Spectre

Trump - Russia Thread

2,069 posts in this topic

Anyone want to explain why Rudi Gulliani, the guy who was all over the news bragging about Hillary's emails were going to be leaked, is tied up and has been seen hanging out at Alfa Bank, the same bank that was targeted in the FISA warrant and was exchanging information back and forth with Trump Tower? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, atl falcon 89 said:

I know you know the difference between impeachment and actually getting rid of a president,  but in the heat of your arguments I think you guys sometimes forget.

We're still only a few months into this thing and Trump is already walking a super tight line in this regard. To date there's only been one impeachment of a president and if Bill Clinton lying about getting some head is the set target for this kinda thing from some of these very same career politicans in Trump's corner, than Trump is absolutely risking getting hearings if he keeps up at the pace he's at. This ain't gonna be able work for four years, period.

He's got the advantage over Clinton in that, both houses are controlled by his party but that's only going to get him so far before some of these folks start wondering if this loon is going to be costing them their careers. 

Generals like Oliver North and Micheal Flynn may be conditioned to fall on their sword for their president, career politicans are not

First, your history is off, there have been two POTUS impeached.  Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton.  Second, the left wanted him impeached even before he was inaugurated.  So if that doesn't give you and inkling of a possible witch hunt, I'm not really sure what to tell you.  My best suggestion to everyone on here is to slow their roll a bit.  There has not been any evidence of collusion at this point even as hard as the Farkas media has tried to push it.  If there ends up being a there/there then y'all will get what you want.  

Have have serious doubts that you will though.  I say get the private counsel, they will get this over with a lot quicker, they will be unbiased, and we can move on with the business of governing.  I never thought the left would take this stuff as far as they have, but I'm never shocked by the opposition party from either side.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just wondering how these snowflakes are going to react when their god emperor is in cuffs. Mutiny? Angry Twitter rants? 

Edited by Spectre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

First, your history is off, there have been two POTUS impeached.  Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton.  Second, the left wanted him impeached even before he was inaugurated.  So if that doesn't give you and inkling of a possible witch hunt, I'm not really sure what to tell you.  My best suggestion to everyone on here is to slow their roll a bit.  There has not been any evidence of collusion at this point even as hard as the Farkas media has tried to push it.  If there ends up being a there/there then y'all will get what you want.  

Have have serious doubts that you will though.  I say get the private counsel, they will get this over with a lot quicker, they will be unbiased, and we can move on with the business of governing.  I never thought the left would take this stuff as far as they have, but I'm never shocked by the opposition party from either side.  

Ah your right, it was my understanding  that AJ just missed out on impeachment by a vote but it was the conviction that didn't stick.

I'm not even talking about collusion that play still has several acts to go, I'm talking about the constant lies, and obfuscation. I doubt he'll ever be impeached for them but it's gonna cost him an election in four years at this rate almost undoubtedly.

As to liberals looking to impeach Trump before he even took office, I dunno if you'll recall it was the GOP making noises about impeachment all summer, even unto today no dem with the actual  power to do so or be involved has pushed for impeachment. That may change if Trump doesn't learn some self control and personal  responsibility.

Are the dems circling, waiting for and poking at mistakes, you bet they are but so has the opposition party of every president ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, atl falcon 89 said:

Ah your right, it was my understanding  that AJ just missed out on impeachment by a vote but it was the conviction that didn't stick.

I'm not even talking about collusion that play still has several acts to go, I'm talking about the constant lies, and obfuscation. I doubt he'll ever be impeached for them but it's gonna cost him an election in four years at this rate almost undoubtedly.

As to liberals looking to impeach Trump before he even took office, I dunno if you'll recall it was the GOP making noises about impeachment all summer, even unto today no dem with the actual  power to do so or be involved has pushed for impeachment. That may change if Trump doesn't learn some self control and personal  responsibility.

Are the dems circling, waiting for and poking at mistakes, you bet they are but so has the opposition party of every president ever.

First bold point would've impeached all POTUS.  The second bold point is easily disputed by the tape below.  Third point that you haven't mentioned is even if charges were brought up for impeachment the only way any impeachment proceeding would have to be passed int eh house and senate now controlled by the GOP.

