Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So Obama and his cronies were essentially wiretapping the campaign of a political opponent?

Imagine that. Anyone surprised?

Nope. Isn't this what Trump was saying all along? Looks like he was correct. Stupid liberals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because there isn't anything Mr. Mueller has shared with you doesn't mean it isn't there. After all, after many years of investigating the Whitewater investment, the Special Prosector got Clinton on perjury around a blowjob.

Perjury* after diddling the 20yo intern. But these are just minor details...

Yes she was an intern. However, she was 22 and old enough to smoke, drink, join the military, and have consensual sex. Not really a minor detail.

Anonymous wrote:After all these months, no evidence implicating Trump, drop it. Mueller, at this point in time, is looking to milk the gravy train for him and his staff as long as he can. To stretch this "investigation" this long, is beyond ludicrous.

You all realize the "all star team" is going to rack up 100mm in legal fees, yes? We're paying for it. Going to buy all these parasitic lawyers new Range Rovers, exurb estates, vacation homes and sail boats.

For what, to get some sketchy K street hack and a retired General on tax evasion? Imbeciles.

Pocket change. We spent more money on Travel-gate, Lewinsky-gate, Bengazi-gate, whitewater-gate, email-gate. And with millions (a lot more than your 100mil) spent, all we got was a philandering president who lied under oath about having sex with a consenting adult. I would think that you thought investigating treason would be worth a little more.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's your basis for this belief? Do you have knowledge of the evidence?

It's what lawyers do. They don't create, they posture and steal. They want to financially wipe out anyone associated with Trump, while enriching each other on both ends of the deal.

Boris, Boris. Drink your vodka and go to bed.

Anyone want to explain why the Drudge Report linked to Russian "news" sites several hundred times over the 15-16 election cycle?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's your basis for this belief? Do you have knowledge of the evidence?

It's what lawyers do. They don't create, they posture and steal. They want to financially wipe out anyone associated with Trump, while enriching each other on both ends of the deal.

How is an attorney on a federal salary enriching themselves on either end of the deal? Do tell.

Anonymous wrote:I'm not going to carry water for someone as seedy as Manafort, but this is a political witchhunt enriching lawyer pals, while curating his nytimes obituary.

I'm all for actually draining the swamp of parasites like Manafort, but this is just an attempt to bankrupt via legal fees anyone who was associated with Trump's campaign.

If Muellers $1000/hour bulldogs went after Podesta, Cheryl Mills, etc. it wouldn't take them long to find something...

Mueller''s staff gave up $1,000/hr salaries to take government jobs in service to the country.

If you want to complain about the swamp, where is the outrage over Tom Price's $25,000 flight to Philadelphia at taxpayer expense?

My heart doesn't bleed for Trump campaign and administration staffers who are caught up in Trump's dealing with Russia.

If they have nothing to hide, they don't really need an attorney. Just tell the truth and move on.

The only people lawyering up are the ones who know what they have done and know they need to defend it.

Anonymous wrote:I'm not going to carry water for someone as seedy as Manafort, but this is a political witchhunt enriching lawyer pals, while curating his nytimes obituary.

I'm all for actually draining the swamp of parasites like Manafort, but this is just an attempt to bankrupt via legal fees anyone who was associated with Trump's campaign.

If Muellers $1000/hour bulldogs went after Podesta, Cheryl Mills, etc. it wouldn't take them long to find something...

GGGggaaaaaahhhhhh!!!!!

The special counsel and team are **federal** attorneys now. The USG does not pay $1000 an hour.

Let's stipulate that these folks are skilled enough to earn $1000/hour in private practice.

**They are not in private practice now.**

These attorneys are earning federal salaries for federal work. And federal salaries aren't anywhere *close* to $1000/hr.

Anonymous wrote:I'm not going to carry water for someone as seedy as Manafort, but this is a political witchhunt enriching lawyer pals, while curating his nytimes obituary.

I'm all for actually draining the swamp of parasites like Manafort, but this is just an attempt to bankrupt via legal fees anyone who was associated with Trump's campaign.

If Muellers $1000/hour bulldogs went after Podesta, Cheryl Mills, etc. it wouldn't take them long to find something...

Russia deliberately interfered with a US election. There are multiple reasons to suspect (though no public proof, as of now) that someone in the Trump campaign coordinated with them in some fashion. It seems important to get to the bottom of it.

And I see no evidence that either Mueller, or Comey before him, were not motivated by these concerns.

Anonymous wrote:
What's your basis for this belief? Do you have knowledge of the evidence?

It's what lawyers do. They don't create, they posture and steal. They want to financially wipe out anyone associated with Trump, while enriching each other on both ends of the deal.

Anonymous wrote:I'm not going to carry water for someone as seedy as Manafort, but this is a political witchhunt enriching lawyer pals, while curating his nytimes obituary.

I'm all for actually draining the swamp of parasites like Manafort, but this is just an attempt to bankrupt via legal fees anyone who was associated with Trump's campaign.

If Muellers $1000/hour bulldogs went after Podesta, Cheryl Mills, etc. it wouldn't take them long to find something...

What's your basis for this belief? Do you have knowledge of the evidence?

I'm not going to carry water for someone as seedy as Manafort, but this is a political witchhunt enriching lawyer pals, while curating his nytimes obituary.

I'm all for actually draining the swamp of parasites like Manafort, but this is just an attempt to bankrupt via legal fees anyone who was associated with Trump's campaign.

If Muellers $1000/hour bulldogs went after Podesta, Cheryl Mills, etc. it wouldn't take them long to find something...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do you mean when Obama modified EO 12333 less than 2 weeks before leaving office?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/politics/nsa-gets-more-latitude-to-share-intercepted-communications.html?mcubz=1

Yep, its Obama's fault!

In hindsight, it is likely that Obama did this specifically to allow the IC to collaborate on what they were seeing from Manafort, Page, Trump(s) and the others. But if you really want to blame anyone, blame W - the Patriot Act is the root of all of this.

But that doesn't absolve the Trump campaign from colluding with Russians and getting swept up in both domestic and foreign SIGINT.

Why stop at Dubya, blame it on Reagan as he started EO12333.

In reality, 44 did more to disrupt our Constitutional Republic in the last 6 months of office than any previous defeated party in the past. This crash and burn will impact us for years to come and history will look back unfavorable on 44.

Trash.

So your husband gets busted for being in a whorehouse that was under surveillance and you are getting mad at everyone else and excusing your husbands behavior.

That makes sense.

(sarcasm)

People do realize that all of the judges on the FISA court were picked by Chief Justice Roberts, right? He has absolute power about the court's picks and I think it's safe to assume that they share Roberts's ideological bent.

And yet, they still granted the warrants against Trump associates. The AG AND FBI director can ask for the FISA warrants, but they are ultimately granted by a group of fairly conservative justices.