Russia Probe

As the Mueller Report Drops, a Transparency Fight Begins

How much will we see of the special counsel's report? And when?

|

Robert Mueller
Alex Wong/Pool/Cnp/ZUMA Press/Newscom

There no need to ask if we'll see Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report about his investigation of Russian attempts to meddle in the 2016 presidential election. We almost certainly will. The real questions are when we'll get it, how much we'll see of it, and who's going to leak it.

Because these days, sieves are jealous of the federal government. If the report claims any sort of direct connection between President Donald Trump and Russian election interference, some folks are going to want to get that into the public's hands. And if the report does not show any connections, a different group of people is going want to leak that information out.

Unnamed Justice Department officials are telling reporters Mueller has recommended no further indictments. The letter from Attorney General Robert Barr to ranking members of Congress indicates that he found no actions by the Mueller's special investigation to be inappropriate. Barr further noted that he may be able to advise the heads of Congress' two judiciary committees of the conclusions reached by the report over the weekend.

That means something may leak out tomorrow or Sunday. A spokesperson from the Justice Department said the conclusions of the report (note that this isn't the same as the report itself) may be released to the public as the same time as it is to Congress, perhaps to avoid the issue of somebody on either side of the political aisle attempting to leak a heavily spun version of the conclusions.

In any event, Democratic leaders are now immediately calling for the entire report to be released:

And of course, presidential candidates among the Democrats are lining up behind that message. The desire to release the report might not actually be a Dems vs. GOP thing however: Recall that the House of Representatives voted 420–0 on a resolution to release the report, though it's not clear where the Senate stands. Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R–Ky.) is a bit non-committal in his response:

He's calling for "as much openness and transparency as possible" without actually saying he's going to push for the full report's release.

As for the complicated details of what happens to the report, here's an explainer. Barr has a lot of control over how much information will be made public and even revealed to Congress and Trump himself.

But given how much of geopolitical space this entire Russian investigation has consumed ever since Trump became president, it's easy to predict we're going to see much—maybe even all—of the report regardless of what Barr, or Trump, Pelosi, or McConnell want. And probably sooner rather than later.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

335 responses to “As the Mueller Report Drops, a Transparency Fight Begins

  1. No reasonable Speaker will impeach.

    1. on Saturday I got a gorgeous Ariel Atom after earning $6292 this ? four weeks past, after lot of struggels Google, Yahoo, Facebook proffessionals have been revealed the way and cope with gape for increase home income in suffcient free time.You can make $9o an hour working from home easily??.

      VIST THIS SITE RIGHT HERE >>=====>>>> http://www.Theprocoin.com

    2. on Saturday I got a gorgeous Ariel Atom after earning $6292 this ? four weeks past, after lot of struggels Google, Yahoo, Facebook proffessionals have been revealed the way and cope with gape for increase home income in suffcient free time.You can make $9o an hour working from home easily??.

      VIST THIS SITE RIGHT HERE >>=====>>>> http://www.Theprocoin.com

    3. Makes me wonder… when was the last time we had a “reasonable” Speaker?

      1. Before Pelosi?

        Boehner.

        And I am no GOPer.

        1. BWAHAHAHAHA

          1. I essentially started three weeks past and that i makes $385 benefit $135 to $a hundred and fifty consistently simply by working at the internet from domestic. http://xurl.es/ReadMore

          2. on Saturday I got a gorgeous Ariel Atom after earning $6292 this ? four weeks past, after lot of struggels Google, Yahoo, Facebook proffessionals have been revealed the way and cope with gape for increase home income in suffcient free time.You can make $9o an hour working from home easily??.

            VIST THIS SITE RIGHT HERE >>=====>>>> http://www.payshd.com

            1. Why everyone is confused just join at home online job .This is really good opurtunity for home mom just join this website and Earn money by monthly check .So u cant be miss and join this site as soon as posible .
              Here what i am doo ?

              ??????? http://www.AproCOIN.Com

              1. Why everyone is confused just join at home online job .This is really good opurtunity for home mom just join this website and Earn money by monthly check .So u cant be miss and join this site as soon as posible .
                Here what i am doo ?

                ??????? http://www.finestylereview.com

        2. Uhhh..try again…

      2. Ender Wiggin?

        1. Some in the House *do* look like they may already be dead…

    4. In this thread, chemjeff beclowns himself almost as much as he did when defending the right of child rapists to receive asylum in the US

      1. I don’t have a lot of love for Ken but he and NAS did yeoman’s work in this thread. I wish there was some way to buy them both a beer.

        1. Yeah, Chemleft’s bum was a lot sorer once they finished with him.

  2. No indictments. Hmm I wonder which Democrat will be the first to say that the Russians got to Mueller?

    “Well I went home with Bob Mueller
    The way I always do
    How was I to know
    He was with the Russians too?”

    1. Mueller is Putin’s puppet who forced him to serve a Russian tofu nothing burger.

    2. Actually there were 36 indictments.

      You mean “no Con Man indictment” and that might be correct.

      1. Totally unrelated to what the investigation was started for. But hey thanks for playing.

        1. People close and closest to Pres. Trump lied, under oath and to extraordinary degree, about contacts with Russians. That is obstruction of justice. It is directly related to the investigation. Roger Stone is still in the barrel, and his testimony (or documentary evidence) seems destined to bring the problems to Trump’s right hand, if not closer.

          We do not know whether Trump has escaped indictment (so far) (1) because he was exonerated, (2) because there was evidence but not enough for a Republican prosecutor to pull the trigger on a Republican president, or (3) because certain debatable Justice Department legal interpretations reject indictment of an in-office President, regardless of the degree of moral and legal culpability, indicating the President is to be indicted at the conclusion of his term.

