cbtstorm

here they go again getting their hopes up based on polls. 

worked out so well in 2016. 

Trumps victory exposed that media scam. polls????

11 hours ago, heybruce said:

There was legal surveillance of a Trump campaign staffer who had come to the attention of the intelligence services because of shady Russian dealings and there was legal paid for opposition research.

thats the claim , we will find out in due time if that holds up to scrutiny.

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

 

Actually I did bring up the SS and make a Barr/Himmler comparison when addressing another gloating post about how Trump can use the Justice department as a weapon against his enemies.

thank you and I was just taking it as humor. so no objections to your colorful language.

10 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Not at all surprised that you try a cheap trick by mentioning Nazi's when heybruce said no such thing. And your belief that a possible target of an investigation should be notified is truly bizarre. And what's even more bizarre is the fact that all you calumniators  of the FBI have no explanation for why news of this investigation didn't leak before the election.

You've got nothing.

and youve got what? collusion? obstruction? give me a break.

There was some spying on an oppostion campaign under false pretense,of russia collusion using intel paid for by dnc fusion gps that was never verified before applying for fisa warrants. 

7 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Not at all surprised that you try a cheap trick by mentioning Nazi's when heybruce said no such thing. And your belief that a possible target of an investigation should be notified is truly bizarre. And what's even more bizarre is the fact that all you calumniators  of the FBI have no explanation for why news of this investigation didn't leak before the election.

You've got nothing.

he did say ss and himller earlier , go look it up.

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

No basis in reality, so I assume you got it from your pretend news sources.

Barr will straighten out the obstruction definition. his call, not Muellers.

or take it to supremecourt and sort that out.

But the origins of the investigations will be investigated. that is reality.

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You don't think attempting to fire Mueller was an attempt to obstruct the investigation?

well within the presidents right to fire Mueller but he didnt.

didnt even claim executive privilege one time for anything Mueller asked for.

what good would firing Mueller do anyway, to replace him with another prosecutor?

absurd

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

One of the two goals of the investigation was Russian interference in the 2016 election.  It accomplished that.  Anyone who doesn't think that should have been investigated is either a traitor or Russian troll.

surprised you didn't say ss,or himmler like earlier.

The goal of the investigation was to get  Trump, which is why he was not notified when the illegal surveillance started. 

9 minutes ago, usviphotography said:

Because Mueller adopted the extreme minority position (and in truth, batshyt crazy position) that mere objection to his investigation could constitute "obstruction". When Barr was brought in he in fact called Mueller out on this in private discussions and asked if Mueller had any evidence of real obstruction, which Mueller couldn't produce. There is no allegation of actual obstruction in the report. It is just a crackpot interpretation of "obstruction" that if actually adopted by the legal system, would mean that the current Democratic Leadership of the House are all committing obstruction against Barr himself! Fortunately for them, and for all of us, Barr believes in the traditional definition of obstruction and not Mueller's crazy take. 

obstruction statue is quite small.

interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) is where Barr and Mueller differ.

c) Whoever corruptly—

(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or

(2) otherwise obstructs, influences or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so [is guilty of the crime of obstruction]. (Emphasis added)

Barr - no official proceeding was impeded or influenced and no attempts were shown to impede any official proceedings.

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

The fact is the evidence is against you. The Mueller report clearly stated it did not exonerate Trump of obstruction of justice.

the investigation itself is a fraud from the get go.

of you dont like my sources, you'll just find out a little late. no worries

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

The sources you choose to back up your arguments is impeachment enough of them.

itd be the same argument even from another domain name.

impeachment! atleast you have a sense of humour.

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No please do tell us where you are getting your misinformed nonsense from?

easy just take off your 2016 tds filled spectacles, you'll see it clearly. turn off msnbs or whatever rag you read. think about it from opposing view point 

and evaluate your position and it's lack of accomplishment to date.

Eitherway tables have turned. try keeping up.

