At 13:00 forward. After the Democrats threw a fit about the question of how many interviews occurred between a certain set of dates and Strzok stated he was directed not to answer. It's all a good look by he and the FBI. Definitely breeds faith an what is supposed to be an impartial institution of justice. Kind of reminds of....that is of course if he had self-respect to admit he would be incriminating himself and not able to hide behind FBI lawyers: Though, for some reason, I feel like he, Bruce Ohr & spouse, and Lisa Page will have their day.
You said Congressional Republicans. So you believe that the Democrats acquitted themselves admirably? You believe Strzok to be an upright citizen?
I believe the Democrats and Strzok knew the hearing to be a farce. Some of the Democrats were content to make parliamentary inquiries all day long demonstrating how bullshit the Republicans were, others grandstanded a bit because why the fuck not. Strzok came across as a professional who likes to talk shit on politicians with his sidepiece off the clock.
I guess this is just a 50/50 thing. You clearly fall on the left side of the spectrum of politics and that view makes sense. The other 50% of the country holds a different view of things.
I'm honestly not that liberal in my actual policy preferences, I just hate Republicans for being utterly worthless and actively hostile to most everything that makes modern society function.
Friendly reminder that Bill was impeached for lying about jizzing on curtains basically. What got Bill impeached is now considered “locker room talk” for trump. And my in-laws think I’m wrong for my stance that there should be an IQ-type test before you can vote!
I think it was stupid too, but he was impeached for committing perjury. I'm getting really sick of this. Bill Clinton was accused of rape, and unlike that fucktarded conspiracy theory where Trump raped a 12 year old he was probably guilty of it. Bill's presidency is long past, but it is really ridiculous to just compare the Lewinsky scandal to the "Grab 'em by the pussy" scandal and then pretend none of the other shit surrounding Bill happened. Anyway, as for Trump, I couldn't give less of a shit about the bickering. Is this investigation actually going somewhere? Because that's what is supposed to matter. It seems like every time I try to tune in to see where it's at they're just accusing each other of stupid shit. Like, are we at an investigation of the investigation of the investigation, or what the fuck is going on? Jesus Christ this government sucks.
If you're referring to the Mueller investigation, yes it is going somewhere. It is proceeding quickly and professionally, but because of its aforementioned "professional" nature, it doesn't tout itself as it goes. If you're referring to the various Republican "investigations" of anything they think they can discredit in an effort to obstruct the Mueller probe, or political consequences more broadly, no, they are not going anywhere, nor were they ever intended to. They exist purely for partisan political purposes, to the detriment of the country.
Yeah, no shit. 2 years for the Benghazi email investigation that resulted in absolutely nothing, and yet so far Mueller has a number of indictments, guilty pleas, and the President's Campaign Manager in jail. Never mind that a bipartisan House committee voted unanimously that there is real shit there and that the investigation should continue. Fucking rights it's "going somewhere".
Oh you poor naive child. The two year investigation to which you refer only happened after the Republicans were unsatisfied with the internal FBI investigation, independent State Department investigation, two Democrat-controlled Senate investigations, and five Republican-controlled House investigations, which all failed to declare Hillary Clinton a witch. All told the Republicans spent four years investigating Benghazi, found nothing, and campaigned on it anyway. That was the Senate, where the committee is controlled by Richard Burr (an American), not the House, where the committee is controlled by Devin Nunes (wherever the fuck his loyalties lie).
I'm legitimately asking because there's so many "bombshells" that are actually nothing and so many others that might be something, but are suddenly not discussed again it's hard to keep up. Of course I know about Manafort, etc but is this all leading back to Trump or not? As far as I know (and bear with me if I'm missing something) all of the indictment stuff points to a lot of crimes, but thus far isn't actually related to the Trump campaign beyond "at some point this person was involved with the Trump campaign". I'm not saying that it's irrelevant, it's not, but do they actually have something on the Trump campaign itself at this point or no?
It's important to keep in mind that almost everything we know about the Special Counsel comes from people that have been questioned or subpoenaed by the Counsel trying to guess at what the bigger picture is based on what they were asked about. It's like that parable of the blind men and the elephant. We won't know the whole picture until Mueller finalizes his report, so as to your question about whether it leads back to Trump, the answer is "maybe." As far as guessing what will come out of the Special Counsel, there are certain things I feel comfortable saying are more likely than others based on what we know now. It's almost certain that the Counsel will find that Trump committed obstruction of justice, because you don't need subpoena power to see that, he's been doing it brazenly and openly for months. It seems pretty clear that there were people on his campaign that were open to colluding with the Russians, and that likely means Conspiracy Against the United States charges for some folk. I think it's likely Trump was aware of those overtures; whether Mueller can prove it in a court of law I'm not sure. Whether the campaign explicitly offered anything in return, I don't know. I can't imagine everything Cambridge Analytica did was above board given what we know about their activities in other parts of the world, but how deep that rabbit hole goes is again an unknown. Then there's fun "other" box, of things that Mueller may just have stumbled upon in the course of his investigation. Evidence of violating the Foreing Corrupt Practices Act? Sure, that's easily possible. Money laundering, tax evasion, other financial crimes? I'd be shocked if they weren't there, although I don't know how aggressively Mueller looked for them.
Eh the money laundering one will be shocking if that comes up. It’s really difficult to prove a lot of the time. SCOTUS ruled in 2008 that money moving off-shore is not enough to constitute probably cause for money laundering.
You guys... Hillary’s emails just dropped another set of indictments. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...lligence-officers-hacking-dnc-clinton-n891236
His son Jacob, that other one Ben Shapiro and the preschooler Charlie Kirk, all a bunch of modern day Rasputins.
A point well taken from a recent article: Regardless of what the Trump campaign did or did not do during the election, the fact remains that while in office Trump has knowingly and aggressively abetted the Russians in continuing their attacks against the United States, and none of that is in question. It has all occurred in the open.