"After being dismissed by President Trump, Comey leaked government memos to influence the investigation. Comey may have violated the law, but he accomplished his goal of getting his mentor Mueller appointed special counsel by Rosenstein.

Lol,  is somebody butthurt?

Mueller is making sure even if Trump tries to pardon somebody the states will be right behind Mueller with charges he can't pardon.  I don't know how much you gain by denying what is going on with the investigation.  I mean, remember how Ken Starr brought it all to a stained dress?  You can't stop this once it gets going, and you can thank yourselves. 

Mueller is making sure even if Trump tries to pardon somebody the states will be right behind Mueller with charges he can't pardon.

Give us an example of an offense which a President cannot pardon?

Your other statement seems to confirm that even you don't think there was collusion, but you want something to remove this President. Don't worry, we learned one thing from the dems via Bill Clinton- it takes two thirds of the Senate to convict on impeachment and you'll never get it!

an offense which a President cannot pardon?

is a defense of what

again ?

You need to read post #2

Give us an example of an offense which a President cannot pardon?

He can only pardon FEDERAL crimes.  The states are providing the backup crimes he can't pardon.

So you admit Trump needs to pardon, yet consistently defend the whole GOP green gang of gang green...

why ?

Thus far the four individuals who had some contact with the Trump campaign, however brief, have been charged exclusively with federal crimes:

George Papadopolous - Making false statements to the FBI

Mike Flynn - Making false statements to the FBI

Rick Gates - Making false statements to the FBI, conspiracy against the US, filing false tax returns, failure to report foreign bank accounts, bank fraud conspiracy & bank fraud

Paul Manafort - Conspiracy against the US, money laundering, unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false & misleading statements, assisting in the preparation of false tax returns, suscribing to false tax returns, filing a false amended tax return, failure to report foreign bank accounts, bank fraud conspiracy & bank fraud.

None of the above relate to Trump campaign collusion and all of the above pertain to federal offenses. Correct?

So you admit Trump needs to pardon,

Where did I say he has the need to pardon?

I only said he has that right

If I was Trump, however, as I've said before, I would pardon Manafort and Flynn the day after the Mueller investigation ends. Of course he cant do it if he is under impeachment, which some still dream of. I would also remove Rod Rosenstein on that day and replace him with Sarah Isgur Flores.   

Give us an example of an offense which a President cannot pardon?

He has no pardon power for state convictions.  So he cannot pardon anyone convicted in state courts.

Although that is what they say, we can see how many feet have trampled on the Constitution since its inception.  How did Bill Clinton either pardon or give commutation to  Roger Clinton?

You can't stop this once it gets going, and you can thank yourselves

It's had over a year to get going and all they have done is some indictments that have nothing to do with collusion or obstructing justice. Oh, and then there are those dozen or so Russians who will never get prosecuted. Because of the actions of some of his investigators, these proceedings have the odor of taint all over them. The best I can give for all this wasted time and money is a D-.

Mueller's investigation began mid May 2017, not quit a year yet. Don't forget the Watergate investigation took two years. 

Talking about grading this investigation is a bit premature (and immature).

Don't forget the Watergate investigation took two years.

The main conspirators (Erhlichman Haldeman) were indicted within a year (ten months)  of the special counsel's appointment. The indictments were for the actual crimes related to Watergate.

The main conspirators (Erhlichman Haldeman) were indicted within a year (ten months)

The first Mueller indictments came in five months and he had Flynn's guilty plea and cooperation in less than 7 months.  Keep on trying, though.

You seem to be missing the obvious point that Mueller's convictions have nothing to do with collusion. 

Paul Manafort - Conspiracy against the US, money laundering, unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false & misleading statements, assisting in the preparation of false tax returns, suscribing to false tax returns, filing a false amended tax return, failure to report foreign bank accounts, bank fraud conspiracy & bank fraud.

