Has anyone considered that Mueller may be working on a charge of treason against Trump?

[Billy_Kinetta]

Memories.

At that time (1967-70) I was lead singer in a regionally popular rock band. We played multiple gigs on weekends, and for high school kids made shitpots full of money. I was not a fan of the government at the time. (Johnson-Nixon)

One day, the leader of the multi-school student anti-war group approached me and said "You have a lot of influence. You should join us and speak out against the war."

I cast her a baleful eye and said something along the lines of "No. I have a brother in Nam. As far as I'm concerned, we can carpet-bomb those little yellow bastards until they bleed piss, until he comes home. I really don't care about them."

Recall the sentiment of the times. She turned pale and stared for a moment, then wandered off.

It didn't affect my job in the slightest.

You stil have the same sentiments about carpet bombing "the little yellow bastards" as you called them? Or did you finally grow up and develop a conscience and some respect for humanity?

Not at all. They ceased being little yellow bastards when my brother got home.

Overall, humans are beasts. They are capable of great things, but I don't respect them simply for existing.

 

[mikegriffith1]

After all, isn't it strange that Trump never says anything bad or negative about Putin?

Oh. My. Goodness. Really? Never? Really?

 

[mikegriffith1]

I'll tell you what's "odd": that you fail to mention that Trump has sold weapons to Ukraine and Georgia, expelled over 60 Russian diplomats, slapped high tariffs on Russian steel imports, shut down a Russian consulate, extended Obama's sanctions on Russia and imposed new ones, pushed NATO nations to spend more on defense, and tried to get Germany to cancel the Russian-German pipeline deal.

 

[dannyboys]

I posted this thread over 4 months ago. It's more relevant now than it was then.

But before I comment further, I want to ask a rhetorical question that is considerably less provocative than it is a simple common sense inquiry.

If you're a president with nothing to hide, and you know that you and your campaign are both not guilty of any kind of collusion (conspiracy) with the Russians to affect the 2016 election, but you also understand that optics and your behavior could either bolster your argument or weaken it considerably in the eyes of people who still have an open mind about what happened (and why) in 2016, then I can't help but ask the following question:

With your countrymen and the world watching (from afar), why would you choose to meet Putin in private for 2 hours with no high-ranking American aides present, no stenographer, and no one other than an American translator? Why shouldn't reasonable, rational people be suspicious of what happened in that meeting room.under such circumstances?

President Trump, why would you do that if you have nothing to hide?

If Obama had met privately with Putin for two hours the LIB MSM would be calling for Obama to be awarded a second Noble Peace Prize.
They'd be calling Obama 'the greatest peace maker in US history.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

..They'd be calling Obama 'the greatest peace maker in US history.

I thought they already did that when they handed him the first fake Nobel Peace Prize

 

[dudmuck]

Really?

It named no names?

There were no Americans indicted, shit for brains. Muellers witchhunt is supposedly about collusion. Remember that?

I never mentioned Americans, dope.

If there are no Americans implicated, then it's a farce. You can't have "collusion" without any Americans, now can you, fuck stick.

No Americans implicated? Two weeks ago it was announced that Mueller's team would release evidence tying Manafort chargets to Trump campaign.

But separately on the non-Mueller front, the arrest of Maria Butina points to different collusion.

WTF are chargets? Two weeks ago, and he still has nothing? Guess what he will have in two years? Still nothing!

Butina has nothing to do with anything related to the Trump campaign. Nothing has even been alleged. You just don't like her last name.

There is a new list of Manafort evidence, and that trial is just starting now.

Butina doesnt need to have interacted with Trump campaign. She met with US Treasury. And conveniently, the treasury no longer requires the NRA to disclose donors.

 

[bripat9643]

There were no Americans indicted, shit for brains. Muellers witchhunt is supposedly about collusion. Remember that?

I never mentioned Americans, dope.

If there are no Americans implicated, then it's a farce. You can't have "collusion" without any Americans, now can you, fuck stick.

No Americans implicated? Two weeks ago it was announced that Mueller's team would release evidence tying Manafort chargets to Trump campaign.

But separately on the non-Mueller front, the arrest of Maria Butina points to different collusion.

WTF are chargets? Two weeks ago, and he still has nothing? Guess what he will have in two years? Still nothing!

Butina has nothing to do with anything related to the Trump campaign. Nothing has even been alleged. You just don't like her last name.

There is a new list of Manafort evidence, and that trial is just starting now.

