It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Democrats are Upset With Bob Mueller - He Didnt Try Hard Enough To Get President Trump.

page: 4
27
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Did the Russians hack the Electoral College? Those are the only votes that a presidential hopeful gets that count.




posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: redmage

Clearly you've missed the long list of guilty pleas, indictments, and convictions all of which were a direct result of this investigation... and it hasn't even wrapped up yet.

You have a skewed definition of the word "nothing".


I think the nothing has been the collusion part... This investigation has expanded to include ANY at all...anything... What we have seen is people going to jail for things they did well outside of their Trump connection (taxes as example) or just plain lying.

As the investigation starts to rap up we are not seeing new players in any of this and not seeing the investigation move anymore than what it was over a year ago. We now have the dem controlled house that wants to go down the path of investigating all his taxes, all his dealings, so on and so on... Even they know now there was nothing, and if anything, if we wanted to go down the path of foreign actors meddling in our elections the Steele dossier is the best example of that so far... The interesting part is most of these people that worked for Trump for a short period of time, and then got in trouble one way or another, came to him trough big RNC connections, just as the dossier and other shady acts have had big DNC connections...

We are back to only this...

1. Did Trump have fun 12 plus years ago with a porn star...yep
2. Did he pay her off in a form of extortion money...yep
3. Was it legal...yep
4. Will anything come out of it other than talking point for the Dems in 2020...nope
5. Will much of what the Dems have been doing across the board in the last two year bite them in the ass in the future...yep

We are still in the bad orange man won mentality... The only people who will be hurt is us...




edit on 11-1-2019 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

Almost.

Some states require that their EC votes represent the state's popular voting, while others don't.

A fun example of trying to cook the EC was recently in Florida. Before the 2016 election they altered their EC voting to a "winner takes all" status (to ensure Jeb got ALL of FL's EC votes). Yeah, that didn't work out so well for poor ol' Jeb.



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Schiff is squirming. He seems cool, calm, and collected, but I think he's scared. (Look at his eyes...lol).

I don't know if he reads the comments on his tweets, but whoa! The public knows what and who he is, and he ain't a nice guy.

Trump has been investigated up one way and down the other. Obama's IRS audited him every single year, and at least two years prior to that. At least 100 pages of meticulous financials were presented before he became president.

His business empire is huge, but that doesn't mean he and his family should be pulled through the mud just because certain politicians are hellbent on finding something...anything...they can use as blackmail. They are desperate and squirming like the snakes they are.



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: redmage

Since the Special Counsel told Cummings and Cohen that they are free to ask/answer any questions in the February 7th open session, does that imply:

1. Mueller will be finished and report issued before February 7th?

or

2. Cohen knows nothing that would affect the (at that time) ongoing Mueller investigation?

Mueller's sentencing recommendation said that Cohen's cooperation was "overstated." This likely translates as "He don't know squat."



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage

Yes and most states are a winner take all. Meaning your vote in November is really for which set of electors are sent in December to vote. And a few states have laws against faithless voters freely casting their vote. However, nothing can really be done and any repercussions can be negated in federal court for restitution.

Part of the purpose of the EC is to safeguard against a populist vote that would disastrous to the country. Which funnily enough, is what impeachment also does as a final act of protection.

For example, if Hilary would have won in November and all the militias self-activated and placed the country into civil war to prevent her oath of office. The EC could opt not to vote her in to placate the people and restore order. Bingo, Hilary is not President despite the outcome of November’s election.

Would that sort of thing happen? Probably not. But it could.



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
I think the nothing has been the collusion part...


That I can agree with, but probably not the way you might be thinking. There is no "collusion part", because "collusion" is merely a non-criminal buzzword Trump likes to toss around. Trump LOVES spouting "No collusion! No collusion!" when it's really just a semantic tactic. "Collusion" is not a crime, conspiracy is. The whole "collusion" thing is simply linguistic misdirection. Trump's incessant spouting off of "No collusion" is akin to him spouting off "I didn't commit a non-crime!", and if someone takes the bait and claims that "there was collusion", Trump can come back honestly (for a change of pace) and say "collusion is not a crime!".


originally posted by: Xtrozero
As the investigation starts to rap up we are not seeing new players in any of this and not seeing the investigation move anymore than what it was over a year ago.