          We also still have the investigations related to the campaign, the inauguration, the foundation, the emoluments, and the tax returns to observe. And the vestigial prosecutions deriving from Mueller’s investigation. But with Mueller’s work done, state prosecutors and congressional investigators have a freer hand to investigate, charge, and prosecute Pres. Trump, his family, and his organizations.

          Still plenty of fun on the horizon.

          1. Ahahahahahaah you completely fucking failed!!!

            You bet the farm and you lost!!

            You HANDED TRUMP 2020!!

            AHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAJAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

            1. You’re nuts.

          2. Keep grasping. And let’s see one conviction of lieing to FBI agents where even the agents didn’t think he lied and originally they had decided not to prosecute. Also the aforementioned contact with Russia was actually part of his job on the transition team and had nothing to do with criminal behavior. One distant, low level campaign volunteer, one person prosecuted for shit that happened long before he had joined the Trump campaign (and his ties were to Ukraine and just so happens that Podesta, who worked for Clinton had the same ties). This also had nothing to do with the campaign and he wasn’t exactly the closest of close. And Trump had fired him partially because he was to close to Russia. Who else do you have? Cohen is probably the only one that can be truly classified as close to Trump and he was not prosecuted for anything to do with Russia. So your rant is not even factually accurate.

          3. I love it when the Deep State “Libertarians” show their true colors, cheering on a lawfare witch hunt.

          4. Plenty of fun? Do you mean more of the same bogus magical thinking and obstruction (yes, that’s exactly what it is) of government by democrats? You don’t have to be on the Trump train to see that the far left (whoops, I mean democrats) is gripped by a mass hysteria that in saner times would have been scorned by anyone with just a few vestigial neurons. So, using government power to harass and vilify people just because of who they are is ok with you Rev.? (By the way, reverend of what, pray tell — progressive smears and gaslighting?)

            Rev. you’ve been sliming this site for quite a while, have convinced no one of anything by your erstwhile scribbling, and have generally been an object of derision. But it’s all getting wearying and you need to roost with birds-of-a-feather at HuffPo, Salon, Nation, and similar outer planets.

            But you won’t because like all those of your ilk you’re on some kind of benighted mission.

      2. Zero indictments, of anyone, on charges related to collusion with Russia.

        1. Sarah Sanders hasn’t sung yet. Roger Stone alone should be worthy of popcorn and optimism.

          1. You know, some people think OBL is the gold standard for parody-of-a-lefty in the Reason comments, but if that’s so, you’re platinum.

      3. “Actually there were 36 indictments.”

        Yeah, lying shitbags like you and Tony keep bringing up those guilty pleas for littering and the like.
        Keep it up; your rep just grows, turd.

        1. Majority of those indictments will.never see the inside of a courtroom. Only idiots would continue to point to it. Whitewater had a dozen felony convictions directly related to whitewater.

    3. Send lawyers guns and money
      The shit has hit the fan

      1. +1 Warren Zevon, or however it’s spelled.

        1. You spelled it right! Have a Denver J.

  3. Well, no one here ever claimed that Trump’s Con Man, White Trash, Lying-Ass self was going to get impeached.

    1. You can’t post without lying, turd; Tony as much as had him convicted.
      And “lying-ass” from you is pure projection.

      1. Actually, I as much did not want him booted from office, because Pence is a terrible religious nutjob who can control himself in public or on Twitter and, while disliked by practically everyone, thus had a chance of rehabilitating the Republican party’s image, what with America’s infinitesimally short attention span. Keep Trump in and twatting! That’s what I say.

        1. Pence is a terrible religious nutjob
          Literally nothing Pence has said regarding religion or LGBTQWTFBBQ is one iota different than what Obama and Hillary were saying in 2008. Yet those two are your gods.
          Fuck, Pence sounds like Harvey Milk compared to Hillary “Defense of Marriage Act” Clinton, during her husband’s administration.

          When are you going to stop being so ideologically dishonest, Tony?

          1. People who defend Mike Pence’s bigotry are among my favorite authoritarian, bigoted casualties of the culture war.

            Carry on, clingers.

          2. People who defend Mike Pence’s bigotry are among my favorite authoritarian, bigoted casualties of the culture war.

            Carry on, clingers.

            1. AHAHAHAHAHAHAH GRASP THOSE STRAWS MOTHERFUCKER!!!

              AHAHHAHAHAAHAHAHAJAHAH

            2. Kirkland, that wasn’t worth posting twice; it wasn’t even worth posting once.

    2. Yes lets ignore multiple members of Congress calling for impeachment because you were wrong.

      1. Wait. Does AOC want to impeach Trump? Because as we all know, AOC represents the entirety of the Democrat Party. Pelosi? Who’s that?

        1. The Pigeon Strikes!

        2. I would love nothing more than to watch the Yas Queens of the democratic party steamroll over the old heads that allowed their party to turn into the oppression Olympics. God bless the shrieking minority women and their many dumb-as-a-brick twitter followers for showing the rest of the country what empty-headed fools progressives have become

          1. ^^^ Milo Yiannopoulos language

        3. Jeff. You’re unusually idiotic with this response. I didnt bring up AOC shithead. Are you truly ignorant to the comments of the DNC? Start with Auntie Maxine for one shithead.

          1. Green, Sherman, Schiff etc.

    3. Actually I have made that exact claim several times. And I’m no less confident now.

      1. Time to sit back, pour yourself a cosmo, relax your sex organs, and watch justice bloom.

    4. Except the Lefty MSM everyday for the last 2 years.

  4. I would fucking hate Trump if I was Manafort, Gates, Flynn, Papadopoulos, the Dutch Lawyer, Stone and the others. At best it was Trump’s stupidity that bought on the investigation in the first place. Trump couldn’t have made a bigger target by constantly lying and confessing his motives on live TV. I’d be really surprised if Mueller doesn’t give enough to justify the initial universal suspicious. It’s not like there isn’t probable cause in every fucking direction.