Butina doesnt need to have interacted with Trump campaign. She met with US Treasury. And conveniently, the treasury no longer requires the NRA to disclose donors.

You snowflakes are so desperate. Now a Russian who never got within 1000 miles of Trump is evidence of "collusion."

 

[Mustang]

I posted this thread over 4 months ago. It's more relevant now than it was then.

But before I comment further, I want to ask a rhetorical question that is considerably less provocative than it is a simple common sense inquiry.

If you're a president with nothing to hide, and you know that you and your campaign are both not guilty of any kind of collusion (conspiracy) with the Russians to affect the 2016 election, but you also understand that optics and your behavior could either bolster your argument or weaken it considerably in the eyes of people who still have an open mind about what happened (and why) in 2016, then I can't help but ask the following question:

With your countrymen and the world watching (from afar), why would you choose to meet Putin in private for 2 hours with no high-ranking American aides present, no stenographer, and no one other than an American translator? Why shouldn't reasonable, rational people be suspicious of what happened in that meeting room.under such circumstances?

President Trump, why would you do that if you have nothing to hide?

Perhaps for diplomatic reasons Trump chose not to embarrass Putin with a public meeting while explaining the facts of life to him.

Perhaps they just talked about their favorite movies. The salient point is that we just don't know what was discussed because Trump made sure that we wouldn't know, that we COULD'NT know! Why would that be if Trump had nothing to hide from his fellow Americans?

 

[Mustang]

I posted this thread over 4 months ago. It's more relevant now than it was then.

But before I comment further, I want to ask a rhetorical question that is considerably less provocative than it is a simple common sense inquiry.

If you're a president with nothing to hide, and you know that you and your campaign are both not guilty of any kind of collusion (conspiracy) with the Russians to affect the 2016 election, but you also understand that optics and your behavior could either bolster your argument or weaken it considerably in the eyes of people who still have an open mind about what happened (and why) in 2016, then I can't help but ask the following question:

With your countrymen and the world watching (from afar), why would you choose to meet Putin in private for 2 hours with no high-ranking American aides present, no stenographer, and no one other than an American translator? Why shouldn't reasonable, rational people be suspicious of what happened in that meeting room.under such circumstances?

President Trump, why would you do that if you have nothing to hide?

No.

Let me elaborate. Not a chance in hell. I know it's the dream of every Lefty, but IT AIN'T GOING TO HAPPEN. And yes, I will be more than willing to post an apology and an admission that I was totally wrong.

It's not a dream. Dreams are pleasant. This is an American nightmare!

You're a fucking idiot. A guy leaves his cushy lifestyle to try to do good for the America he loves, and here you are being an asshat. I'd like to kick you right in your ass, you piece of shit! What have you done for America? Fuck right the hell off. I'm tired of bullshit like this.

"Leaves his cushy lifestyle"? You need a reality check. Trump's "lifestyle" is cushier than it ever was before, and WE, the American people, are paying for it now!

Remember when Trump said he wouldn't have time for golf as he criticized Obama for golfing so much? Well, Trump's playing golf more often than Obama did, and the American taxpayers are footing the bill for all his trips to FL on AF1.

 

[Mac1958]

I posted this thread over 4 months ago. It's more relevant now than it was then.

But before I comment further, I want to ask a rhetorical question that is considerably less provocative than it is a simple common sense inquiry.

If you're a president with nothing to hide, and you know that you and your campaign are both not guilty of any kind of collusion (conspiracy) with the Russians to affect the 2016 election, but you also understand that optics and your behavior could either bolster your argument or weaken it considerably in the eyes of people who still have an open mind about what happened (and why) in 2016, then I can't help but ask the following question:

With your countrymen and the world watching (from afar), why would you choose to meet Putin in private for 2 hours with no high-ranking American aides present, no stenographer, and no one other than an American translator? Why shouldn't reasonable, rational people be suspicious of what happened in that meeting room.under such circumstances?

President Trump, why would you do that if you have nothing to hide?

No.

Let me elaborate. Not a chance in hell. I know it's the dream of every Lefty, but IT AIN'T GOING TO HAPPEN. And yes, I will be more than willing to post an apology and an admission that I was totally wrong.

It's not a dream. Dreams are pleasant. This is an American nightmare!

You're a fucking idiot. A guy leaves his cushy lifestyle to try to do good for the America he loves, and here you are being an asshat. I'd like to kick you right in your ass, you piece of shit! What have you done for America? Fuck right the hell off. I'm tired of bullshit like this.