I'd say it's still moving. Heck, thanks to Manafort's lawyers and their poor redaction skills we only just found out about him passing the campaign's internal polling data off to his Russian counterparts a couple days ago.

Beyond external flubs like Manafort's lawyers, Meuller has run a very tight ship so we can't really conclude much in regards to not "seeing the investigation move". The public doesn't get to see much in regards to active investigations.

All this projected hope of "nothing" may turn out to be true, but drawing any hard conclusions before the report is in is a fools errand.
edit on 1/11/19 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: redmage
Trump LOVES spouting "No collusion! No collusion!"


I agree with this, BUT the left has coined the phrase "Russian Collusion" and has used that phrase millions of times, so who started it all in the first place...lol


originally posted by: Xtrozero
I'd say it's still moving. Heck, thanks to Manafort's lawyers and their poor redaction skills we only just found out about him passing the campaign's internal polling data off to his Russian counterparts a couple days ago.


Was that something to help Trump? Was that something both parties did all the time in the past? Manafort came to Trump through the RNC as a person who has been with a good number of Presidents. I don't know the answers, but it sure seems that acts considered as normal operations for both side is being repackaged as wrong/corrupt today. We are talking 5 months here where he worked with Trump, so I don't know how mach he is guilty of and how much he is being accused of things that everyone did all the time in the past.


All this projected hope of "nothing" may turn out to be true, but drawing any hard conclusions before the report is in is a fools errand.


Well the left can only hope...and hope...and hope...

I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for the smoking gun...Even Rosenstein is ready to move on from all of this..



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
I agree with this, BUT the left has coined the phrase "Russian Collusion" and has used that phrase millions of times, so who started it all in the first place...lol


Meh, whataboutisim doesn't advance discussion. It's quite possible that someone on the left was dumb enough to coin the phrase (I don't really care enough to research the origin), but Trump definitely latched on to it, is riding that horse like there's no tomorrow, and it's still nothing more than linguistic misdirection in regards to the way he utilizes it.


originally posted by: Xtrozero
Was that something to help Trump? Was that something both parties did all the time in the past?


Good questions. The Meuller report will likely answer the first one. As for the second, the ambiguous "that something" needs clarification through the answer to the 1st question. We need to know what "that something" is before we can really attribute it to both parties in the past. If you mean... did campaign managers of the past give their internal poling data to Russians, then probably not. That said, passing internal polling data to Russian counterparts might not be the whole story if there is a provable quid-pro-quo turned up in the investigation.


originally posted by: Xtrozero
I don't know the answers, but it sure seems that acts considered as normal operations for both side is being repackaged as wrong/corrupt today.


While I don't see passing internal polling data to Russians as "normal operations for both sides", there has been somewhat of a crackdown on "white collar" political crimes. Frankly, I don't see that as a bad thing. Trump claimed he wanted to "drain the swamp" (something I agree with), and cracking down on political crimes is a big part of that process. He was just hoping that the crackdown would be more partisan-driven against the other side, but with all his personal baggage that simply hasn't been the case. He never had any intention of actually draining the swamp, he just wanted to kneecap the other side's swamp monsters while empowering his own. Personally, I think we'd be better off if the swamp monsters from both sides' were removed from D.C..



edit on 1/11/19 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Whatever the outcome, one side will cry foul and riot while the other side will feel vindicated.



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Yup, that definitely appears to be the only certainty in regards to any outcome of this investigation. We live in a culture of victim-hood, and both parties' diehard followers love to stumble over themselves flailing their victim cards high.



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage

This is true, so the best thing to do is use the actual facts.