The only reason Manafort is charged is because he was with the Trump campaign for a short period of time.  It was simply a way to spy on Trump  If all you read was the fake NYT, you would think the FBI starting investigating Manafort in the the spring of 2016, when in reality they have been investigating him for at least since 2014 and I think even before that.  They already had the goods on Manafort before Trump even decided to run for President.

Why, you might ask, why didn't the FBI warn Trump about Manafort or his campaign manager?  Those who have their eyes closed will probably say they couldn't divulge that information.  Well, I say Comey wasn't suppose to write Hillary's exoneration months before the investigation got off its feet and Bill Clinton wasn't authorized to give a pardon or commutation to Roger Clinton either.  There is collusion, but it isn't Trump, but our top officials in our intelligence agencies and many who are in the Democrat Party.

This is a witch hunt using Soviet Style tactics.  Mueller would have made a very good Soviet Union Prosecutor.  Of course has the support of those who don't want their dominance over the American people to be disturbed.

Talking about grading this investigation is a bit premature (and immature).

It can be graded on how it's been conducted and where it's gone thus far and Iv'e done it. You are free to critique it.

Okay, let's take this apart sentence by sentence:

It's had over a year to get going and all they have done is some indictments that have nothing to do with collusion or obstructing justice.

Trumpbots seem to need regular reminding that it took the Watergate investigation two years to get to the point where Mueller is now.  And they don't just have "indictments."   They've got at least 4 confessed felons and cooperating witnesses.  Finally, the idea that they don't have anything on conspiracy and obstruction is simply wishful thinking.  They have no idea what Mueller's sitting on and how much more is out there to get. 

Oh, and then there are those dozen or so Russians who will never get prosecuted.

If any of those Russians are caught outside of Russia in countries that have extradition treaties with us, they will be arrested, moved here, prosecuted and likely convicted. 

Because of the actions of some of his investigators, these proceedings have the odor of taint all over them.

That's just silly wishful thinking.  There's no foul odor in this investigation other than Mar-a-LagoShitbag's obvious efforts to obstruct or defame it. 

The best I can give for all this wasted time and money is a D-.

What you give it is the very definition of "meaningless."

Trumpbots seem to need regular reminding that it took the Watergate investigation two years to get to the point where Mueller is now.

And you need to be reminded that the Watergate Investigation began with an actual crime - the Watergate Burglary. All the indictments pertained to that and the funny part was the investigation and the media was being spoon fed info from an FBI agent. The way the burglars were caught at the very beginning almost had a foul odor to it. In this case we had an investigation without a crime.

If any of those Russians are caught outside of Russia in countries that have extradition treaties with us, they will be arrested, moved here, prosecuted and likely convicted. 

Yup, I would hope so.

That's just silly wishful thinking.  There's no foul odor in this investigation other than Mar-a-LagoShitbag's obvious efforts to obstruct or defame it. 

Ya, I know the haters would like to get him on obstruction but that's almost as doubtful as the "collusion" fantasy. Let me give you an example - you need strong evidence of that - like you had in the Bill Clinton case, where a witness (Monica Lewinsky) made & signed a false statement and then was given a federal government job. That's what "obstruction" looks like!  Please note, despite the charge Senate democrats refused to convict Clinton. I don't think Mueller is going that route without solid evidence.

Greg's D- is close to my D. I think we have a consensus here.

And you need to be reminded that the Watergate Investigation began with an actual crime -

It's so cute that you still believe there've been no crimes involving with the Shitbag-de-Mar-a-Lago's campaign and administration when four people have confessed to them and multiple indictments on several others.  Just the hackings alone of DNC, Clinton, and Podesta emails were all crimes.  As to whom and how many of the Shitbag pack of scumbags will be found to having been involved--stay tuned.

Already bought a case of Boy Scout popcorn.

Just the hackings alone of DNC, Clinton, and Podesta emails were all crimes.

Which have nothing to do with Trump. Liberals made this an investigation of Trump, not Russia

Your comment is illogical. And meaningless.