"Leaves his cushy lifestyle"? You need a reality check. Trump's "lifestyle" is cushier than it ever was before, and WE, the American people, are paying for it now!

Remember when Trump said he wouldn't have time for golf as he criticized Obama for golfing so much? Well, Trump's playing golf more often than Obama did, and the American taxpayers are footing the bill for all his trips to FL on AF1.

I don't think this is about lifestyle, anyway. It's more about HIM.
.

 

[Contumacious]

People keep talking about collusion despite the fact that collusion is not a crime. However, conspiracy to hack into the DNC email system AND obstruction of justice are both crimes and would qualify as high crimes and misdemeanors for the purposes of impeachment.

But what if that's not the least of it?

After all, isn't it strange that Trump never says anything bad or negative about Putin? Isn't it also extremely odd that Trump keeps denying Russian interference in the 2016 election despite overwhelming evidence provided by numerous intelligence agencies? And why hasn't Trump enacted the sanctions that congress overwhelmingly voted on last year?

Let me propose a possible theory of what happened in the past and what's happening behind the scenes now: Years ago, Trump struck a bargain with the devil (so to speak). He agreed to help Russians launder money (which is, of course, illegal) in exchange for payment. For the most part, these transactions mostly flew under the radar. However, the Russians would certainly have evidence of all of these transactions although they would certainly have no incentive to blow the whistle on Trump. But once Trump ran for president and WON the election, the Russians would now have leverage over Trump. That leverage would give the Russians the power to blackmail Trump. At this point, Trump had a choice. One choice was the choice of a patriot: refuse to give in to the blackmail and risk the possibility that the money laundering scheme would go public. The other choice is the choice of a traitor who would place his own personal interest above the interests of the USA while also betraying his oath of office. In other words, Trump is quite possibly putting the interests of Putin and Russia above that of his own country and is essentially a foreign agent, and a turncoat. More plainly, it's quite possible that President Trump is a traitor.

What say you?

There is no "overwhelming evidence" provided by the intelcommunity.

You must learn to tell the difference between an ALLEGATION AND A FACT.

You must also disclose how you concluded that the CIA did not employ its UMBRAGE technique.


.

 

[Mustang]

I'll tell you what's "odd": that you fail to mention that Trump has sold weapons to Ukraine and Georgia, expelled over 60 Russian diplomats, slapped high tariffs on Russian steel imports, shut down a Russian consulate, extended Obama's sanctions on Russia and imposed new ones, pushed NATO nations to spend more on defense, and tried to get Germany to cancel the Russian-German pipeline deal.

You must still believe that Magicians use real magic.

From Oct 25, 2017 Bloomberg Businessweek:

Four days after his inauguration, Donald Trump signed a handful of executive memos to advance the Keystone XL pipeline and revive the U.S. steel industry. He invited builder TransCanada Corp. to reapply for a permit denied by Barack Obama and ordered up fast-track rules forcing not only Keystone but also all new U.S. pipelines to be made from American steel. “From now on, we’re going to be making pipeline in the United States,” he said.

Made-in-America Keystone was a stunt. Most of its pipes had already been manufactured, a fact the White House grudgingly admitted when it exempted the project from any new Buy American rules a few months later. While some of Keystone’s pipes were made in the U.S., at least a quarter of them came from a Russian steel company whose biggest shareholder is an oligarch and Trump family friend. The company, Evraz North America, supplied Keystone from its steel plants in Canada and for years has lobbied in Washington against Trump-style protectionism.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Obviously, the detail in the indictments had nothing to do with your strawman, crowdstrike. Certainly the server did not and would not have revealed such details as names and paymemt methods.

Try again, loser.

How do YOU KNOW what the server revealed or didn't reveal ? You work for Crowdstrike, or the DNC ?

None of this stuff has a damn thing to do with the 2016 election and if anybody wants to talk about rigging that election, they can start with millions of sanctuary city Democrat-protected illegal aliens, illegally voting for Hillary Clinton, then progress to fixed debates, Democrat leaders who had to be fired or resign (DWS, Scott Foval, Amy Dacey, Brad Marshall, Luis Miranda, Donna Brazile etc), Hillary's earpiece, Hillary being fed information, Trump rallygoers being attacked by goons at trump rallies (San Jose, Chicago, etc), disruptors inside Trump rallies,

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattv...nton-campaign-undercover-video-sting-n2234276

The purge: Senior DNC staff resigns after email revelations

Donna Brazile is totally not sorry for leaking CNN debate questions to Hillary Clinton



​

How do YOU KNOW what the server revealed or didn't reveal ? You work for Crowdstrike, or the DNC ?

