday despite a sharp decline in energy shares after written testimony from former FBI director James Comey did not add major revelations about an investigation into Russian meddling with last year's U.S. presidential election.

Comey, who was fired by Trump last month, wrote that U.S. President Donald Trump asked him to drop an investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

But the details of Comey's testimony, expected to be delivered Thursday to a Senate Committee, appeared to be priced into the stock market.

Investors were concerned that any additional revelation could dampen already flagging momentum for Trump's agenda of lower taxes and lax regulations.

Bets that Trump can implement his agenda are partly behind a rally that has taken stock indexes to record highs.

"They were hoping that there wasn’t going to be anything in there that was more inflammatory," said Peter Costa, president of trading firm Empire Executions.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks-idUSKBN18Y1GG?il=0

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

2 scoops?

 

[ark steel]

We'll find out sooner than later. And remember, Comey's testimony tmrw is not one and the same as the Mueller inquiry. So Comey may be limited by what he can say in a public hearing, and not be as constricted in answering to Mueller behind closed doors. Comey can also strike a deal with the prosecutors in exchange for his testimony, if it gets to that.

Mueller may can give him immunity as it relates to his investigation, but if he lies in Congressional testimony, I don't think he can give immunity for that.

If it is true that he already testified, right before he was fired, that he hadn't been pressured, and now testifies he was, which was the perjury before Congress? If he gets right up to the edge of saying he was pressured without contradicting prior testimony, and then tells Muller he was pressured, then he committed perjury before Congress twice. Since, as you say, the Congressional Testimony is separate from the Mueller investigation, how can Mueller grant immunity to the perjury before Congress?

 

[Tibs]

Again, selective outrage. Bill Clinton...Loretta Lynch...Hillary...email felonies...Democrat

Will there ever be a point in time when you address current events without constantly dipping into the past, always reflecting on how things were with previous politicians and previous adminstrations? It's like watching a football game and after every play, you make some sentimental connection to the past. "That was a sweet run, reminds me of Earl Campbell." Wow, nice interception, like the one Deon Sanders picked off against the Bucs" "Great 4th quarter comeback, almost as good as the one in '78". I realize it's painful, but it may be time to start living in the here and the now and begin addressing these events on their own merit. Just a suggestion.

 

[ark steel]

He was appointed by Obama, but did serve under multiple administrations.

Probably more correct to say "Establisment boy"?

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Will there ever be a point in time when you address current events without constantly dipping into the past, always reflecting on how things were with previous politicians and previous adminstrations?

Explain why precedent isn't important. It's established in Law. It's established in other cultural norms. Why do you support different rules based upon party affiliation?

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Probably more correct to say "Establisment boy"?

Or Deep State

 

[Roy92040]

The media is already having fun with this. I turned on the local news here at noon and they had some yay whos rapping on about what they think he'll say. All I got out of it was the mainstreamers will be jumping out of windows if this is no big thingy.

 

[Tibs]

Explain why precedent isn't important.

Theoretically it is important and can be brought up from time to time to make a point. But you do realize literally every single response of yours to allegations against Trump has to do with Hillary, Obama or the Dems? It's a little eerie, frankly, that you're constantly trying to change the subject. I'm sure you have your reasons to constantly deflect, deflect, deflect.

 

[Spike]

What's this?


Tibs is gonna need another troll rock to hide under for a year!



Comey confirms — contrary to media reports — that he told Trump that Trump was not personally under investigation.

That’s a pretty big concession considering speculation that Trump himself was under investigation.

Comey also paints a picture of Trump trying to put in a good word for Michael Flynn, but there is no suggestion that anything rising to the level of obstruction of justice was said. Also, Comey made clear that those comments did not relate to the general investigation of Russian interference in the election.

The official statement from James Comey, to be read during the hearing tomorrow, has bombshells — but they are helpful to Donald Trump.

Comey confirmed — three times in the statement — that he told Trump he was not under investigation. The fact of three such statements was in Trump’s termination letter of Comey, but the media discounted it and cited anonymous sources denying it.

January 6

“In that context, prior to the January 6 meeting, I discussed with the FBI’s leadership team whether I should be prepared to assure President-Elect Trump that we were not investigating him personally. That was true; we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him. We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted. During our one-on-one meeting at Trump Tower, based on President Elect Trump’s reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, I offered that assurance.”

January 27

“During the dinner, the President returned to the salacious material I had briefed him about on January 6, and, as he had done previously, expressed his disgust for the allegations and strongly denied them. He said he was considering ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn’t happen. I replied that he should give that careful thought because it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally, which we weren’t, and because it was very difficult to prove a negative. He said he would think about it and asked me to think about it.”