WASHINGTON ― Congressional Democrats led by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced legislation on Monday that would require President-elect Donald Trump to divest his business holdings in order to avoid conflicts of interest while serving in the White House.

The President Conflict of Interest Act would require the president and vice president, their spouses and any minor or dependent children to divest all personal financial holdings that could create a conflict of interest, and to place the resulting assets into a blind trust governed by an independent trustee.

The bill would also formally implement the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, which bans government officials from receiving gifts or payments from foreign governments, by declaring the violation of financial conflict-of-interest laws and provisions by the president to be considered a high crime or misdemeanor punishable by impeachment.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

Second, the left wanted him impeached even before he was inaugurated

The GOP wanted Hillary impeached before she was even elected. Stop being a partisan hack. 

Leon Troutsky likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't know which thread to put this in....so I chose this one.

 

The mean *** Russian hamster has been tamed y'all. We've renamed him Boris but he's cool as **** now. He'll jump right up in your hand and let you pet him without screeching like some being sent straight from ****. He likes to **** in your hand so I still feel like there's still a little rebel in him though.

 

Edit: For the record I wasn't the one to discover this. My 9 year old boy, who Boris had bit the **** out of previously, was the one to discover that Boris was cool now. 

AF89 and Billy Ocean like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/31/2017 at 10:33 AM, WhenFalconsWin said:

You'll see after all the hysteria settles down JP that there will be no there/there.  Just like I said nothing would come of her email scandal.  Call it luck, call it skill in following politics for a long time, but my record on here is pretty dayum good. If I'm wrong I'll be the first one (as I usually am) on here saying so.  I don't expect the same courtesy from some on here though...they know who they are.   

I do not know I think some things come of it. In no way did Trump collude and there is 0 evidence of it. Grassley is not too happy with the FBI at this point.

Crowd Strike is the company that is owned by a Ukraine Oligarch. It is also the company that reported the Trump server as well as the people that determined the DNC was hacked by Russia which the FBI or no one in government ever checked. They also reported Russia hacked their artillery that they have begun to walk back.

This is really shaping up to look like the left and the media falling on their swords. It is really looking more and more like Trump was way closer to telling the truth than anyone in the media.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/31/trump-dossier-financier-accused-of-improper-work-for-kremlin/#ixzz4d3V941Qp

The opposition researcher behind the so-called Trump dossier worked last year on behalf of an alleged former Russian spy, and the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee wants to know why he hasn’t registered as a foreign agent.

In a letter sent to Acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente on Friday, Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley inquired about Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson’s work last year for Rinat Akhmetshin, a Washington, D.C.-based operative who is believed to be a former Russian counter-intelligence agent.

Simpson’s work with Akhmetshin, which was first revealed last year, is surprising given that Simpson is who hired former British spy Christopher Steele to conduct research about Trump’s activities in Russia.

Simpson, a former Wall Street Journal reporter, was hired by a Hillary Clinton supporter to dig up dirt on Trump. The project resulted in a 35-page unverified dossier written by Steele that Fusion GPS distributed to reporters. Steele also gave the document to the FBI.

Screen-Shot-2017-03-07-at-1.20.18-PM-e14

Former British spy Christopher Steele. (Youtube screen grab)

In his letter, Grassley asserts that Simpson’s work for Akhmetshin “casts further doubt on an already highly dubious dossier.”

He also questions whether the FBI is aware of Simpson’s work for Akhmetshin.

“Presumably, such awareness would have informed the FBI’s evaluation of the dossier’s credibility,” writes Grassley.

“It is highly troubling that Fusion GPS appears to have been working with someone with ties to Russian intelligence — let alone someone alleged to have conducted political disinformation campaigns — as part of a pro-Russia lobbying effort while also simultaneously overseeing the creation of the Trump/Russia dossier,” writes Grassley.

Akhmetshin hired Simpson and Fusion GPS last year to work on a campaign to roll back the Magnitsky Act, a law passed in 2012 which imposed sanctions against a handful of Russian criminals accused of human rights violations.