    1. Trump does seem to have a habit of dragging down everyone who surrounds him.

      1. One reason not to impeach him.

      2. The smart ones get the fuck out after calling Trump a “fucking moron” – Tillerson, Kelly, Gary Cohn, others. I respect them for it. Even Nikki Haley wanted out of the monkey zoo.

        That leaves the imbeciles like Rick W Perry, Ben Carson, and others to hang around and spread their incompetence.

        1. Fuck off loser. Go cry in your panties.

      3. DRAGGING THEM AL THE WAY DOWN TO THE WHITE HOUSE!!

        AGAHAHAHHAHAHAAHAHJAJAJA

    2. Ordinary Person|3.22.19 @ 8:55PM|#
      “I would fucking hate Trump if I was Manafort, Gates, Flynn, Papadopoulos, the Dutch Lawyer, Stone and the others.”

      You already do, loser.

    3. Your bitterness is palpable.

      The fact is, Trump had just found out the FBI etc had been spying on his campaign all along. So — get this — he didn’t trust them. Gosh, can you imagine?

      If Trump had been obsequious and intimidated by the investigation, it would have destroyed his Presidency as it was intended to do.

      He takes the high risk high reward path. You have an cooked up investigation that threatens to destroy your Presidency. Take that and turn it into an asset.

      1. The five stages of grief:

        1. Denial & Isolation.
        2. Anger.
        3. Bargaining.
        4. Depression.
        5. Acceptance.

        It’s taken them two years to graduate from denial about the Mueller probe to anger. Give the lefties time to shit their pants and run around in circles before they get to bargaining. They haven’t even started demonizing Mueller yet. After all, his report didn’t say what they wanted it to say. If that doesn’t make him a target for their anger, . . .

        1. Here you are gearing up for a Comey probe. Where’s delusional on the chart.

          1. Do you imagine there’s less reason for a Comey investigation than there was for a Trump investigation?

            1. Maybe you can get this QAnon fellow to provide some dirt for a new investigation.

              1. You mean now that they’re freed up from RUSSIA?

              2. “Comey said he was aware of who funded the report, which Steele compiled for Fusion GPS, a political research firm co-founded by former Wall Street Journal reporter Glenn Simpson.

                “I was told at some point that it was ? the effort had originally been financed by a Republican source to develop material, opposition research on Donald Trump,” Comey told Stephanopoulos. “Then after the Republican nominating process ended, the effort was taken up and funded by a Democratic-aligned group trying to get opposition research on Trump. ? I never knew ? who the groups were, but I knew it started with Republicans paying for it and then Democrats were paying for it.”

                http://abcnews.go.com/Politics…..d=54488781

                The FBI was apparently denied a wiretap warrant on the Trump campaign twice–until they resubmitted it with information from the Steele Dossier. The fact that the source of the warrant application was opposition political research was withheld from the FISA court that approved the warrant.

                The FBI conducting surveillance on a presidential campaign on the basis of bogus information they knew had no business being used as evidence to obtain a warrant is a serious allegation–and it should be investigated. If you thought the FBI were wiretapping the Warren campaign that was authorized by a warrant based on opposition political research, you’d shit your pants and have a conniption.

              3. Poor ignorant Jeffie. Of course you would love a banana republic like prosecution of a politician you hate. Stop claiming you’re a libertarian shithead.

                1. you would love a banana republic like prosecution of a politician you hate

                  Kinda like chanting “Lock Her Up” at political rallies of a certain politician?

                  1. Hillary Clinton is a crook.

                    “In all, governments and corporations involved in the arms deals approved by Clinton’s State Department have delivered between $54 million and $141 million to the Clinton Foundation as well as hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to the Clinton family, according to foundation and State Department records.”

                    —-Mother Jones

                    http://www.motherjones.com/pol…..rms-deals/

                    She reported accepting all that money from foreign governments while she was the secretary of state–as if reporting that she robbed a string of banks somehow meant she wasn’t a bank robber.

                  2. “Kinda like chanting “Lock Her Up” at political rallies of a certain politician?”

                    Look at this ridiculous way of thinking.

                    The tu quoque would be bad enough, but, even beyond that, there’s an implication that if you think Hillary Clinton is a crook, then you must be wrong.

                    The possibility that Hillary Clinton might actually be a crook never seems to occur to him.

                    Keep pushing, you might even see chemjeff suggest that if Hillary Clinton is a crook, then Donald Trump must be one, too, since that’s only fair.

                    1. Hillary’s a crook.

                      You’re a disaffected bigot and a culture war casualty who must spend his entire life whining about complying with others’ political preferences.

                      Crosses to bear all around.

                    2. “Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland|3.23.19 @ 1:22PM|#

                      Hillary’s a crook”

                      Hey you got one right!!!

                    3. “In all, governments and corporations involved in the arms deals approved by Clinton’s State Department have delivered between $54 million and $141 million to the Clinton Foundation as well as hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to the Clinton family, according to foundation and State Department records.”

                      —-Mother Jones

                      http://www.motherjones.com/pol…..rms-deals/

                      Read it and weep.

                      Hillary Clinton’s responsibility as secretary of state included approving weapons sales to foreign countries, and she accepted between $54 million and $141 in payments from those foreign governments while she was secretary of state.

                      Look at the link! It’s all detailed in that article.

                      Hillary Clinton really is a crook.

                      Accepting money from foreign governments while she’s the secretary of state is completely indefensible–accepting payments from countries that had applications for arms sales pending for her approval is (indefensible)^2.