I just told you, dope.

Tell us all how the server would in any way reveal the names of the russian intelligence officers behind the attack and the who ,how and in what ways it was then disseminated and ultimately financed.

You can't. Obviously the server was not required to assemble this detailed analysis.

It's a dopey narrative without thought or substance.

These latest indictments are soley about the 2016 election and the russian operation, dope. I suggest you read them.

 

[skews13]

People keep talking about collusion despite the fact that collusion is not a crime. However, conspiracy to hack into the DNC email system AND obstruction of justice are both crimes and would qualify as high crimes and misdemeanors for the purposes of impeachment.

But what if that's not the least of it?

After all, isn't it strange that Trump never says anything bad or negative about Putin? Isn't it also extremely odd that Trump keeps denying Russian interference in the 2016 election despite overwhelming evidence provided by numerous intelligence agencies? And why hasn't Trump enacted the sanctions that congress overwhelmingly voted on last year?

Let me propose a possible theory of what happened in the past and what's happening behind the scenes now: Years ago, Trump struck a bargain with the devil (so to speak). He agreed to help Russians launder money (which is, of course, illegal) in exchange for payment. For the most part, these transactions mostly flew under the radar. However, the Russians would certainly have evidence of all of these transactions although they would certainly have no incentive to blow the whistle on Trump. But once Trump ran for president and WON the election, the Russians would now have leverage over Trump. That leverage would give the Russians the power to blackmail Trump. At this point, Trump had a choice. One choice was the choice of a patriot: refuse to give in to the blackmail and risk the possibility that the money laundering scheme would go public. The other choice is the choice of a traitor who would place his own personal interest above the interests of the USA while also betraying his oath of office. In other words, Trump is quite possibly putting the interests of Putin and Russia above that of his own country and is essentially a foreign agent, and a turncoat. More plainly, it's quite possible that President Trump is a traitor.

What say you?

I say if anybody has the authority to bring that charge, it would be a decorated combat Marine with the character of Robert Mueller to bring them.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

People keep talking about collusion despite the fact that collusion is not a crime. However, conspiracy to hack into the DNC email system AND obstruction of justice are both crimes and would qualify as high crimes and misdemeanors for the purposes of impeachment.

But what if that's not the least of it?

After all, isn't it strange that Trump never says anything bad or negative about Putin? Isn't it also extremely odd that Trump keeps denying Russian interference in the 2016 election despite overwhelming evidence provided by numerous intelligence agencies? And why hasn't Trump enacted the sanctions that congress overwhelmingly voted on last year?

Let me propose a possible theory of what happened in the past and what's happening behind the scenes now: Years ago, Trump struck a bargain with the devil (so to speak). He agreed to help Russians launder money (which is, of course, illegal) in exchange for payment. For the most part, these transactions mostly flew under the radar. However, the Russians would certainly have evidence of all of these transactions although they would certainly have no incentive to blow the whistle on Trump. But once Trump ran for president and WON the election, the Russians would now have leverage over Trump. That leverage would give the Russians the power to blackmail Trump. At this point, Trump had a choice. One choice was the choice of a patriot: refuse to give in to the blackmail and risk the possibility that the money laundering scheme would go public. The other choice is the choice of a traitor who would place his own personal interest above the interests of the USA while also betraying his oath of office. In other words, Trump is quite possibly putting the interests of Putin and Russia above that of his own country and is essentially a foreign agent, and a turncoat. More plainly, it's quite possible that President Trump is a traitor.

What say you?

There is no "overwhelming evidence" provided by the intelcommunity.

You must learn to tell the difference between an ALLEGATION AND A FACT.

You must also disclose how you concluded that the CIA did not employ its UMBRAGE technique.


.

There obviously was evidence that was presented to the GJ who approved the indicments, dope.

 

[WEATHER53]

I would not call it working but rather throwing a variety darts at a variety of boards and looking for a bullseye rather than a score 1.

 

[Mustang]

Whenever I see someone like Trump pretending to be such a great patriot and getting upset at flag issues, it reminds me of the saying 'patriotism, the last refuge of the scoundrel'. This poor little rich kid got several deferments during the Vietnam war and now he's pretending to be superpatriot.

It's the Ted Nugent wing of the Republican Party. They're loud. They're obnoxious. And they're vulgar. They're also hyperpartisans who hate anyone who won't march in lock step with them.. They embrace conspiracy theories while they're simultaneously contemptuous of facts when those facts don't support their desired narrative. They love Trump because he's just like them.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I posted this thread over 4 months ago. It's more relevant now than it was then.