The law was named in honor of Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian lawyer who was killed by jail guards in 2009. Magnitsky was working for Bill Browder, a London-based investor who once operated in Russia, when he uncovered a $230 million fraud being carried out by the Russian government.

After Magnitsky’s death, Browder began lobbying U.S. lawmakers to enact sanctions against Russian criminals engaged in human rights abuses.

In a FARA complaint submitted in July, Browder laid out the case that Akhmetshin conducted a covert lobbying campaign to hinder the Global Magnitsky Act, an expansion of the original law.

Akhmetshin claimed that he was lobbying to help Russian orphans. The Russian government prohibited U.S. citizens from adopting Russian children after the original Magnitsky Act was passed.

But the orphan issue was a red herring Akhmetshin was using to hinder the sanctions.

Browder told The Daily Caller in January that Simpson worked for Akhmetshin as a “<.”

“Glenn Simpson knowingly spread false information on behalf of people connected to the Russian government to try to protect Russian torturers and murderers from consequences,” Browder told TheDC for an article cited in Grassley’s letter. (RELATED: EXCLUSIVE: Oppo Researcher Behind Trump Dossier Is Linked To Pro-Kremlin Lobbying Effort)

Grassley says that the Judiciary Committee needs to find out how the Justice Department has responded to Browder’s complaint.

“The issue is of particular concern to the Committee given that when Fusion GPS reportedly was acting as an unregistered agent of Russian interests, it appears to have been simultaneously overseeing the creation of the unsubstantiated dossier of allegations of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians,” he wrote.

Grassley also pointed to news reports about Akhmetshin’s background.

“It is particularly disturbing that Mr. Akhmetshin and Fusion GPS were working together on this pro-Russia lobbying effort in 2016 in light of Mr. Akhmetshin’s history and reputation,” he writes.

He cited various reports referring to Akhmetshin as a “Soviet counterintelligence officer” who later worked for the GRU, the successor to the KGB.

Akhmetshin has also been accused in a lawsuit of “organizing a scheme to hack the computers of one his client’s adversaries,” Grassley notes.

 

This is really not going like they would have hoped and it is falling apart piece by piece day by day. This really is fun to watch!

WhenFalconsWin likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Spectre said:

I'm just wondering how these snowflakes are going to react when their god emperor is in cuffs. Mutiny? Angry Twitter rants? 

IF it happens then they're going to say they never supported him and wanted Ted Cruz and they criticized him the whole time and they're happy to have Pence as president and talk about how great Pence will be a president.

Carter likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jpowers said:

Didn't know which thread to put this in....so I chose this one.

 

The mean *** Russian hamster has been tamed y'all. We've renamed him Boris but he's cool as **** now. He'll jump right up in your hand and let you pet him without screeching like some being sent straight from ****. He likes to **** in your hand so I still feel like there's still a little rebel in him though.

 

Edit: For the record I wasn't the one to discover this. My 9 year old boy, who Boris had bit the **** out of previously, was the one to discover that Boris was cool now. 

"The Russian Hamster" sounds like something you would find on urban dictionary.

mdrake34, Jpowers, Carter and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, mdrake34 said:

The GOP wanted Hillary impeached before she was even elected. Stop being a partisan hack. 

Show me the tape of them saying that like I showed you.  I haven't seen it, but I did give you several example of Democratic leaders saying it in tape.  I did a search and I couldn't find one example of an elected official from the GOP saying that.  Maybe you found something I couldn't find?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, mdrake34 said:

The GOP wanted Hillary impeached before she was even elected. Stop being a partisan hack. 

So did a large portion of the electorate and they were successful!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On March 27, 2017 at 5:16 PM, mdrake34 said:

Some Republicans are discussing their plans for President Clinton — starting with impeachment

By Mike DeBonis November 3, 2016
Travis Klinefelter of Dubuque, Iowa rouses the crowd before a rally for Donald J. Trump  on Oct. 28, 2016 in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The crowd of a few thousand warmed up by chanting “Lock her up” and waving signs of Women for Trump. (Photo by David Greedy/Getty Images)

Senior Republican lawmakers are openly discussing the prospect of impeaching Hillary Clinton should she win the presidency, a stark indication that partisan warfare over her tenure as secretary of state will not end on Election Day.

