Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
careful who you call dumb, easypeasyAgain, since this is all over the news and has been explained several times, I am just going to credit you with ACTING 'dumb'.Is it corrupt to pay for bad news on your opponent? Since when?
Acquiring / Buying information n from a foreign agent - especially one connected to the Russians - and using that information against a candidate in a US election, which it was, is a CRIME.
Is it corrupt to pay for bad news on your opponent?What's got you guys nervous today? Usually a big push to discredit Mueller is because someone is sniffing too close.
So far there is more circumstantial evidence pointing to corruption within the DNC than there is within the Trump campaign.
Not to call you a liar, but I've never seen or heard of that one.Is it corrupt to pay for bad news on your opponent?What's got you guys nervous today? Usually a big push to discredit Mueller is because someone is sniffing too close.
So far there is more circumstantial evidence pointing to corruption within the DNC than there is within the Trump campaign.
Apparently, it is when you don't disclose it in your campaign reporting and then lie about it for a year.
Not to call you a liar, but I've never seen or heard of that one.Is it corrupt to pay for bad news on your opponent?What's got you guys nervous today? Usually a big push to discredit Mueller is because someone is sniffing too close.
So far there is more circumstantial evidence pointing to corruption within the DNC than there is within the Trump campaign.
Apparently, it is when you don't disclose it in your campaign reporting and then lie about it for a year.
They have to disclose contributions. People have to disclose employment.
there may well be disclosure requirements about foreign payments.Not to call you a liar, but I've never seen or heard of that one.Is it corrupt to pay for bad news on your opponent?What's got you guys nervous today? Usually a big push to discredit Mueller is because someone is sniffing too close.
So far there is more circumstantial evidence pointing to corruption within the DNC than there is within the Trump campaign.
Apparently, it is when you don't disclose it in your campaign reporting and then lie about it for a year.
They have to disclose contributions. People have to disclose employment.
I read it this morning in an article, which, of course, I can't find now.
The WSJ is responding to / commenting on the EVIDENCE just released...unless you are suggesting Murdoch somehow manufactured and released the evidence that just came out.Well, it's no surprise that Rupert Murdoch's WSJ would run interference for Dotard Trump.
And Easyt whines and moans about that the rest of the MSM is "fake news" when they run an opinion piece. Oh, the irony and hypocrisy.
What maroons....
Wall Street Journal is fake news
It always surprises me how little you know but when you confirmed you prefer bloggers ( not accountable to anyone) over real journalists ( who are) it makes sense.Tell us all then what he's investigating since you know soooooooo much.It’s well known what he’s been investigating.Since "Russian dossier" is a fake, what in the world is Mueller going to "Investigate"?
God damn it’s always hilarious how little you Trump whores follow the news.
“Strip out the middlemen,” the Wall Street Journal’s editors argue this morning, “and it appears that Democrats paid for Russians to compile wild allegations about a US presidential candidate.” The editorial demands a “full investigation” into the FBI’s activities during the previous presidential cycle, saying that collusion may have taken place — only in a completely different direction than previously thought. And that puts the special counsel in an impossible position...
...this impacts on the supposed independence of special counsel Robert Mueller. Even aside from the Uranium One issue that took place while Mueller ran the FBI, the dossier case will directly reflect on James Comey, his friend and protege. And unlike the initial conception of the collusion probe, in which the FBI was presumed to be merely a collector of evidence, it now appears that the agency he led will have to get scrutinized as well — which, the WSJ concludes, makes Mueller’s position untenable:
'Mr. Mueller is a former FBI director, and for years he worked closely with Mr. Comey. It is no slur against Mr. Mueller’s integrity to say that he lacks the critical distance to conduct a credible probe of the bureau he ran for a dozen years. He could best serve the country by resigning to prevent further political turmoil over that conflict of interest.' "
The editors are correct that the exposure of the funding of the dossier changes the entire context of the probe. There is a small but non-zero chance that the FBI picked up this thread as a result of direct contact with Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the DNC, or its contractors, and if so it happened on Comey’s watch. That would at least raise the suspicion of political corruption at the nation’s top law-enforcement and domestic counterintelligence agency. At some point, the special counsel will have to probe those possibilities, and can that be done in a credible manner by a man who commanded the same people just a few years ago?