But before I comment further, I want to ask a rhetorical question that is considerably less provocative than it is a simple common sense inquiry.

If you're a president with nothing to hide, and you know that you and your campaign are both not guilty of any kind of collusion (conspiracy) with the Russians to affect the 2016 election, but you also understand that optics and your behavior could either bolster your argument or weaken it considerably in the eyes of people who still have an open mind about what happened (and why) in 2016, then I can't help but ask the following question:

With your countrymen and the world watching (from afar), why would you choose to meet Putin in private for 2 hours with no high-ranking American aides present, no stenographer, and no one other than an American translator? Why shouldn't reasonable, rational people be suspicious of what happened in that meeting room.under such circumstances?

President Trump, why would you do that if you have nothing to hide?

Perhaps for diplomatic reasons Trump chose not to embarrass Putin with a public meeting while explaining the facts of life to him.

Perhaps they just talked about their favorite movies. The salient point is that we just don't know what was discussed because Trump made sure that we wouldn't know, that we COULD'NT know! Why would that be if Trump had nothing to hide from his fellow Americans?

Considering that the Democrats and their media pets have fallen completely face down in the gene pool, I would not be inclined to tell them anything either.

And no, they are not "fellow Americans". Frankly, I don't know what the fuck they are.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I posted this thread over 4 months ago. It's more relevant now than it was then.

But before I comment further, I want to ask a rhetorical question that is considerably less provocative than it is a simple common sense inquiry.

If you're a president with nothing to hide, and you know that you and your campaign are both not guilty of any kind of collusion (conspiracy) with the Russians to affect the 2016 election, but you also understand that optics and your behavior could either bolster your argument or weaken it considerably in the eyes of people who still have an open mind about what happened (and why) in 2016, then I can't help but ask the following question:

With your countrymen and the world watching (from afar), why would you choose to meet Putin in private for 2 hours with no high-ranking American aides present, no stenographer, and no one other than an American translator? Why shouldn't reasonable, rational people be suspicious of what happened in that meeting room.under such circumstances?

President Trump, why would you do that if you have nothing to hide?

No.

Let me elaborate. Not a chance in hell. I know it's the dream of every Lefty, but IT AIN'T GOING TO HAPPEN. And yes, I will be more than willing to post an apology and an admission that I was totally wrong.

It's not a dream. Dreams are pleasant. This is an American nightmare!

You're a fucking idiot. A guy leaves his cushy lifestyle to try to do good for the America he loves, and here you are being an asshat. I'd like to kick you right in your ass, you piece of shit! What have you done for America? Fuck right the hell off. I'm tired of bullshit like this.

"Leaves his cushy lifestyle"? You need a reality check. Trump's "lifestyle" is cushier than it ever was before, and WE, the American people, are paying for it now!

Remember when Trump said he wouldn't have time for golf as he criticized Obama for golfing so much? Well, Trump's playing golf more often than Obama did, and the American taxpayers are footing the bill for all his trips to FL on AF1.

So what? He's accomplished ten times in eighteen months what Obama "accomplished" in eight years.

 

[bripat9643]

I posted this thread over 4 months ago. It's more relevant now than it was then.

But before I comment further, I want to ask a rhetorical question that is considerably less provocative than it is a simple common sense inquiry.

If you're a president with nothing to hide, and you know that you and your campaign are both not guilty of any kind of collusion (conspiracy) with the Russians to affect the 2016 election, but you also understand that optics and your behavior could either bolster your argument or weaken it considerably in the eyes of people who still have an open mind about what happened (and why) in 2016, then I can't help but ask the following question:

With your countrymen and the world watching (from afar), why would you choose to meet Putin in private for 2 hours with no high-ranking American aides present, no stenographer, and no one other than an American translator? Why shouldn't reasonable, rational people be suspicious of what happened in that meeting room.under such circumstances?

President Trump, why would you do that if you have nothing to hide?

Perhaps for diplomatic reasons Trump chose not to embarrass Putin with a public meeting while explaining the facts of life to him.

Perhaps they just talked about their favorite movies. The salient point is that we just don't know what was discussed because Trump made sure that we wouldn't know, that we COULD'NT know! Why would that be if Trump had nothing to hide from his fellow Americans?

Whenever you snowflake morons admit your total ignorance, you immediately start gushing about the smoking gun evidence Mueller has just obtained.