Special Council Investigation Complete - results are ....

[C0|dB|00ded]

Isn't that what legal counsel is for? You ask your legal counsel to take care of a matter and you expect them to inform you if it's illegal, or a bad idea, etc, right? Then it's up to you to take the expert opinion into account and then act or don't act. Sounds to me like he heeded the advice of his attorney and did not fire the Special Counsel, but he could have done it anyway. He didn't.

90% likely that during one of his freewheeling strategy sessions he stated he was firing Mueller to gauge the initial reaction of those in attendance. I pretty much have Trump profiled to a "T" at this point. He is a very creative communicator who enjoys unrestricted brainstorming sessions where people interject, interrupt, and say outlandish things while he digests everything eventually coming to the best decision (in his mind). This is a powerful communicative method with respect to generating innovative ideas and garnering honest input.

Trump's enemies then take the necessary soundbites (completely out of context of course) and scamper off to the Fake News media. There are many times though where I think Trump himself leaks "damaging" comments for the very same reason he enjoys unstructured communication - to judge the nation's initial reaction.

Someone like Obummer would sit quietly while his handlers give him solutions. He would then turn to his attorney and ask how could this hurt me. Next he would turn to his pollsters and ask what will be the likely impact on the next election. He then makes the safe (for him, not America) choice, pleasing his handlers and protecting his legacy.


T


...:cool:

[ShockingButTrue]

Agreed, but I've actually seen a few articles saying Obama comes out looking really bad (which he does to a certain extent), but I have seen very little coverage applying this analysis to Trump. In regards to Trump, everyone seems focused on the obstruction issues.

We absolutely knew that Russia attempted to influence our election, and Trump was not willing to say it was Russia. People on here were not willing to say it was Russia. Going so far as to say that it was probably another WMDs situation where the intelligence community was wrong. I literally talked to someone last weekend that still doesn't think there is evidence that Russia was involved.

Trump isn't willing to call out Russia because he thinks it will belittle winning the 2016 election (most likely... we can always keep our fingers crossed that it's really because Russia has the pee tape and is blackmailing him, but it's just not that likely). But it's resulted in huge portions of his supporters just thinking that Russia is not a threat of any kind. I've been told (i) Russia wasn't involved; (ii) it's not a big deal because every country tries to interfere with every other country's election; and (iii) Obama was at fault. I have yet to see anyone who reads Volume 1 and says "wow, Russia is absolutely our enemy and what Trump's team did was absolutely unacceptable."

I've said it before... One more time...

Russia is the established enemy who can never be trusted. But yet these very same swindlers we're believing to have honest dirt on the President? How gullible can someone be.

[C0|dB|00ded]

By the way, who cares who "attempted to influence our election"; I'm quite certain that there are an unlimited number of nations who have tried in the past to influence our elections in some way or the other. We should concern ourselves with who actually DID influence our election. So far the greatest risk of that happening from outsiders is occurring via the southern border. We have Libtards running for president who have advocated allowing incarcerated felons to vote. I'm quite certain they have/would advocate for allowing illegals to vote also. Once that occurs, "Russian meddling" looks like child's play in comparison.


T


...:cool:

[wufan]

Off topic, but if Bernie believes that voting is an inalienable human right, even for those that have violated the human right of liberty and life of others, then why wouldn’t he just pardon everyone? I mean incarceration is CERTAINLY a violation of human rights.

[ShockingButTrue]

They hatin'

trump-convention-q-1-gdp-2019.jpg

[pinstripers]

Damn........Mueller is a ****ing snake

[C0|dB|00ded]

If he helps Trump get impeached you could also call him a friend.

Imagine Crazy Nancy starting impeachment proceedings and then a week later Trump inks a deal with the Chinese, the stock market goes through the roof, etc. etc.

These Dims just can't get out of their own way.


T


...:cool:

[C0|dB|00ded]

I will say this... the media is impressive with their reporting right now. The ferocity and Fake News is off the charts. Had there been pressure like this on Nixon I suspect he'd have hung himself in the Lincoln bedroom closet. Meanwhile, Trump continues to troll. Honestly, I tip my hat to him. Makes me look like a real gentleman.


T


...:cool:

[ShockingButTrue]

The pall that hung over middle America in the fall of '16, and that would have been a clinton victory, led a -ahem- "congregation" of humanity to say "Hell No!" The result was a Trump victory.

Now, it seems, the leftist's eyes have been opened, and it ain't just the President who's in their cross-hairs. They-hate-us! Really. The evidence is everywhere in plain sight. They've said so many times. They're all-in on the scorched earth policy and there isn't any turning back it seems.

Pelosi said the collateral damage will just be nothing but a side issue, if even that. This spokesperson for the left pretty much sums it up:

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/05/heavyhitter_lefty_actor_warns_what_they_have_in_mi nd_for_us_when_they_win_power.html


It's not too hard to take someone like this guy, and Nancy, seriously. Brother, they mean it!

TDS is real. Unbridled hatred.

[ShockerPrez]

But Donald Trump is the end of democracy, though....

[pinstripers]

https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2019/05/30/mueller-backtracks-presser-tries-clarify-matters-joint-statement-bill-barr/

[ShockingButTrue]

https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/201...ent-bill-barr/

The very definition of intellectual dishonesty (and worse)

[jdshock]

This is the problem with not having clear special counsel statutes or clear rules about prosecuting a sitting president. Mueller was speaking in legalese, right? Of course those two statements are not contradictory. If Mueller said "but for the DOJ rule, I'd indict Trump" that is clearly Mueller saying "I think Trump has committed offenses that are indictable. Mueller said the DOJ rule prevents him from making such a statement. Therefore, it is not contradictory to say "Mueller never said 'but for the OLC opinion, I would have found the president obstructed justice.'" and that "Mueller did not reach an opinion because of the OLC opinion."

But that is a really technical and nuanced issue, and it would be great if Mueller could just come out and say what he meant. Obviously, I don't think anyone really cares. I don't think anyone on here who supports Trump would be swayed if Mueller said "Oh, yeah... for sure, I would say Trump should be indicted but for the OLC opinion." But instead, he's hamstrung by certain rules and opinions, and then us regular folk are left to try to parse what he said.

[shockfan89_]

What the report clearly stated was that Trump didn't work with the Russians to impact the election (NO COLLUSION). That is a fact that cannot be argued.

Given that was the reason Mueller was appointed, I say now we wait until the IG report comes out to see if the Special Counsel was even legally, ethically, and free from political bias. If it was all on the up and up you can then talk about potential obstruction, if the investigation was not legal, ethical, and free from political bias when it was initiated by DOJ and FBI, then obstruction should go away and the focus should be prosecuting people that started the investigation.

[ShockingButTrue]

He was the subject of an investigation that Mueller knew the President was innocent of a week before the investigation even started. And that doesn't need any "nuancing." Well, except for the people who blindly believe cnn.

Blame Fox news my a**.

[ShockingButTrue]

President's approval rating highest in 2 years

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/446347-trumps-approval-rating-hits-highest-point-in-two-years