It will also mean probing Team Hillary and the DNC, who have suddenly contracted a case of laryngitis..."
WSJ to Mueller after dossier exposé: Resign - Hot Air
Considering the revelation of Hillary's connection to the dossier, the fact that she and the DNC paid $9 Million for a false report filled with Russian-generated propaganda from a foreign agent through a Russia-linked firm that just pleaded the 5th when called to testify before Congress and the fact that Hillary accepted over $100 million dollars from the Lead Russian in charge of the Russian Uranium One deal, that leaves several of Mueller's Special Counsel team members, like the former Clinton Foundation Lawyer, being exposed as having Conflicts of Interest that should result in them having to recuse themselves from any further investigations as well.
Aren't the WSJ and Breitbart written by the same people?“Strip out the middlemen,” the Wall Street Journal’s editors argue this morning, “and it appears that Democrats paid for Russians to compile wild allegations about a US presidential candidate.” The editorial demands a “full investigation” into the FBI’s activities during the previous presidential cycle, saying that collusion may have taken place — only in a completely different direction than previously thought. And that puts the special counsel in an impossible position...
...this impacts on the supposed independence of special counsel Robert Mueller. Even aside from the Uranium One issue that took place while Mueller ran the FBI, the dossier case will directly reflect on James Comey, his friend and protege. And unlike the initial conception of the collusion probe, in which the FBI was presumed to be merely a collector of evidence, it now appears that the agency he led will have to get scrutinized as well — which, the WSJ concludes, makes Mueller’s position untenable:
'Mr. Mueller is a former FBI director, and for years he worked closely with Mr. Comey. It is no slur against Mr. Mueller’s integrity to say that he lacks the critical distance to conduct a credible probe of the bureau he ran for a dozen years. He could best serve the country by resigning to prevent further political turmoil over that conflict of interest.' "
The editors are correct that the exposure of the funding of the dossier changes the entire context of the probe. There is a small but non-zero chance that the FBI picked up this thread as a result of direct contact with Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the DNC, or its contractors, and if so it happened on Comey’s watch. That would at least raise the suspicion of political corruption at the nation’s top law-enforcement and domestic counterintelligence agency. At some point, the special counsel will have to probe those possibilities, and can that be done in a credible manner by a man who commanded the same people just a few years ago?
It will also mean probing Team Hillary and the DNC, who have suddenly contracted a case of laryngitis..."
WSJ to Mueller after dossier exposé: Resign - Hot Air
Considering the revelation of Hillary's connection to the dossier, the fact that she and the DNC paid $9 Million for a false report filled with Russian-generated propaganda from a foreign agent through a Russia-linked firm that just pleaded the 5th when called to testify before Congress and the fact that Hillary accepted over $100 million dollars from the Lead Russian in charge of the Russian Uranium One deal, that leaves several of Mueller's Special Counsel team members, like the former Clinton Foundation Lawyer, being exposed as having Conflicts of Interest that should result in them having to recuse themselves from any further investigations as well.
Aren't the WSJ and Breitbart written by the same people?“Strip out the middlemen,” the Wall Street Journal’s editors argue this morning, “and it appears that Democrats paid for Russians to compile wild allegations about a US presidential candidate.” The editorial demands a “full investigation” into the FBI’s activities during the previous presidential cycle, saying that collusion may have taken place — only in a completely different direction than previously thought. And that puts the special counsel in an impossible position...