                    4. Why didn’t Sessions prosecute?

        2. The left is already sugesting subpena every document Muller has so that they can make thier own determination and of course drag it out untill 2020

          1. They’re just making themselves look like Birthers and Truthers again.

            They keep forgetting that there’s this crazy thing called “reality”, and it doesn’t conform to the pronouncements of the news media and AOC.

            The reality is that Mueller found nothing, Pelosi is against bringing an impeachment vote to the floor, and there’s nothing left to do but try to convince the American people that the Democrats aren’t half as crazy as the presidential candidates seem–despite the fact that they’re all pushing for the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and Reparations for Slavery.

            I hope they keep making Birthers and Truthers of themselves. Come 2020, that’s gonna seem so 2017. And the more openly socialist the Democrats become, the more I care that whomever the Democrat nominee is, he or she loses.

            1. Agreed let fools speak to show thier foolishness

            2. The reality is that Mueller found nothing

              Your ability to predict the future is every bit as impressive as your ability to shape American society has been for the past few decades.

              Carry on, clingers. So far as bigotry, ignorance, and backwardness can carry anyone.

              1. ^^^Man, talk about a bitter clinger.

            3. ‘They keep forgetting that there’s this crazy thing called “reality”‘

              They don’t forget, they deny.

              “Reality is a socially constructed Narrative of the white supremacist cisheteropatriarchy used to oppress marginalized peoples”

              There is no Reality. There are only Narratives.

          2. Last thing any half-sane Dem politician wants is to drag this nothing burger out to the next election. Trump couldn’t get better endorsement than have the Dems drag up even more nothing before the public and turn Trump into a martyr to corrupt politics.

            1. On the contrary, the problem that Democrats have is that their base- the people who will fund all the primary contestants- have bought in to the grotesque narrative that has been pushed for the past 3 years. They have gained popularity and money by babbling vague promises of Trump’s inevitable comeuppance. They have a prisoner’s dillema before them. They can all agree to “MoveOn” (.org) or one or two could break ranks to call loudly for impeachment on whatever technicality is found in the report, and corner the market for these activists.

              It is true that Pelosi wants this to go away because she already has what she wants- a house majority. But the Primary contenders are still in the hunt for their prize. Repeatedly rattling the impeachment saber is a win-win for them. They get to not only collect dollars from people who just can’t accept the nothingburger and at the same time appear to be the real progressive radical who will remake the Dems in a more leftist manner.

              1. The contenders are as you say, but they have only a very noisy minority backing them. The vast majority of Dems are typical voters: quiet and busy running their lives.

                It’s the fence sitters the Dems have to worry about after four years of crying wolf about Trump and Russia, on top of shrill calls for socialism and the Green New Deal. If just 10% of voters hold their nose and switch to the GOP, it will be an Electoral College landslide.

        3. The problem is, they HAVE started demonising Mueller. Some lefties have even suggested he has been compromised by the Russians.
          It’s really pathetic. They are already threatening to sopena. Mueller and have accused Mueller and Barr of a cover up before Barr even releases the report. They haven’t even seen the report and they are already shouting about the content.
          Trump needs to demand an apology from every single dummycrat and disgusting ‘news’ outlet.
          He should demand Maddow be fired for her consistent conspiracy about Russia. She is absolutely the worse example of fake news.

      2. Fuckers like Trump or Putin should leave a bad taste in your mouth. Of course I don’t like him.

        1. “Fuckers like Trump or Putin should leave a bad taste in your mouth.”

          Fucking lefty ignoramuses like you are amusing. Keep lying; it can only help your rep.

        2. Obama and Hillary did more for Putin than trump could ever dream of dummy.

        3. The bad taste in your mouth is all the communist shit you keep eating.

          1. Open wider, perlchpr. Your betters have more progress, science, tolerance, education, reason, freedom and inclusivity to shove down your whiny, right-wing throat.

            And you will comply with the liberal-libertarian mainstream’s wishes, just as you have for decades.

            But you get to whimper about it impotently all you wish.

      3. Oh look, it’s another Trump boot-licker. How droll.

        1. Don’t worry, you’ll always have Bernie.

          1. You really think I’m a Bernie voter?

            1. Well you settled, but this time you won’t have to.

              1. I didn’t vote for Bernie and I didn’t vote for Hillary.

                What makes you think I voted for either of them? Because I don’t like Trump? I didn’t vote for him either.

                Can you get it through your head that just because a person doesn’t like Trump, doesn’t make that person a BernieBro?

                1. Because I don’t like Trump? I didn’t vote for him either.

                  More gifted reasoning from the Pigeon.

                  No, it’s the fact that you twist yourself in knots to defend whatever the Dem talking point of the day is.

                  1. Let me translate that for you:

                    “I don’t regard Democrats as axiomatically evil”

                    That is closer to the truth. The fact that you regard anything that doesn’t denounce Democrats at every turn and in every way as just “repeating Dem talking points” says more about you than it does about me.

                    1. Let me translate for you:

                      “I default to assuming that Democrats are always trying to do the right thing and anyone on the Right is doing the wrong thing.”

                      Your performance during the Kavanaugh witch hunt showed just how unprincipled you are. And for all of your claims of whataboutism, nothing holds a candle to your pearl clutching over Podesta and Pizzagate.

                      That is the unvarnished truth.

                    2. I am more skeptical of the right than of the left, that is for sure.

                      And shocker of shockers, I don’t view Kavanaugh as God’s gift to the Supreme Court. Heavens to Betsy! I’m not on Team Red! What a shock! I’m not a water carrier for Team Red like you evidently expect me to be.

                      The pure libel over the Pizzagate nonsense is beyond absurd. I don’t know how anyone can defend that nonsense. But, you being you, I am sure you’ll find a way.