Chairmen of two congressional committees said in media interviews this week they believe Clinton committed impeachable offenses in setting up and using a private email server for official State Department business.

And a third senior Republican, the chairman of a House Judiciary subcommittee, told The Washington Post he is personally convinced Clinton should be impeached for influence peddling involving her family foundation. He favors further congressional investigation into that matter.

“It is my honest opinion that the Clinton Foundation represents potentially one of the greatest examples of political corruption in American history,” said Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), who leads the Constitution and Civil Justice subcommittee. “Now that perspective may be disproven, time will tell. But given that conviction on my part, I think all options are definitely on the table.”

The impeachment talk is the latest sign that Clinton will not be handed a clean slate — let alone an extended honeymoon — by Republican lawmakers should she win the presidency.

It comes after months of accusations from GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, who has repeatedly referred to his rival as “Crooked Hillary” before and after federal investigators announced they would not charge Clinton or her associates over the email matter.

When some in the crowd at a Donald Trump rally in Wilkes-Barre, Pa., started chanting “Lock her up!” about Hillary Clinton on Oct. 10, the Republican presidential nominee replied: “Lock her up is right.” (The Washington Post)

Chants of “Lock Her Up!” coursed through crowds at the Republican National Convention and at dozens of Trump rallies. The FBI’s disclosure last week that it is examining potential new evidence in the email probe has offered new fuel for the attacks.

“Hillary Clinton is the most corrupt person ever to seek the presidency, and if she were elected, it would create an unprecedented constitutional crisis,” Trump said Wednesday at a rally in Pensacola, Fla. “You know it’s going to happen. And in all fairness, we went through it with her husband. He was impeached. . . . Folks, do we want to go through this again?”

Republican lawmakers have aggressively questioned Clinton’s State Department dealings for months, with a special committee impaneled to probe the handling of the 2012 Benghazi attacks and separate probes of the department’s personnel practices and handling of classified documents found on her private email server.

Top GOP leaders have previously indicated they will aggressively investigate Clinton if she is elected president. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said last month he considered a Clinton administration a “target-rich environment” and that “we’ve got two years’ worth of material already lined up” for investigations.

[House Republicans are already prepping for ‘years’ of investigations]

Should they keep control of the House in the next Congress, Republicans could easily launch impeachment proceedings, with political will as the most significant obstacle.

The House Judiciary Committee typically investigates charges of official wrongdoing and, if it finds them to be warranted, forwards articles of impeachment to the House floor. Articles approved by a majority of the House are then sent to the Senate for a trial, with a two-thirds majority required for conviction.

Neither Chaffetz nor House Judiciary Committee Chairman Robert Goodlatte (R-Va.) have called for Clinton’s impeachment, but they have made clear they intend to continue probing her emails. In a joint letter sent Thursday, the two chairmen called on Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch to preserve documents related to the email investigation, including the new evidence the FBI disclosed last week.

Chaffetz and Goodlatte have also asked the federal investigators to probe whether Clinton committed perjury during 2015 testimony before the Benghazi panel.

Democrats have warned voters in recent days of apparent GOP obstruction to come, citing the impeachment threats.

“It doesn’t matter what evidence . . . they’ll find something — that’s what they’re saying already,” President Obama said Wednesday during a campaign stop in Chapel Hill, N.C. “How does our democracy function like that?”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that impeaching Clinton for alleged actions that took place before the election “would be a brazen attempt to nullify the vote of the American people, outside our constitutional framework and destructive to the Framers’ intent.”

The Clinton campaign declined to comment.

But the senior Republicans say they are convinced Clinton has broken the law and are speculating that she could be criminally charged after she is elected.

Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, told Fox News Tuesday the probe into Clinton’s emails “will continue whether she wins or not.”

“Assuming she wins and the investigation goes forward and it looks like an indictment is pending, at that point in time under the Constitution, the House of Representatives would engage in an impeachment trial,” he said, warning of a possible “constitutional crisis.”

In a separate Fox News interview Thursday, McCaul accused Clinton of committing “treason” in mishandling classified documents.