I tried to find an overview for ya, I think this will suffice but only as an intro.

https://thenationalsentinel.com/2019/05/17/treason-docs-prove-deep-state-hacks-obama-comey-brennan-and-clapper-aided-russian-efforts-to-divide-americans-with-spygate/

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Please tell us where you get this hogwash from?

since you know a sitting president cannot be indicted and collusion does not equal to crime, why would you spend 2 years investigating if not to entrap for an obstruction charge. the goal along. 

prosecutors are known for doing this. most masic method, find a reason to investigate, you'll find something or another and if not go for obstruction.

game over, next we find out how this all got constructed. 

2 minutes ago, Tug said:

Guess this( ?) Can’t get by the not indicting a sitting potus lol

if ya knew that going in, then the investigation was all about entrapping for an obstruction charge for hopes at impeachment.

clever but an utter failure.

11 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

The Russian conspiracy is not the issue in question. It's about obstruction of justice.

so the  false narrative was created and investigated with the help of some fraudulently obtained fisa warrants so that some obstruction claims can be made when the original story doesnt quite pan out.  ok

now its going to back fire on all the perpetrators.

2 minutes ago, Tug said:

Really really simple Donald’s mo is to drag everything out for years and years hoping it will lose importantance it’s his mo some day hopefully soon he will trade the golden toilet for a stainless steel one with a sink attached if you catch my drift

oh I thought the democrats are trying to drag this russian collusion conspiracy to 2020.

what exactly would land Trump in prison? do you have some secret info? something Muellers team missed? 

14 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The release to the public of more physical evidence is not ‘moving the goal posts’.

so we are still on about russian collusion  by trump team? or can we put that to rest now?

If Mueller had something  illegal he would have moved on it and filed charges.

On 5/17/2019 at 1:08 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

Barr is in a bit of fix now.

 

He has been ordered by Judge Sullivan to release all redacted portions of the Mueller report that relate to Flynn.

 

Apart from seeing what was redacted we will also get to see if the reason Barr gave for those redactions is legitimate.

 

Those who attempted to obstruct, justice are about to be exposed, one of whom is reportedly a member of Congress.

 

Orifice twitching time is upon them.

oh my " orifices twitiching" and all

I must say I am impressed how some continue to hang on with the delusional hopes of getting Trump by moving the goal posts to some phone call from some congressman to Flynn.  

is this the beginning of the end again? ???? 

interesting interview ,Stephen Moore of the Heritage Foundation, the guy who helped craft Trumps econ policy.

also Steve Bannon,on cnbc recently

10 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Straight down the middle is where America finds itself at present. Mired in mediocrity, yet the budget always seems to disappear while racking up ever more debt for no discernable benefit.

 

Joe's a Trojan Horse. He never was a good politician, always choosing to be on the wrong side and whenever he misspeaks, which is often, you have to wonder if that was what he really meant and he forgot his scripted lines.

 

I'm really sorry for him, about some of the personal tragedies he's suffered, but sympathy is no no reason to vote for someone as inept as he is, who has shown himself to solely in service to corporate interests. Suffering Trump will have all been for nothing if Joe Biden is the result.

4 hours ago, Tug said:

Well I wonder how mr Biden will use the news of crazy Rudy going to Ukraine to try to attack joes dead son what a bunch of sleaze bags

or the news of how how he is not going.

Hunter Biden is still alive.

and has some serious issues in Ukraine that are being investigated by new admin there.  

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

 

Great example of the kind of alt right toxic backlash a diverse democratic ticket would expect.

 

Yes Chasten would be the First Gentleman. 

 

The couple made the cover of TIME.

 

http://time.com/longform/pete-buttigieg-2020/

toxic is the left seeing the last three years. consistent all consumed with vilifying.not much diversity in that intolerance theyve shown.

But whats funny is the left havent yet decided if they are the party of Goldman sachs or Stalin.