                    3. Of course you are more skeptical of the right. Your entire line of reasoning always consists of the ends justify the means. You even repeat it here with Kavanaugh. It isn’t “carrying water” to expect some shred of evidence to accuse someone of sexual assault. But because you reflexively hate any conservative, that justifies the witch hunt.

                      I can see why you have amnesia over the Pizzagate false equivalence. You spent over an hour accusing me of defending it, and you did it again right now. Because in Jeffy’s mind some tinfoil theory/accusation supported by literally no single right wing politician or commentator is equivalent to sitting Dem senators trying to destroy a man in front of the entire nation based on claims with zero corroboration.

                      It’s certainly not surprising that you continue to look for the pony in this particular pile of shit too. The narrative demands it.

                    4. It isn’t “carrying water” to expect some shred of evidence to accuse someone of sexual assault.

                      For a trial in a court of law? You’re right. For a political campaign? Oh don’t even go there. Especially when you and your tribe spent TWO DECADES accusing Bill Clinton of being a *RAPIST* on less evidence than was presented against Kavanaugh. Was Kavanaugh being tried before a jury on charges of sexual assault? If so, then I would have been right there with you. But he WASN’T, and you know that. And that you now stand there sitting in some pious judgment against those who would dare to use your same tactics against you, is absurd beyond belief. And even still, *I NEVER SUPPORTED FORD’S CLAIMS AGAINST KAVANAUGH*. I only had the temerity to point out that the criteria for a job promotion are different than the criteria for conviction of a crime. Team Red cynically conflated the two to its advantage and you dare to justify and legitimate the conflation, which just goes to show how much you are a Team Red dupe.

                    5. Less evidence?

                      You call Pizzagate pure libel and dismiss the Kavanaugh smear with a wave of the hand and a flippant justification of “a job interview.” Kavanaugh would have been ruined and you know that. But he was the enemy and that is all that mattered. Any justification could be rationalized. And I note how you seize on Team Red “cynicism” and fail to find any reason to doubt the Team Blue motives. How telling.

                    6. Yes, less evidence. Why do you expect me to be swayed by some article in Slate? Oh, because it’s Slate, and chemjeff is a lefty, and all lefties believe everything in Slate! That is about the extent of your thought process, isn’t it? The evidence for Bill Clinton raping Juanita Broaddrick is about as strong as the evidence for Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulting Christine Ford. Neither one is particularly strong. Yet that didn’t stop you and your tribe from accusing Bill Clinton of being a rapist for 20 years, and then fall to your fainting couch when the *exact same tactics* are used against an ally of your tribe. Well tough noogies for you. You have absolutely no moral standing to preach about ‘due process’ or ‘presumption of innocence’ outside of the setting of a court of law. Once again: If Juanita Broaddrick had pursued her claims in a court of law, or if Christine Ford had pursued her claims in a court of law, I would have been absolutely with you in presuming Bill Clinton and Brett Kavanaugh, respctfully, a presumption of innocence in those proceedings. (You would of course have presumed Clinton innocent, right? Right?) But they didn’t, and so they didn’t enjoy such presumption. Neither one. You want the double standard. I don’t. That’s the difference.

                    7. chemjeff says . . .

                      Especially when you and your tribe spent TWO DECADES accusing Bill Clinton of being a *RAPIST* on less evidence than was presented against Kavanaugh.

                      But then chemjeff says . . .

                      The evidence for Bill Clinton raping Juanita Broaddrick is about as strong as the evidence for Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulting Christine Ford.

                      So, you’ve moved from the position that the evidence was weaker in the Clinton case to that it wasn’t. Now maybe you can move on to the truth.

                      You see, the difference is that 1) there are people willing to testify that Broaddrick told them that Clinton raped her contemporaneously with the rape, and 2) there is documentation of evidence that Broaddrick was raped by someone.

                      On the other hand, Ford by her own account never told anyone contemporaneously about the alleged attack, never named Kavanaugh until he made the news decades later, and her account of the events that she made after Kavanaugh was nominated directly contradicted the only record of her account made before the nomination.

                      While it certainly isn’t enough to justify a conviction for rape, the Broaddrick accusation of Clinton is vastly more credible than the Ford accusation of Kavanaugh.

                    8. Oh, and for the record, Bill Clinton settled a sexual harassment case with Paula Jones. There’s unquestionably more evidence against him than Kavanaugh. An Appeals court certainly thought so.

                2. You’re not a libertarian either shithead Jeff.

                  1. And you are?

                    You fucking Jesse Helms jackass.

                    1. “And you are?”

                      Asks the hag supporter…
                      Hey, turd! You and she lost, loser!

                    2. No moneyshot isn’t a libertarian he’s a pedophile who got banned for posting kiddie porn links.

                  2. I’m more of a libertarian than you are. As far as I can see, Jesse, you’re just a Trump boot-licker.

                    1. chemjeff radical individualist|3.22.19 @ 10:29PM|#
                      “I’m more of a libertarian than you are.”

                      Yep, lefty assholes are, uh…
                      Well, they can kind of see liberartianism ‘way over there if the squint…

                    2. I know, Sevo. I’m an extremist in the defense of liberty. What a terrible libertarian I am. Isn’t that right?

                    3. Hah!

                    4. So what is the liberty that I have been insufficiently supportive of. Be specific.

                    5. No really. Tell me where I have been insufficiently defending liberty. Because I am not a perfect person, I will be the first to admit.

                      But of course, defending liberty is not the same as defending Team Red. Or Team Blue, for that matter. So I make no apologies for not subscribing to either red/blue tribal loyalty.

                    6. Besides due process? Presumption of innocence?

                      You are correct in stating that defending liberty is not the same thing as defending Team Blue. You should try it some time.