Actually the comments of far right wing fascists are meaningless. They're just Heartland Industry lies.

There are no far right wing fascist on this site, only Liberals, Conservatives and all those in between.

Finally, the idea that they don't have anything on conspiracy and obstruction is simply wishful thinking.

Now that's the part I like, but to negate the above comment it needs to read, 'Finally, the idea that they have anything on conspiracy and obstruction is simply wishful thinking.'  Now that's better or at least as true as the original sentence.

I can say Mueller is motivating many people to vote in 2018 and we'll see if he's campaigning for Republicans or Democrats at the end of the day.  From where I sit, I'd say people are getting tired of an endless witch hunt that is not going to lead anywhere in my opinion which is as good as yours.

Well, I take that 'not going to lead anywhere' back because we have learned so much during the last couple of years and during the last year Mueller has charged people with crimes that had nothing to do with Trump that we would have never learned if this Special Prosecutor witch hunt had never got off its feet.  Now we have gathered enough information that there was indeed collusion, but it wasn't Trump, but on the other side and we're getting closer to the top of the pile. 

Power is shifting and soon we'll have another investigation like this going on and with all the evidence we already have it shouldn't take long to do the job.

So how many bullshit far right wing witch hunt investigations have found nothing?  The word treason comes to mind when I think of the far right wing.

So how many bullshit far right wing witch hunt investigations have found nothing?

All of the ones investigated by the Obama Justice Department. That is about to change very soon.

If any of those Russians are caught outside of Russia in countries that have extradition treaties with us, they will be arrested, moved here, prosecuted and likely convicted.

Sure thing.  I won't hold my breath for that one. LOL

I won't hold my breath for that one. LOL

They will all get free vacations at some swanky government owned dacha on the Black Sea where they'll all be served nerve agent vodka.......

Still zero evidence that Trump or anyone in his obit colluded with the Russians, which was the whole point of this exercise. 

But its interesting to watch Mueller charge people with lying to the FBI, after the Obama DOJ gave immunity to for lying to the FBI about destroying evidence. 

It's as if Mueller's investigation and the Obama DOJ investigation into Clinton's email server had different goals. 

Still zero evidence that Trump or anyone in his obit colluded with the Russians, which was the whole point of this exercise.

Yeah, just pretend Flynn doesn't exist.  Then you can pretend gravity doesn't exist when the earth collapses under your feet.

Yeah, just pretend Flynn doesn't exist.  Then you can pretend gravity doesn't exist when the earth collapses under your feet.

Flynn?  Flynn lied to the FBI about something that was 100% legal. You think your'e going somewhere with Flynn? 
I'll bet 3 months self suspension with you there was NO COLLUSION VIA FLYNN!

What do you say?

COLLUSION

Why would you think this is the only thing being investigated?   Nobody will know if there is collusion for sure until he's done.  Which he isn't.  It's all on the table.  Collusion, obstruction, money laundering, lying under oath.  Sit back and breathe, it's going to be a very bumpy ride for you.

Why would you think this is the only thing being investigated?

Because that's what liberals in and out of the media were screaming about for about 7 months. What happened to that?

I have no problem with the ride. It's been rather smooth thus far. How do you feel about another Special Counsel Investigation?

Flynn lied to the FBI about something that was 100% legal.

Then why'd he lie?  When you think up an answer to that, vickie. 

You think your'e going somewhere with Flynn? 

It's not me who thinks he's going somewhere with Flynn.  It's Mueller.  And Mueller wouldn't let Flynn cop to just lying to the FBI if Flynn hadn't proffered  much more valuable information about much more serious wrongdoing in the Shitbag campaign.  And the severity of the sentence Flynn evenutually gets depends on how good his continued cooperation is.  IOW, Mueller's got Flynn's balls and Flynn won't get them back unless and until he's been good boy.

Why would you think this is the only thing being investigated

Because Mueller's specific charge is to investigate coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of Donald Trump.

