actually the determination of intent can be inferred from various things...such the letters and interviews surrounding the firing of Comey
Inferred...in no certain terms. Left to interpretation. Method to strip constituional powers.
actually the determination of intent can be inferred from various things...such the letters and interviews surrounding the firing of Comey
Inferred...in no certain terms. Left to interpretation. Method to strip constituional powers.
If the president knew for example that Flynn committed a crime and asked for the investigation to be stopped for that reason, I think that would be problematic.
So you agree he broke the law?
I don't think a backroom deal is necessarily a "shenanigan".You believe that these typea of shenaningans happens behind the scenes but refuse to believe that the fbi could potentially setup a president to committ a coup? Seems inconsistent
I don't think a backroom deal is necessarily a "shenanigan".
And no, I don't think the FBI would setup Trump. They wouldn't need to. But they would be concerned with a potential President having alarming ties to a known enemy.
To entertain the idea that the FBI would be so far out in front of a Trump presidency, to bring about a coup as you put it, is well ... even crazier than thinking the moon landing was filmed in Hollywood.
I'm not sure that Amy Berman Jackson knows how baseball works. Just sayin'.
there is this 3 strikes and you're out thing...with caveats to be sure
By my count, Roger Stone now has somewhere between 2 and 3 strikes.
Imagine it is 1972:
1) George McGovern is running against the war.
2) N Vietnam intelligence informs the McGovern campaign it has pictures of Nixon visiting his mistress in Hong Kong. The McGovern campaign works with N Vietnam intelligence to time the release of the pictures for maximum effect.
3) Meanwhile back at the ranch George McGovern is negotiating with Hanoi for a slice of a lucrative real estate venture.
Anything wrong with any of this?
It's Friday. Time for a review? Feel free to call this improper over-reach by the FBI. I looked for something about Adam Schiff lying but couldn't find it.
Let's start with what we know.
*** We know, because it was the unanimous conclusion of the intelligence community, that Russia sought to interfere in the election to help Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton, believing the billionaire businessman was better for them.
*** We know that multiple people within Trump's orbit -- former national security adviser Michael Flynn, former foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen -- have all pleaded guilty to making false statements to either Congress or federal investigators (or both) regarding the nature and breadth of their contacts with the Russians during the campaign.
*** We know that former Trump political adviser Roger Stone has been charged with lying to Congress about his knowledge of and dealings with WikiLeaks, the website that served as a clearinghouse for emails the Russians stole from the servers of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.
*** We know that many of the contacts between Trump associates and the Russians date back to the spring of 2016 (at least), which is when Papadopoulos' bragging to an Australian diplomat that he knew Russia had dirt on Clinton set in motion what has come to be special counsel Robert Mueller's probe.
*** We know that in June 2016, three of the top officials in Trump's campaign -- Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort -- met with Russians, a meeting the top Trump brass took under the promise of "dirt" on Clinton.
*** We know that Manafort, the campaign chairman at the time, shared polling information with a Russian with known ties to Russia's intelligence operation.
^^^^^^^^^^^
What else?
*** We know Donald Trump.
[Tw]1099410153265344514[/tw]
I guess real evidence will come out at some point right?