March 30

“I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating President Trump. I reminded him I had previously told him that. He repeatedly told me, “We need to get that fact out"

Comey Full Statement:

https://www.scribd.com/document/350...-to-Senate-Intelligence-Committee-June-8-2017

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Theoretically it is important and can be brought up from time to time to make a point. But you do realize literally every single response of yours to allegations against Trump has to do with Hillary, Obama or the Dems? It's a little eerie, frankly, that you're constantly trying to change the subject. I'm sure you have your reasons to constantly deflect, deflect, deflect.

Every reiteration of it harkens back to the beginning of this debate around selective outrage.

You've posted likely 387 times anything and everything you can find about Trump and Russia. Saying things about how "insane" these allegations are. How wrong and disturbing these "allegations" are to you.

Posts in the past by Tibs about Clinton proven dealings with Russia showing your outrage: 0

I will continue to bring it up to remind you of your lack of credibility on this issue. Your selective outrage is just that. You say you care about America. But the reality is you care about Party and platform. If you truly cared about America, and dealings that supposedly Trump has engaged in (supposedly, highly emphasized... considering Comey said again today Trump is not a part of the investigation and feels vindicated), you would have been equally outraged by not one, but all of the Clinton dealings with Russia. You would have been equally outraged that Bill Clinton circumvented what should have been a criminal investigation into Hillary. Zero outrage from you. None.

You can't spin this Tibs. You don't care about the issue of an elected official breaking these dire rules. You care only when Republican officials break these rules.

And I will remind you of it as long as I can type.

 

[Tibs]

I will continue to bring it up to remind you of your lack of credibility on this issue. And I will remind you of it as long as I can type.

Whatever empowers you and makes you feel like you have a leg up. Knock yourself out, man.

 

[Spike]

2 scoops!

 

[Tibs]

Comey knows exactly what he's doing, releasing his written statement ahead of time. I hope they've stocked xtra oxygen tanks in the WH for the next 72 or so hours, Trump will surely be hyperventilating.

James Comey wanted his written testimony out there early—and with good reason

There's nothing normal about releasing the written testimony of a public figure like former FBI director James Comey 24 hours in advance of his appearance at a Congressional hearing. But James Comey wanted it that way.

This isn't Comey's first tussle with an executive branch nor is he a neophyte in dealing with the current commander in chief. Indeed, Comey notes in his testimony that after having two totally unremarkable interactions with Barack Obama during his entire presidency, he's already engaged in "nine one-on-one conversations with President Trump in four months"—each one more cringeworthy than the last.

So Comey knows a thing or two about how Donald Trump operates and he apparently wanted to deliver a pre-emptive strike of his own before testifying Thursday. Why exactly isn't clear. But it's easy enough to imagine.

First, it blocks Trump from pulling some last-minute stunt like trying to invoke executive privilege—it's all out there now and it's all attributable. Second, it serves as a buffer against the pathetic smear campaign Trump's henchman are already mounting against Comey. If you haven't seen this attempt to defile an unelected public official by a pro-Trump group in advance of his testimony, it's worth a look.

Which leads to the question: Just how desperate is Trump? Well, pretty damn desperate—like a rat cornered behind a dumpster by a herd of raccoons. The Washington Post's Phil Rucker told MSNBC Wednesday that Trump's "ready to go to war."

As Rucker and his colleagues reported:

Alone in the White House in recent days, President Trump — frustrated and defiant — has been spoiling for a fight, according to his confidants and associates.

Glued even more than usual to the cable news shows that blare from the televisions in his private living quarters, or from the 60-inch flat screen he had installed in his cramped study off the Oval Office, he has fumed about “fake news.” Trump has seethed as his agenda has stalled in Congress and the courts. He has chafed against the pleas for caution from his lawyers and political advisers, tweeting whatever he wants, whenever he wants.

The president may be seething, but he also barely has an army inside the White House to go to war with. The "war room" idea floated a week ago died just as soon as White House aides realized it would have to be staffed. Apparently, no one's super excited about jumping into that role. Even the RNC had trouble finding talking heads.

The Republican National Committee has lined up a roster of surrogates to appear on conservative news stations nationwide to defend Trump. But a list the RNC distributed on Tuesday could hardly be described as star-studded: The names include Bob Paduchik, an RNC co-chair who worked on Trump’s Ohio campaign; Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi (R); and Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge (R).

What Trump’s down to then is him and his thumbs vs. Comey's highly detailed 7-page written testimony and the tidbits he'll add tomorrow during his sworn testimony.