If you can't show any evidence of collusion, it becomes an investigation in search of a crime.

If you can't show any evidence of collusion, it becomes an investigation in search of a crime.

Are you too young to remember Ken Starr?  That IC investigation that he headed was  only "charged" initially with looking into the Clinton Whitewater real estate dealings and when that became a dry hole he then fixed on the Lewinski affair.  These IC investigations are permitted to go anywhere once they're established.  I'll bet you're not outraged that what started out as a financial investigation became a sexual one when it happened to a Dem.  You people just don't like to play by the rules, do you.

Starr was an independent counsel who had to get each avenue of investigation approved a committee of Federal appellate  judges. Even with that amount of oversight, the problems were palpable and the Independent counsel statute was not renewed. Mueller has no such independent oversight. The problem is  even worse.

The problem is even worse.

Mueller's investigation is so far pursuing exactly what he was commissioned to do.  He hasn't veered off into some kind of wild rabbit hunt.  But, if he encounters evidence of criminal activity along the way not directly related to the Trump campaign there he is not restricted from pursuing that as well. 

Because Mueller's specific charge is to investigate coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of Donald Trump.

Yes and no... that was what 'we' were led to believe - however, Mueller has the reins and can drive the buggy in whatever direction he so desires.  

This is an interesting read that provided me clarification on the Special Counsel and counterintelligence investigations

Ever since Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as a Special Counsel to investigate allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election, commentators have raised questions about the investigation’s scope.  Some have claimed that the Special Counsel’s mandate is too expansive ; others, too narrow ; and still others, simply too vague .  On Lawfare , the issue has been addressed by Andrew Kent and David Kris .  All appear to have assumed, however, that the scope of the investigation will be governed by 28 C.F.R. Part 600 , the 1999 regulation authorizing the appointment of a “Special Counsel” that was enacted in the wake of the lapse of the independent-counsel statute .

But does this regulatory apparatus govern the Mueller investigation?  I am not so sure.  The order appointing Mueller (what I’ll call the “ Rosenstein Order ”) invokes—and commentators have naturally focused on—the regulations contained in 28 C.F.R. Part 600 (what I’ll call the “ Part 600 regulations ”), because they expressly authorize the appointment of a Special Counsel.  But as I explain below, these regulations do not contemplate the delegation of a counterintelligence investigation to a Special Counsel; they focus on criminal investigations.  The two kinds of investigations are significantly different in scope and function and rely on different investigative tools.  The Rosenstein Order, however, appears to delegate a counterintelligence investigation to the Special Counsel under the criminal-prosecution-focused Part 600 regulations, thereby creating some confusion on the appropriate scope and type of investigation.  By seemingly directing Mueller to conduct a counterintelligence investigation while at the same time limiting his authority to the criminal investigations authorized by the Part 600 regulations, the Rosenstein Order points in different directions on the scope of the Special Counsel’s mandate.

In this post, I will explain why the counterintelligence investigation that Rosenstein appears to have intended to delegate to the Special Counsel is inconsistent with the criminal focus of the Part 600 regulations.  The delegated investigation, in short, does not comply with the limits on the Special Counsel’s authority imposed by the regulations.  In a subsequent post, I will explain that Rosenstein may delegate a counterintelligence investigation to the Special Counsel under his general statutory authority, 28 U.S.C. § 510 .  But if he intends to do so, he should clarify that the Part 600 regulations are inapplicable.

lawfareblog

How do you feel about another Special Counsel Investigation?

Now that is going to be a fun ride and get ready, because it will be taking off before they realize it.

If Jeff Sessions knew he wasn't going to be able to be involved in the Russian Trump investigation, he should have just resigned in my opinion.  He left the prisoners to run the prison.  Trump should have never appointed Rosenstein.  Rosenstein just rubber stamps anything Mueller wants to investigate.  I bet there isn't a person on this site that could come out innocent in an investigation like this one.