...this impacts on the supposed independence of special counsel Robert Mueller. Even aside from the Uranium One issue that took place while Mueller ran the FBI, the dossier case will directly reflect on James Comey, his friend and protege. And unlike the initial conception of the collusion probe, in which the FBI was presumed to be merely a collector of evidence, it now appears that the agency he led will have to get scrutinized as well — which, the WSJ concludes, makes Mueller’s position untenable:
'Mr. Mueller is a former FBI director, and for years he worked closely with Mr. Comey. It is no slur against Mr. Mueller’s integrity to say that he lacks the critical distance to conduct a credible probe of the bureau he ran for a dozen years. He could best serve the country by resigning to prevent further political turmoil over that conflict of interest.' "
The editors are correct that the exposure of the funding of the dossier changes the entire context of the probe. There is a small but non-zero chance that the FBI picked up this thread as a result of direct contact with Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the DNC, or its contractors, and if so it happened on Comey’s watch. That would at least raise the suspicion of political corruption at the nation’s top law-enforcement and domestic counterintelligence agency. At some point, the special counsel will have to probe those possibilities, and can that be done in a credible manner by a man who commanded the same people just a few years ago?
It will also mean probing Team Hillary and the DNC, who have suddenly contracted a case of laryngitis..."
WSJ to Mueller after dossier exposé: Resign - Hot Air
Considering the revelation of Hillary's connection to the dossier, the fact that she and the DNC paid $9 Million for a false report filled with Russian-generated propaganda from a foreign agent through a Russia-linked firm that just pleaded the 5th when called to testify before Congress and the fact that Hillary accepted over $100 million dollars from the Lead Russian in charge of the Russian Uranium One deal, that leaves several of Mueller's Special Counsel team members, like the former Clinton Foundation Lawyer, being exposed as having Conflicts of Interest that should result in them having to recuse themselves from any further investigations as well.
You can't have the douchebag (Mueller) the left said is beyond approach who actually along with Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein actively worked to cover up The Russian Extortion and Bribery operation going on for Clinton & Obama to get approval of the Uranium One deal investigating The President when he is part of a Russian Collusion scandal himself.What's got you guys nervous today? Usually a big push to discredit Mueller is because someone is sniffing too close.
You guys applauded Mueller until he started looking at Trump.You can't have the douchebag (Mueller) the left said is beyond approach who actually along with Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein actively worked to cover up The Russian Extortion and Bribery operation going on for Clinton & Obama to get approval of the Uranium One deal investigating The President when he is part of a Russian Collusion scandal himself.What's got you guys nervous today? Usually a big push to discredit Mueller is because someone is sniffing too close.
I never applauded Mueller. In fact I called him Scum and Compromised the second he stepped up to suck Comey's Cock and save his bacon from going to jail.You guys applauded Mueller until he started looking at Trump.You can't have the douchebag (Mueller) the left said is beyond approach who actually along with Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein actively worked to cover up The Russian Extortion and Bribery operation going on for Clinton & Obama to get approval of the Uranium One deal investigating The President when he is part of a Russian Collusion scandal himself.What's got you guys nervous today? Usually a big push to discredit Mueller is because someone is sniffing too close.
No one wants Trump investigated.
They are also known for NOT supporting treason, collusion, and hiding crimes, especially Russian crimes.Aren't the WSJ and Breitbart written by the same people?“Strip out the middlemen,” the Wall Street Journal’s editors argue this morning, “and it appears that Democrats paid for Russians to compile wild allegations about a US presidential candidate.” The editorial demands a “full investigation” into the FBI’s activities during the previous presidential cycle, saying that collusion may have taken place — only in a completely different direction than previously thought. And that puts the special counsel in an impossible position...
