Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Partially tied to Mueller having resigned his membership at Trump National previously.

Was the pretext Trump wanted to use to fire Mueller.

I agree with Trump that a conflict of interest -- or even the appearance of one -- should disqualify a person from a position. /s

I'm sure Trump's lawyers could create the appearance of a conflict of interest for King Tut if they wanted to.

John Dowd? Not likely.

And Sekulow? Hahahahahahaha ...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Partially tied to Mueller having resigned his membership at Trump National previously.

Was the pretext Trump wanted to use to fire Mueller.

I agree with Trump that a conflict of interest -- or even the appearance of one -- should disqualify a person from a position. /s

I'm sure Trump's lawyers could create the appearance of a conflict of interest for King Tut if they wanted to.

John Dowd? Not likely.

Trump is a coward at heart. There’s no way he’s sitting to be interviewed by Mueller. He’s prepared to refuse to comply with a subpoena because ... you know ... witch hunt ... deep state ... secret society ... Hillary ... yadda yadda. McGahn and Cobb likely know this and aren’t willing to join Dowd and Kellyanne in going down with the Trumptanic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Partially tied to Mueller having resigned his membership at Trump National previously.

Was the pretext Trump wanted to use to fire Mueller.

I agree with Trump that a conflict of interest -- or even the appearance of one -- should disqualify a person from a position. /s

I'm sure Trump's lawyers could create the appearance of a conflict of interest for King Tut if they wanted to.

Anonymous wrote:McGahn, Priebus and Bannon all share the same defense counsel. Why? They are all getting immunity in exchange for testimony. And they just kneecapped Cheetolini.

Certainly it says that their legal interests are not in conflict.

Anonymous wrote:Many people are saying that Trump should get the death penalty. Word is that the Central Park 5 are taking out a full page ad in the NYT.

OMG, seriously? The death penalty? HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Many people are saying that Trump should get the death penalty. Word is that the Central Park 5 are taking out a full page ad in the NYT.

Anonymous wrote:Put the order in but backed off when White House Counsel threatened to quit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/us/politics/trump-mueller-special-counsel-russia.html?action=Click&contentCollection=BreakingNews&contentID=66419382&pgtype=Homepage

Lordy, I hope there are tapes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hannity faceplants on the issue:

Sean Hannity: The New York Times is trying to distract you. They say Trump tried to fire Mueller, but our sources aren’t confirming that!

[Minutes Later]

Sean Hannity: Alright, yeah, maybe our sources confirm Trump wanted to fire Mueller. But so what? That’s his right. Anywho...

They are indeed also distracting. Did the New York Times write anything about the new texts about how the FBI was going to go soft on Clinton because she would probably be the next President and take it out on them?

The FBI, via Comey, in an unusual step, publicly explained what they were doing with respect to Clinton.

They were totally silent, with no leaks, about what they were doing with the other presidential candidate, who was also under investigation at the time. Would you have preferred Comey to make a statement about Trump, too?

I'm sorry, what? Are you aware of the new information?

Give it up. Within days or weeks, what's left of the GOP will realize the game is over. The sooner you accept it, the better.

OK

McGahn, Priebus and Bannon all share the same defense counsel. Why? They are all getting immunity in exchange for testimony. And they just kneecapped Cheetolini.

Anonymous wrote:Hannity faceplants on the issue:

Sean Hannity: The New York Times is trying to distract you. They say Trump tried to fire Mueller, but our sources aren’t confirming that!

[Minutes Later]

Sean Hannity: Alright, yeah, maybe our sources confirm Trump wanted to fire Mueller. But so what? That’s his right. Anywho...

Video of this SO funny.
https://www.facebook.com/Mediamatters/videos/10155269313391167/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Partially tied to Mueller having resigned his membership at Trump National previously.

Was the pretext Trump wanted to use to fire Mueller.

I agree with Trump that a conflict of interest -- or even the appearance of one -- should disqualify a person from a position. /s

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hannity faceplants on the issue:

Sean Hannity: The New York Times is trying to distract you. They say Trump tried to fire Mueller, but our sources aren’t confirming that!

[Minutes Later]

Sean Hannity: Alright, yeah, maybe our sources confirm Trump wanted to fire Mueller. But so what? That’s his right. Anywho...

They are indeed also distracting. Did the New York Times write anything about the new texts about how the FBI was going to go soft on Clinton because she would probably be the next President and take it out on them?

The FBI, via Comey, in an unusual step, publicly explained what they were doing with respect to Clinton.

They were totally silent, with no leaks, about what they were doing with the other presidential candidate, who was also under investigation at the time. Would you have preferred Comey to make a statement about Trump, too?

I'm sorry, what? Are you aware of the new information?

Give it up. Within days or weeks, what's left of the GOP will realize the game is over. The sooner you accept it, the better.

Preibus and Bannon.

Good stuff

Trump is getting warmed up. He’s gonna try to clean house in the name of fighting back against corruption. Sessions. Rosenstein. Wray. McCabe.