Then why'd he lie?

Probably for the same reason Clinton lied about Lewinsky - he must have thought that talking to a Russian Ambassador about sanctions was wrong since liberals were saying just that! Trouble is he was the incoming National Security advisor with every right to do just that. What is troubling is that Obama imposing sanctions on his way out the door.

It's not me who thinks he's going somewhere with Flynn.  It's Mueller.  And Mueller wouldn't let Flynn cop to just lying to the FBI if Flynn hadn't proffered  much more valuable information about much more serious wrongdoing in the Shitbag campaign.

I hate to bust your balloon but a federal judge has already ruled that the prosecution withheld evidence that would have benefited Flynn in his case. I notice your'e not taking my bet.

That IC investigation that he headed was  only "charged" initially with looking into the Clinton Whitewater real estate dealings and when that became a dry hole he then fixed on the Lewinski affair.

It didn't exactly hit a dry hole. The evidence which disappeared - the invoices from the legal payments to Hillary Clinton - turned up strangely after the statute of limitations had run out.

These IC investigations are permitted to go anywhere once they're established.  I'll bet you're not outraged that what started out as a financial investigation became a sexual one when it happened to a Dem.

Yup, that is what happens with these and with this one more than others since Rosenstein added the line "and anything that arises in the course of the investigation" - thus the charges against Manafort, Gates and Flynn. Yup, we can play by those rules, can you? The Senate democrats were able to prevent a Clinton conviction. Senate Republicans will be able to do the same thing should Mueller find something on Trump.

But its interesting to watch Mueller charge people with lying to the FBI, after the Obama DOJ gave immunity to for lying to the FBI about destroying evidence.

The Obama DOJ gave immunity to witnesses BEFORE they were even interviewed. Fear not, it looks like we may be investigating the e-mail investigation. What a pleasant thought! To finally have an investigation of something that happened during the Obama years that Obama won't control!

It's as if Mueller's investigation and the Obama DOJ investigation into Clinton's email server had different goals. 

I'd say that's a fair assessment

The Obama DOJ gave immunity to witnesses BEFORE they were even interviewed

Where is this fresh bullshit coming from?  Or is old, recycled bullshit? 

Here it is - pay attention:

"Hillary Clinton’s former chief of staff Cheryl Mills and two other staffers were granted immunity as part of the now-closed FBI probe into the former secretary of state’s email practices, according to a top House Republican who questioned whether the numerous deals hindered the bureau’s ability to build a case.

"This is beyond explanation,” House oversight committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, said in a statement Friday. “The FBI was handing out immunity agreements like candy. I've lost confidence in this investigation and I question the genuine effort in which it was carried out.”

The arrangements detailed by Chaffetz bring the total number of publicly known immunity deals in the Clinton case to five.

Chaffetz first revealed the additional deals in an interview with The Associated Press, saying “no wonder they couldn't prosecute a case.” He said Mills gave federal investigators access to her laptop on the condition that findings couldn't be used against her."

foxnews

They also gave immunity to the man who destroyed e-mails after they were subpoened

Here it is - pay attention:

Again, vickie, I want to thank-you and your fellow rightwingers for never reading the entire articles you link to (or thinking we won't) because even FarzNooz could entirely lie about this. From YOUR link:

Democrats on the oversight committee pushed back at Chaffetz’ claims Friday, saying the immunity agreements were very limited and did not extend to statements to the FBI or assertions to other investigators, or testimony before Congress.

“It’s beyond disappointing—but not surprising in light of the election—that Republicans are rushing to leak inaccurate information about this very limited agreement between Ms. Mills and the Justice Department,” Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., top Democrat on the oversight committee, said in a statement. “Ms. Mills was not immunized for any statements she made to the FBI, Congress, or other investigators. Of course, Republicans are trying to make political hay out of this, but the facts are that Ms. Mills cooperated fully with the Justice Department and Congress.”