                    7. Do you honestly think defending liberty is the same as defending Team Red? I would love to see you defend that presumption.

                      People are free to believe anything they want about you without any sort of presumption of innocence. True or false?

                    8. Jeffie Pop, if you can’t objectively see how the evidence from several women against Bill Clinton is stronger than one half-assed vague witness against Kavanaugh, you have let your hatred of Trump destroy your last shred of objectivity.

                    9. I said the evidence for Bill Clinton *RAPING* Juanita Broaddrick.

                    10. Besides the accuser, the witnesses who saw her injuries that night and the ones she told that night what happened? Did any of Kavanaugh’s accuser have any supporting witnesses? No. But Juanita Broaderick did, her roommate attested that Broaderick returned from Clinton’s room that night with her dress and pantyhose ripped her lips swollen and in a state of shock. She then told Rogers that Clinton had assaulted her sexually. So yes more evidence.

                    11. All of the evidence in Clinton’s case comes from Broaddrick herself. There is no corroborating evidence whatsoever, independent of Broaddrick herself, that proves Clinton even went to the hotel, let alone raped Broaddrick. The claim that Clinton raped her is on very shaky ground. But that did not stop Team Red from accusing Clinton of being a rapist for 20 years now. So spare me the crocodile tears about how Kavanaugh was treated so poorly. He got much the same treatment that Clinton got.

                    12. No, it also came from her roommate and a physical examination but keep playing. I said her roommate verified that Broaderick was injured and that her clothing was ripped. So no it wasn’t o ly from Broaderick.

                    13. Her roommate wasn’t present. Her knowledge of the event is entirely based on what Broaddrick told her. I’m not aware of the physical exam.

                    14. Contemporaneous reports, hospital examinations, bruising.

                      All introduced into the record. All presented against President Clinton, but none against Justice Kavanaugh (though I agree, I’d rather have had another Gorsuch).

                    15. Besides due process? Presumption of innocence?

                      You’re not giving me due process or presumption of innocence. Why do you think all are entitled to it as a matter of fundamental liberty?

                    16. Like the due process and presumption of innocence you give Kavanaugh?

                    17. Was Kavanugh on trial? Am I on trial? Due process, and presumption of innocence, are legal concepts, meant to place the burden of proof on the prosecution to prove why the accused is guilty.

                      Outside of the courtroom, no one is obligated to give anyone due process or a presumption of innocence. Would you agree?

                    18. Due process is for trials only?

                      Why did you bring up due process for Bill Clinton but Kavanaugh gets none?

                    19. Due process is for trials only?

                      When it comes to accusations of criminal behavior? Well, yeah. Outside of court, no one is required to follow due process, or adhere to a presumption of innocence, when it comes to anyone accused of a crime. Nor should they be! It follows directly from freedom of conscience. I am free to believe that Kavanaugh or Clinton or anyone else is a rapist scumbag, just like I am free to believe that the earth is flat or that the moon is made of cheese. Specifically with regards to Kavanaugh, the “due process” he was entitled to is entirely up to the rules of the Senate. And the Senate is not required to follow the courtroom standard. Maybe they should, but that is a different argument.

                      Why did you bring up due process for Bill Clinton but Kavanaugh gets none?

                      Neither Clinton with his rape accusation, nor Kavanaugh with his sexual assault allegation, received very much in the way of due process. But then again neither one was criminally charged over those allegations.

                    20. You should put some ice on that, chemjeff

                    21. Bailing out, are yee? I wonder which arguments you gave up rebutting.

            2. “You really think I’m a Bernie voter?”

              No.
              Voting for anyone who might win would soil your self righteousness.

              “muh anarchy”

    4. The walls are closing in!

      You’ll get him OP, just keep resisting!

    5. His stupidity in winning? Because that’s what really led to their downfall, if you insist on ignoring everything THEY did.

    6. “If only Trump hadn’t threatened the power of the Deep State, ever so slightly, they wouldn’t have come after us. Orange Man Bad!”

  5. Transparency fight!

    Man, these libs never give it a rest. The President hasn’t even seen the report yet.

    1. It’s been clear for at least a week or two that the Ds were pivoting to the strategy of alleging coverup when the report comes out.
      They know there will be (legally required) redactions, so their only hope of keeping the delusion going is to point at redactions and suggest that’s where all kinds of nefarious info lies.
      Never let reality get in the way of power mongering fantasy

      1. Which is stupid since Trump has already stated he wants it completely released. They’ll release the redacted version this week I bet and the Democrats will point to redacted information as hiding stuff (which is kind of the point). They know they can never release the full unredacted version, it will undoubtedly put real intelligence sources at risk (some was probably developed by human intelligence assets in Russia how long is there life span worth if the report was released in full?) so they can keep pounding that point.

        1. Yep.
          They know they have nothing but a compliant media and lemming followers.
          It’ll have to suffice

        2. Kind of stupid of Trump to say he wants it completely released, before he’s seen it. DOJ policy prohibits accusing people of things you don’t indict them for, but that policy is often observed in the breach.

  6. How much of a nothingburger do we need to see in order to know that it’s a nothingburger?

    I want to know when a special prosecutor will be appointed to investigate the FBI’s behavior during the 2016 election, specifically concentrating on Comey. There was no way we ever about to get a full accounting of that from Mueller, who was personally responsible for transforming the FBI into the shit-show it became and was Comey’s personal mentor.

    1. Fuck Comey. I want to know how much President Obama was involved in the rampant corruption, abuse of power, and politicization at the FBI and DOJ.

      It defies credibility that his advisors didn’t keep him in the loop if they were surveilling the rival party’s nominee for ostensibly national security reasons and didn’t give the president regular updates.