FBI Director James B. Comey said in July there was no “clear evidence” that Clinton or associates willingly broke federal laws but “were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

[FBI agents knew of emails in early October]

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, told a Wisconsin newspaper Monday that Clinton could be impeached, citing federal laws against “willful concealment and destruction.”

“I’m not a lawyer, but this is clearly written,” he told the Beloit Daily News. “I would say yes, high crime or misdemeanor, I believe she is in violation of both laws.”

Both McCaul and Johnson have political imperatives for taking a hard line on Clinton: Johnson is locked in a close race to keep his Senate seat and has moved recently to shore up his support among his Republican base. McCaul is said to be considering a possible Senate run against fellow Republican Ted Cruz in 2018.

Former GOP congressman Tom Davis, who served on the House Oversight Committee during the first Clinton administration, warned lawmakers against overreach.

“The news reports don’t look good, but we’re a long way” from impeachment, he said. “There may absolutely be a place for this, I don’t know, but when you jump the gun way ahead, you lose the credibility of your mission before you start. And that’s my caution to both sides.”

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), a current member of the Oversight panel, called the impeachment talk “reprehensible, reckless and un-American” and called it part of a two-decade GOP campaign to undermine Democratic presidents. But he said the failure of the 1998 Bill Clinton impeachment and President Obama’s current popularity shows that perpetual opposition isn’t necessarily good politics.

“We’ve got a base, too, and for every action in politics there is a reaction,” Connolly said. “If you want to fire up our base, keep on making statements like that.”

Other prominent Republicans stopped short this week of suggesting that impeachment should be in the offing.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) called the talk “premature” during an interview on a Texas radio station Tuesday. “She hasn’t been elected or sworn into office,” he said, according to a CNN report on the interview. “And unless there is some additional evidence that the FBI director and the Justice Department would take to a grand jury, then she is not likely to be convicted of a crime.”

Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), a former Judiciary Committee chairman who played a leading role in the 1998 Clinton impeachment, called talk of a Hillary Clinton impeachment “speculative” in a Wisconsin radio interview Tuesday.

But he said there would be a “constitutional crisis” should she be indicted as president. “We don’t need to go through another Watergate,” he said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/11/03/no-honeymoon-for-hillary-congressional-republicans-openly-discussing-impeachment/?utm_term=.31f279dad553

 

On March 27, 2017 at 5:23 PM, mdrake34 said:

For the "dems are out on a witch hunt against Trump" crowd, coughwfwcough, if Hillary had won, the GOP would be doing the EXACT same thing to her.

"That's just speculation mdrake, you don't know that!"

Yeah, well, they said they were going to do it.  Unless they were just making another empty promise they never intended to deliver on . . .

 

5 minutes ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

Show me the tape of them saying that like I showed you.  I haven't seen it, but I did give you several example of Democratic leaders saying it in tape.  I did a search and I couldn't find one example of an elected official from the GOP saying that.  Maybe you found something I couldn't find?  

 

MACK4ttACK likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sobeit said:

So did a large portion of the electorate and they were successful!

Except for the 3 million more people that voted for that ******* awful creature, but sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mdrake34 said:

Except for the 3 million more people that voted for that ******* awful creature, but sure. 

They still don't realize that they do not have a mandate for their agenda.  Even after all everything that's happened since his inauguration, they still act like the vast majority of Americans support their agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mdrake34 said:

Except for the 3 million more people that voted for that ******* awful creature, but sure. 

You mean the Sanctuary cities the only places Hillary could win, hmmm!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Psychic Gibbon said:

Ah, right, the three million illegals thing. I take it Trump has still provided zero proof of that.

The administration is still young I expect a lot more to come out concerning it between now and the time he wins reelection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mdrake34 said:

Trump never investigated the illegal votes like he said he would. His team is too busy being investigated themselves. 

and stealing state secrets... and failing to repeal obamacare... and tweeting... Go Trump! Make Russia Great Again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sobeit said:

The administration is still young I expect a lot more to come out concerning it between now and the time he wins reelection.

You could have said, "No, he hasn't."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now