Furthermore, this very limited immunity was not given to someone who'd already committed a crime but was the FBI's attempt to get HRC.  If you're trying to make this equivalent to Flynn, you're not even in the same universe of comparative situations.  So, the answer to my question is:  Old, recycled bullshit.  Thankyouverymuch. 

You see, I discounted anything  Elijah Cummings has to say, because that always turns out to be BS, as it is in this case where he proclaims that an immunity agreement does not equal immunity. Six people got it in the Clinton case AND FOR WHAT REASON?  Also they were allowed to have the same lawyer and Ms Mills who was a witness under investigation was allowed to be present during the HRC interview, which meant nothing since Comey had already decided not to recommend charges!

So again, you have no valid response

I discounted anything Elijah Cummings has to say, because that always turns out to be BS

 So, you also must have discounted the final paragraph of the article:

Chaffetz said he is looking forward to asking Comey questions about the immunity deals when Comey testifies Wednesday before the House Judiciary Committee.

Because when Chaffetz got his shot at Comey, it blew up spectacularly in his face.  Again, vickie, let me tell you how much I appreciate you being such an eager and willing dupe for me. 

Democrats on the oversight committee pushed back at Chaffetz’ claims Friday, saying the immunity agreements were very limited and did not extend to statements to the FBI or assertions to other investigators, or testimony before Congress.

“It’s beyond disappointing—but not surprising in light of the election—that Republicans are rushing to leak inaccurate information about this very limited agreement between Ms. Mills and the Justice Department,” Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., top Democrat on the oversight committee, said in a statement. “Ms. Mills was not immunized for any statements she made to the FBI, Congress, or other investigators.

Who questioned these people?  Oh yes, it was Strzok.  What's he doing these days since he was fired from Mueller's investigation, shacking up with his girlfriend?  I think she dished him.  I bet his wife did too.  He knew the plan as Comey had already exonerated Hillary before he questioned the first person. 

He did all the questioning and you think he would charge Mills or Abedin for anything.  Did the FBI destroy their computers or not?  Better to leave no evidence behind like when Hillary was championing how she wanted the public to see her emails and destroying her hard drives at the same time.

It is you who needs to pay attention, don't you think?

Of course all this was conducted under the most corrupt administration in American history.

Top Clinton Aides Face No Charges After Making False Statements To FBI

dailycaller

Daily caller, fox news.. Both fake news outlets. 

Because when Chaffetz got his shot at Comey, it blew up spectacularly in his face.

Not as I recall...Comey told 2 lies to Congress. Normally that's a felony, but Congress can't prosecute, it can only question.

Sorry but you lose that game again

Comey told 2 lies

Only in your inside-out world.  And if lying to Congress was a felony, Jeff Sessions would be in jail right now. 

Still zero evidence that Trump or anyone in his obit colluded with the Russians, which was the whole point of this exercise.

Sean, we know that wasn't the point of the exercise.  The point of the exercise was to get Trump out of office or impede him for his entire Presidency, even if it took lying to save one's ass to do it.

Vickie, the idea that you personally or rightwingers in general are in any position or have any authority (other than your own fantasies) to "grade" the Mueller investigation is both hilarious and weird as it gets.  Hilarious because of the suggestion that your opinion matters in the least and weird because you'd even imagine that it does. 

I've noticed Vic hasn't acknowledged your sarcasm or calling him Vickie.

Don't Acknowledge It: One option is to refuse to acknowledge the sarcastic comments and instead treat them as genuine. This way you can quickly move the subject on, show the person that you are unhappy with their comments, and at the same time often turn it around so that they end up being the ones who look stupid.

healthguidance

That's one way of dealing with it & good advice.  Soon I'll have another way.

As Jim Morrison once said "I just did!"

As Jim Morrison once said "I just did!"

Make us .  Oh, yes.  Yes, you did.