      1. Hell, if Obama didn’t know everything that was going on, it means the FBI has gotten so out of control that it views itself as beyond accountability (an entirely plausible scenario actually) and should be completely dismantled immediately.

        1. America’s half-educated bigots are going to spend the rest of their lives railing about Obama the Kenyan Muslim Communist Negro.

          That, and getting their downscale asses kicked some more in the culture war.

          1. “America’s half-educated bigots are going to spend the rest of their lives railing about Obama the Kenyan Muslim Communist Negro”

            Yes you are.

          2. So are you suggesting that the FBI and Justice Department kept the President in the dark about a potentially treasonous presidential nominee?

          3. Why do you hate poor people so much?

    2. I want to know when the Deep State criminals will hang.

  7. Critical detailed polling information was provided to the Russians at the direction of Trump during the campaign. That’s collusion. Trump knew the Russians were involving themselves in the election and Trump invited that involvement. Trump then helped cover up for the Russians by lying and trying to stifle any inquiry into the crimes and activities of this hostile foreign nation. There’s your collusion. There’s your betrayal. Fuck you.

    1. You and the Truthers and the Birthers and the JFK conspiracy nuts and the Flat Eartners and the John Birchers should all get together and form your own bowling league.

      1. Those are all conservatives. Throw the Creationists in there too.

        1. Yeah no shit. He forgot the “Deep Staters”.

        2. Oliver Stone is a conservative? Because he is one of the biggest JFK conspiracy nuts around. But keep playing one of these days you’ll make a point.

          1. His fevered post is unhinged regardless of whether the JFK conspiracy nuts (not to mention birthers, truthers, and flat-earthers) are Democrat or Republican.

            1. His fevered post is unhinged

              “Critical detailed polling information was provided to the Russians at the direction of Trump during the campaign.”

              Ken, is this statement true, or false?

              1. Why does it matter?

                1. Well, if the statement is true, it does not provide support to your claim that “his fevered post is unhinged”.

                  If the statement is false, please explain why you believe it is false.

                  1. You still don’t understand the null hypothesis, do you?

                    1. Oh look, Skippy is here to throw sand into the air to obscure the conversation.

                    2. You mean like this:

                      Wait. Does AOC want to impeach Trump? Because as we all know, AOC represents the entirety of the Democrat Party. Pelosi? Who’s that?

                      Poor Jeffy.

                    3. “Oh look, Skippy is here to throw sand into the air to obscure the conversation.”

                      Oh, look, chemjeff is here to prove he’s an ignoramus!

                    4. Well well well, looks like I have quite the fan club tonight.

                    5. chemjeff radical individualist|3.22.19 @ 10:10PM|#
                      “Well well well, looks like I have quite the fan club tonight.”

                      Getting regularly called on your continuous bullshit by many people =/= a “fan club”, but fucking lefty ignoramuses like you will spin stuff until it should make you dizzy.

                  2. The idea that Trump won the election because voters were influenced by the Russians is stupid and absurd–and isn’t that your other premise lurking in the background?

                    1. The idea that Trump won the election because voters were influenced by the Russians

                      I never claimed such a thing, Ken, and I dare you to find any time where I did say such a thing.

                      Now, is this statement true or false?

                      “Critical detailed polling information was provided to the Russians at the direction of Trump during the campaign.”

                    2. And precisely who is the burden of proof on, Jeffy?

                      But since we’re asking true or false questions, how about the one above that you dismissed:

                      Yes lets ignore multiple members of Congress calling for impeachment because you were wrong.

                      True or false, Jeffy?

                    3. Oh look, it’s another member of my fan club trying to deflect and distract.

                    4. chemjeff radical individualist|3.22.19 @ 10:28PM|#
                      “Oh look, it’s another member of my fan club trying to deflect and distract.”

                      No, it’s ‘Oh, look! One more person who can call bullshit when they see it!’

                    5. Why are you worried about the Russians getting polling data again?

                      They bought some ads on Facebook?

                      For Christ’s sake, the Kremlin has been operating a whole fucking propaganda news network in the U.S. for ten years. Matt Welch used to appear on it all the time.

                      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AST-2lJaLP0

                    6. “Now, is this statement true or false?

                      Tell me why it should matter whether it’s true or false.

                    7. Why are you worried about the Russians getting polling data again?

                      I’m not “worried”, and you are deflecting.

                      Your responses indicate that you know the statement to be true, you just don’t want to admit it. There is nothing wrong with admitting the truth even if it isn’t flattering to Trump. Truth ought to come before tribalism.

                      You will note that I left off the portion of Ordinary Person’s statement that concluded that sharing polling data with the Russians was some type of nefarious ‘collusion’. Because I am not certain that it is.

                      But what harm is there in just admitting the truth, that Trump’s campaign manager at the time intentionally shared polling data with the Russians?

                      http://www.nytimes.com/2019/01…..imnik.html

                      If you want to make the argument that sharing the data is no big deal, then make it.
                      If you want to make the argument that the source is not credible, then make it.
                      But don’t just deny reality. That is a bad look.

                    8. You’re being willfully obstinate.

                      “Critical detailed polling information was provided to the Russians at the direction of Trump during the campaign.”

                      Why does it matter if the Russians got polling data?

                      Can you not answer that question?

                      I can’t.

                      I can tell you why it doesn’t matter.

                      I can tell you that it doesn’t matter if Russia bought advertising or operated a propaganda news network in the US for ten years and it’s still going.

                      You tell me why it matters if the Russians got polling data.

                      I’m all ears. Why does it matter?

                    9. You tell me why it matters if the Russians got polling data.

                      I’m all ears. Why does it matter?

                      I’m not saying it does or doesn’t matter. That’s not the question, and you’re trying to change the subject, plain for all to see.

