CNN: Public Approval of Mueller Down to 41%

And he is still above Trump's number!! :21::21::21::21:
Dufus thinks 41 is higher than 45. :cuckoo:

Presidential Approval Ratings -- Donald Trump

His rating is not 45 on CNN, which is where the poll in the OP was from!

Do try and keep up with what you post, it makes life much easier!
Dufus thinks 42 is lower than 41 too. :21::21::21::21::21::laughing0301:

If only CNN had him at 42, but they do not. you just keep making up numbers. something you learned from you savoir in the white house.
 
Which means it's more like 4.1%.

Mueller can come out now and say Trump is from Mars and his policy plan is a cookbook and everyone will just shrug their shoulders.

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/06/21/rel6f.-.russia.investigation.pdf
Only a moronic Trump would say that "41% is the same as 4.1%" in a poll that was never off by 40% or anything close.
Getting "winner" ratings in a message board full of right-wingers doesn't make you smart.

Watch what happens with Rosenstein, Wray, and Mueller next week.

In case you didn't know, the IG report rang the death bell on the Mueller "investigation", k?

It's about to get kicked up a notch, too.

The rats are already in the trap. ;)

How long have we been waiting for something to happen "next week". Do you not ever get tired of being wrong?

Back on May 25th we were told it would be "a couple of weeks"..

Trumps Spygate Conspiracy Theory Ends With A Whimper

and yet here we sit more than 4 weeks later and not a thing has happened.
 
CNN 6/14 - 6/17 901 RV 41 54 -13 54% think Trump is a doofus.

39% oppose Mueller's investigation.

weatherman's numbers contradict him.
 
CNN 6/14 - 6/17 901 RV 41 54 -13 54% think Trump is a doofus.

39% oppose Mueller's investigation.

weatherman's numbers contradict him.

Pardon me for pointing out the elephant in the room, but umm..wouldn't those be CNN subscribers?

I haven't listened to them since they lied about something 2 years ago, k?

The election night poll was the icing on the cake!

If anybody tried to illegally influence the election, it was CNN.

Annd..they failed, bigly.

Did they do any soul-searching after that? Oh no!

They've sextupled down on lying by now.
 
It gets better:


Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation may face a serious legal obstacle: It is tainted by antecedent political bias. The June 14 report from Michael Horowitz, the Justice Department’s inspector general, unearthed a pattern of anti-Trump bias by high-ranking officials at the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Some of their communications, the report says, were “not only indicative of a biased state of mind but imply a willingness to take action to impact a presidential candidate’s electoral prospects.” Although Mr. Horowitz could not definitively ascertain whether this bias “directly affected” specific FBI actions in the Hillary Clinton email investigation, it nonetheless affects the legality of the Trump-Russia collusion inquiry, code-named Crossfire Hurricane.

Crossfire was launched only months before the 2016 election. Its FBI progenitors—the same ones who had investigated Mrs. Clinton—deployed at least one informant to probe Trump campaign advisers, obtained Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court wiretap warrants, issued national security letters to gather records, and unmasked the identities of campaign officials who were surveilled. They also repeatedly leaked investigative information.

Mr. Horowitz is separately scrutinizing Crossfire and isn’t expected to finish for months. But the current report reveals that FBI officials displayed not merely an appearance of bias against Donald Trump, but animus bordering on hatred. Peter Strzok, who led both the Clinton and Trump investigations, confidently assuaged a colleague’s fear that Mr. Trump would become president: “No he won’t. We’ll stop it.” An unnamed FBI lawyer assigned to Crossfire told a colleague he was “devastated” and “numb” after Mr. Trump won, while declaring to another FBI attorney: “Viva le resistance.”

The report highlights the FBI’s failure to act promptly upon discovering that Anthony Weiner’s laptop contained thousands of Mrs. Clinton’s emails. Investigators justified the delay by citing the “higher priority” of Crossfire. But Mr. Horowitz writes: “We did not have confidence that Strzok’s decision to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on [the] investigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop was free from bias.”

Similarly, although Mr. Horowitz found no evidence that then-FBI Director James Comey was trying to influence the election, Mr. Comey did make decisions based on political considerations. He told the inspector general that his election-eve decision to reopen the Clinton email investigation was motivated by a desire to protect her assumed presidency’s legitimacy.