"Mueller's team selection gets an F - the team includes 8 lawyers who are Democratic donors with 5 who donated to the Clinton campaign and 2 who had to be removed for blatant bias."

So if you ever donated to Democrats you're now "tainted" and can't work for the FBI or do unbiased work? What kind of bullshit is that? If they donated to Republican campaigns does that also make them biased in the other direction so you can't ever trust them to be impartial? Total nonsense. Every member is allowed to have their own political opinion and belong to whatever party they want, they are Americans just like the rest of us. To claim they can't be fair simply based on that is ridiculous. It's as ridiculous as claiming a judge born in Indiana can't be impartial because he was of Mexican heritage. And the two who got removed were immediately dismissed when the emails were discovered and the emails showed they were bi-partisan with their derision slamming Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and several other Obama appointees along with slamming team Trump.

The grade you give is far more biased than those on the Mueller team and purely based on partisan opinion. 

So if you ever donated to Democrats you're now "tainted" and can't work for the FBI or do unbiased work?

In the nightmare of a fascist one-party, strong-man dictatorship that they hope to inflict on this nation--oh, yeah. 

So if you ever donated to Democrats you're now "tainted" and can't work for the FBI or do unbiased work?

Not if there is some balance on the team. Most of the team is fiercely loyal to Clinton or Obama. Two had to be removed!

If they donated to Republican campaigns does that also make them biased in the other direction so you can't ever trust them to be impartial? 

There is a bit more to it than donations, but if it was simply donations it would simply require some balance of which there is none here.

 And the two who got removed were immediately dismissed when the emails were discovered

Which is an admission that the bias prevented them from doing the job. Thank you!

Mueller is a republican, he was appointed by a republican who was appointed by a republican POTUS. Yes, I can certainly see why the right wing thinks that the whole thing is biased. /sarc

Mueller is a republican, he was appointed by a republican who was appointed by a republican POTUS

And many Republicans are Trump-haters.  I refer you to Sen John McCain and the damage he did to the Trump legislative agenda. He was the decisive vote against healthcare reform and he was unavailable for the tax reform bill, fortunately, he wasn't needed on that one.

By all appearances, Mueller is running a very thorough investigation with many huge successes so far in the form of major players co-operating with him.  He runs a tight ship with no leaks so no one knows what he has.  Just based on what we have observed first-hand, Trump appears to be pretty much nailed to the wall for obstruction of justice.  This is the simple and clear reality of the situation.  It's pointless talking to anyone who can't at least admit this much.

Mueller is running a very thorough investigation with many huge successes so far in the form of major players co-operating with him.

In fact, that's what's driving these morons and their Chief-Moron-and-Shitbag-Extraordinaire in the WH even more bat-shit crazy than usual. He's getting steadily close to lowering the boom on the whole stinking lot of them and they can feel it. 

He's getting steadily close to lowering the boom on the whole stinking lot of them and they can feel it.

You wish! No, liberals are the only ones saying he's gonna fire Mueller. Mueller has yet to lay a glove on him.

By all appearances, Mueller is running a very thorough investigation with many huge successes so far in the form of major players co-operating with him.  He runs a tight ship with no leaks so no one knows what he has.

Agreed to that part, though I think he was way over the top on Manafort (I assume that was Weissmann's handiwork). You are also right on the leaks - all of which now come from Schiff & his staff.

Just based on what we have observed first-hand, Trump appears to be pretty much nailed to the wall for obstruction of justice.

That is where I disagree. He still has no evidence of that. Maybe democrats will try and use it to impeach should they win control of the house, but legally it's just not there.

I'm not able to post any articles on this site.  Apparently there is a secret to selecting pictures that are now required for articles.  

I've never experienced a site that inadvertently dissuaded members to participate because they're not able to pass a tech course.  This is very frustrating.  It really shouldn't be this hard.  

You've clicked on the "topics" tab at the top of the page and seen "discussions" at the top of the new page?

Thank you all for a lively discussion.

D thus far