So far, we've no reason to believe that Trump conspired, colluded (or whatever you want to call it) with any foreign power.
We do know for sure that Hillary did and that Obama's administration spied on political opponents.

Apart from a bunch of people getting snared for unrelated crimes, that's it. Anything else is just speculation based on whichever fantasy outcome each side wants.



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
This is true, so the best thing to do is use the actual facts.


That ship already set sail, and left the harbor. We're now in the world of "alternate truths", and facts have little-to-no bearing it seems.


originally posted by: UKTruth
So far, we've no reason to believe that Trump conspired, colluded (or whatever you want to call it) with any foreign power.


Well, if we're attempting to "use the actual facts", Manafort passing off the campaign's internal polling data to his Russian counterparts would make your "no reason to believe" notion sound a bit premature. There are legitimate questions that need answers.



originally posted by: UKTruth
Apart from a bunch of people getting snared for unrelated crimes, that's it.


Except for those people who were snared for related crimes.



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage

There are questions, for sure. From Democrats and Comey's buddy and Trump haters in general.
There is nothing we've seen so far to provide any basis to believe that Trump conspired with Russians.

Some of us choose not believe liberal media or other crappy sources like Fox News. Others prefer to foam at the mouth with excitement whenever anyone insuates anything that would lead to their wet dream becoming a reality.

edit on 11/1/2019 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: redmage

Meh, whataboutisim doesn't advance discussion. It's quite possible that someone on the left was dumb enough to coin the phrase (I don't really care enough to research the origin), but Trump definitely latched on to it, is riding that horse like there's no tomorrow, and it's still nothing more than linguistic misdirection in regards to the way he utilizes it.


Trump is reactionary, I'm sure if the left hadn't hit him over the head with that statement 24/7 he would have never utter that phrase once. This is not whataboutism, it is the left driving a "Russian Collusion" narrative and you are complaining that Trump reacts to it...lol



Good questions. The Meuller report will likely answer the first one. As for the second, the ambiguous "that something" needs clarification through the answer to the 1st question. We need to know what "that something" is before we can really attribute it to both parties in the past. If you mean... did campaign managers of the past give their internal poling data to Russians, then probably not. That said, passing internal polling data to Russian counterparts might not be the whole story if there is a provable quid-pro-quo turned up in the investigation.


The dossier was created by foreign actors as example, Hillary and Obama had contacts with Russia while not in official positions yet as examples. As to Manafort, his ties with Kilimnik go back a long time and they data shared over that time. With his data share this time, first we must understand the vast majority of the data was public knowledge with some private polling mixed in. We do not know if Kilimnik used it or could have used the date for anything, and it seems much has to do with Manafort's private long term business relationships in Ukraine. The data could be as simple as proving Trump was doing well and Manafort could have been using it for future work...




edit on 11-1-2019 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

ha ha ha very good



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Again with that?

Doesn't that ever get tiresome...? Beating the same dead horse?



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage

Truth!!!



posted on Jan, 11 2019 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Steveogold
a reply to: carewemust

ha ha ha very good


Today feels like January 2017 all over again. NYTimes is declaring that FBI is investigating President Trump, for Working With Russia! (Red Banners popping up at news sites.)

www.nytimes.com...

Oh the humanity!



posted on Jan, 12 2019 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Sillyolme
Doesn't that ever get tiresome...? Beating the same dead horse?


NO..it does not. JUSTICE is coming relatively soon.

It looks like Mueller and the entire FBI were trying desperately to find anything that could be used to get President Trump out of office. (Impeachment, Resignation, Other...)

AAG Rod Rosenstein even wanted top people to "secretly" record every word from President Trump. (Omarosa released her recordings to the public after getting fired. yawn.)

Update: www.foxnews.com...

Apparently, Mueller and the FBI "struck out", so we have Democrats in the U.S. House now stepping up to the plate.
edit on 1/12/2019 by carewemust because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
27
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join