The inspector general wrote that Mr. Strzok’s text messages “created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations.” The report adds, importantly, that “most of the text messages raising such questions pertained to the Russia investigation.” Given how biases ineluctably shape behavior, these facts create a strong inference that by squelching the Clinton investigation and building a narrative of Trump-Russia collusion, a group of government officials sought to bolster Mrs. Clinton’s electoral chances and, if the unthinkable happened, obtain an insurance policy to cripple the Trump administration with accusations of illegitimacy.



Yes. Plus:

What does this have to do with Mr. Mueller, who was appointed in May 2017 after President Trump fired Mr. Comey? The inspector general concludes that the pervasive bias “cast a cloud over the FBI investigations to which these employees were assigned,” including Crossfire. And if Crossfire was politically motivated, then its culmination, the appointment of a special counsel, inherited the taint. All special-counsel activities—investigations, plea deals, subpoenas, reports, indictments and convictions—are fruit of a poisonous tree, byproducts of a violation of due process. That Mr. Mueller and his staff had nothing to do with Crossfire’s origin offers no cure.

When the government deprives a person of life, liberty or property, it is required to use fundamentally fair processes. The Supreme Court has made clear that when governmental action “shocks the conscience,” it violates due process. Such conduct includes investigative or prosecutorial efforts that appear, under the totality of the circumstances, to be motivated by corruption, bias or entrapment.

In U.S. v. Russell (1973), the justices observed: “We may someday be presented with a situation in which the conduct of law enforcement agents is so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial processes to obtain a conviction.” It didn’t take long. In Blackledge v. Perry (1974), the court concluded that due process was offended by a prosecutor’s “realistic likelihood of ‘vindictiveness’ ” that tainted the “very initiation of proceedings.” . . .

The totality of the circumstances creates the appearance that Crossfire was politically motivated. Since an attempt by federal law enforcement to influence a presidential election “shocks the conscience,” any prosecutorial effort derived from such an outrageous abuse of power must be suppressed. The public will learn more once the inspector general finishes his investigation into Crossfire’s genesis. But given what is now known, due process demands, at a minimum, that the special counsel’s activity be paused. Those affected by Mr. Mueller’s investigation could litigate such an argument in court. One would hope, however, that given the facts either Mr. Mueller himself or Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein would do it first.

Mueller’s Fruit of the Poisonous Tree

This antecedent political bias bullshit comes from the same people who always ask "How did Russia force Clinton to delete all those emails or force anyone to vote for Donald Trump?" You can complain all you want, but Strzok didn't force Manafort or anyone else to commit crimes.
 
Which means it's more like 4.1%.

Mueller can come out now and say Trump is from Mars and his policy plan is a cookbook and everyone will just shrug their shoulders.

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/06/21/rel6f.-.russia.investigation.pdf
Only a moronic Trump would say that "41% is the same as 4.1%" in a poll that was never off by 40% or anything close.
Getting "winner" ratings in a message board full of right-wingers doesn't make you smart.

Watch what happens with Rosenstein, Wray, and Mueller next week.

In case you didn't know, the IG report rang the death bell on the Mueller "investigation", k?

It's about to get kicked up a notch, too.

The rats are already in the trap. ;)
Which means it's more like 4.1%.

Mueller can come out now and say Trump is from Mars and his policy plan is a cookbook and everyone will just shrug their shoulders.

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/06/21/rel6f.-.russia.investigation.pdf
Only a moronic Trump would say that "41% is the same as 4.1%" in a poll that was never off by 40% or anything close.
Getting "winner" ratings in a message board full of right-wingers doesn't make you smart.

Watch what happens with Rosenstein, Wray, and Mueller next week.

In case you didn't know, the IG report rang the death bell on the Mueller "investigation" k?
Do you know what happens every time a USMB conservative predicts the end of the "Russia investigation? I have links for you, available upon request.

Here's a link for you, no it's not "Fox news".


Goodlatte, Gowdy Press Rosenstein, Wray on Withholding Documents from Congress - United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

that's because not even fox news is that retarded
 

Forum List

Back
Top