...this impacts on the supposed independence of special counsel Robert Mueller. Even aside from the Uranium One issue that took place while Mueller ran the FBI, the dossier case will directly reflect on James Comey, his friend and protege. And unlike the initial conception of the collusion probe, in which the FBI was presumed to be merely a collector of evidence, it now appears that the agency he led will have to get scrutinized as well — which, the WSJ concludes, makes Mueller’s position untenable:
'Mr. Mueller is a former FBI director, and for years he worked closely with Mr. Comey. It is no slur against Mr. Mueller’s integrity to say that he lacks the critical distance to conduct a credible probe of the bureau he ran for a dozen years. He could best serve the country by resigning to prevent further political turmoil over that conflict of interest.' "
The editors are correct that the exposure of the funding of the dossier changes the entire context of the probe. There is a small but non-zero chance that the FBI picked up this thread as a result of direct contact with Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the DNC, or its contractors, and if so it happened on Comey’s watch. That would at least raise the suspicion of political corruption at the nation’s top law-enforcement and domestic counterintelligence agency. At some point, the special counsel will have to probe those possibilities, and can that be done in a credible manner by a man who commanded the same people just a few years ago?
It will also mean probing Team Hillary and the DNC, who have suddenly contracted a case of laryngitis..."
WSJ to Mueller after dossier exposé: Resign - Hot Air
Considering the revelation of Hillary's connection to the dossier, the fact that she and the DNC paid $9 Million for a false report filled with Russian-generated propaganda from a foreign agent through a Russia-linked firm that just pleaded the 5th when called to testify before Congress and the fact that Hillary accepted over $100 million dollars from the Lead Russian in charge of the Russian Uranium One deal, that leaves several of Mueller's Special Counsel team members, like the former Clinton Foundation Lawyer, being exposed as having Conflicts of Interest that should result in them having to recuse themselves from any further investigations as well.
The WSJ editorial section is known to lean right.
This thread didn't age well : First charges filed in Robert Mueller's Russia investigation“Strip out the middlemen,” the Wall Street Journal’s editors argue this morning, “and it appears that Democrats paid for Russians to compile wild allegations about a US presidential candidate.” The editorial demands a “full investigation” into the FBI’s activities during the previous presidential cycle, saying that collusion may have taken place — only in a completely different direction than previously thought. And that puts the special counsel in an impossible position...
...this impacts on the supposed independence of special counsel Robert Mueller. Even aside from the Uranium One issue that took place while Mueller ran the FBI, the dossier case will directly reflect on James Comey, his friend and protege. And unlike the initial conception of the collusion probe, in which the FBI was presumed to be merely a collector of evidence, it now appears that the agency he led will have to get scrutinized as well — which, the WSJ concludes, makes Mueller’s position untenable:
'Mr. Mueller is a former FBI director, and for years he worked closely with Mr. Comey. It is no slur against Mr. Mueller’s integrity to say that he lacks the critical distance to conduct a credible probe of the bureau he ran for a dozen years. He could best serve the country by resigning to prevent further political turmoil over that conflict of interest.' "
The editors are correct that the exposure of the funding of the dossier changes the entire context of the probe. There is a small but non-zero chance that the FBI picked up this thread as a result of direct contact with Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the DNC, or its contractors, and if so it happened on Comey’s watch. That would at least raise the suspicion of political corruption at the nation’s top law-enforcement and domestic counterintelligence agency. At some point, the special counsel will have to probe those possibilities, and can that be done in a credible manner by a man who commanded the same people just a few years ago?
It will also mean probing Team Hillary and the DNC, who have suddenly contracted a case of laryngitis..."
WSJ to Mueller after dossier exposé: Resign - Hot Air
Considering the revelation of Hillary's connection to the dossier, the fact that she and the DNC paid $9 Million for a false report filled with Russian-generated propaganda from a foreign agent through a Russia-linked firm that just pleaded the 5th when called to testify before Congress and the fact that Hillary accepted over $100 million dollars from the Lead Russian in charge of the Russian Uranium One deal, that leaves several of Mueller's Special Counsel team members, like the former Clinton Foundation Lawyer, being exposed as having Conflicts of Interest that should result in them having to recuse themselves from any further investigations as well.