                      You said that Ordinary Person’s original post was an “unhinged” “fevered post” because it claimed, in part, what is evidently a truthful claim, that Trump’s campaign shared polling data with the Russians. That does not speak well of you, when you just seek to discredit a claim even if the claim is truthful. Why would you do that, Ken?

                    10. Thank you for being honest about the fact that the answer to the question doesn’t really matter.

                      And the fact that Ordinary Person is going hyper in his diaper over a question that doesn’t really matter actually suggests that it’s unhinged.

                      It’s off it’s hinges. He’s off his fucking rocker. And you defending his unhinged rant knowing that whether what he said in that part of it was true doesn’t matter–that doesn’t speak well of you either.

                    11. There is nothing “fevered” or “unhinged” about making factual claims.

                      Is it “fevered” or “unhinged” to say that Trump frequently exaggerates, to the point of lying, when he talks? No, it is simply an observation of reality.

                      Same deal here. There is nothing “unhinged” at all about factually claiming that Trump’s campaign shared polling data with the Russians.

                      You seem to want to make the argument that it wasn’t a big deal. Fine. Go ahead and make that argument. But don’t deny reality.

                    12. “You said that Ordinary Person’s original post was an “unhinged” “fevered post” because it claimed, in part, what is evidently a truthful claim, that Trump’s campaign shared polling data with the Russians. That does not speak well of you, when you just seek to discredit a claim even if the claim is truthful. Why would you do that, Ken?”

                      Actually, OP said “Critical detailed polling information was provided to the Russians at the direction of Trump during the campaign. That’s collusion.” (1)The source article specifically notes that Manafort shared the info, and there is no evidence that Trump directed him to do so. (2) He asserted that; that is collusion, but it is not.

                      So yes, OP’s post is unhinged, and (figuratively) fevered.

                    13. Except it is not truthful in any way. The polling data was not critical, and the data was already in the public domain.
                      Just ask yourself. When has any polling data ever been critical considering by it’s very nature all polling data is little more than guess work at best, and that is if it is not purposely bias.

              2. Jeff you ignorant shithead… did you read the news about Ukraine and Hillary today?

                1. Okay, and?
                  Do you think that possible collusion between Hillary and Ukraine, means that nothing happened between Trump and Russia?

                  It is possible that both happened, or that neither happened.

                  1. “Do you think that possible collusion between Hillary and Ukraine, means that nothing happened between Trump and Russia?”

                    The fact that Mueller spent two years investigating Trump and pressured every associate of Trump’s he could to testify against him–and still couldn’t find any persuasive evidence of collusion–is fairly strong evidence that there isn’t sufficient evidence to conclude that there was any collusion between Trump and Russia.

                    Has there been an investigation like that regarding Hillary and the Ukraine?

                    1. “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”

                    2. chemjeff radical individualist|3.22.19 @ 10:34PM|#
                      “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”

                      But constant bullshit is evidence of a bullshitter, bullshitter.

                    3. So, you know something that Mueller doesn’t know?

                      You’re so deep in the hole.

                      The investigation is over. Pelosi said last week she didn’t want to impeach.

                      At this point, you should really stop digging.

                    4. So, you know something that Mueller doesn’t know?

                      What I know, is that I haven’t read the report yet, and before concluding that it’s a ‘nothingburger’, I should at least read the darn thing. What do you think, Ken?

                    5. I think the investigation is over.

                      I think Pelosi said she wouldn’t impeach.

                      I think there’s something to conclude from that.

                      I think you should feel free to tilt at windmills.

                      In fact, I think that seeing you defend the rantings of the unhinged suggests that you won’t ignore things that don’t matter anymore until you can read the classified portions of the Mueller report–which will probably never happen.

                      And I think people should feel free to laugh at you for that.

                    6. “And I think people should feel free to laugh at you for that.”

                      Thanks Ken, I will.

                    7. But absence of evidence is absence of evidence. That’s the part that you can’t quite grasp.

                      And then we have the little problem that the Steele dossier was paid for by Hillary and used, according to the NYT (your most trusted news source, undoubtedly):

                      After Mr. Trump secured the nomination, Fusion GPS was hired on behalf of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and the D.N.C. by their law firm, Perkins Coie, to compile research about Mr. Trump, his businesses and associates ? including possible connections with Russia. It was at that point that Fusion GPS hired Mr. Steele, who has deep sourcing in Russia,

                      And we know that Veselnitskaya (TRUMP TOWER COLLUSION!!!) was in regular contact and working with Simpson of Fusion GPS. So is there a reason that the RUSSIAN who got the polling data in order to share with Ukrainians is worth more than the RUSSIANS paid by Steele to develop still unsubstantiated claims in the dossier?

                    8. absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

                      Actually, yes, it is. Basic Bayesian inference. It’s not proof, but it certainly is evidence. If there is no smoke, reduce one’s expectation there is a fire.

                      And indeed, Sagan himself made an implicit absence-of-evidence-is-evidence-of-absence argument with his chapter “The Dragon in My Garage” in The Demon-Haunted World. The only evidence that there is no dragon in the garage is the absence of any evidence for a dragon being in the garage; yet we conclude, properly, that there is in fact no dragon in the garage.

                    9. chemjeff is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn’t there, and he plans to keep searching the room until he finds it.

                2. But this is just a rhetorical device meant to throw off the conversation into another direction. That is all. BUT HILLARY!!!

                  1. So you honestly believe that “critical polling data” shared with THE Russians justifies the fever dreams of collusion which you aren’t certain happened, but it may have. Or not.

                    Did you happen to note the correction at the end of the times piece? (They do seem to have had a lot of those when it comes to RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA):

                    A previous version of this article misidentified the people to whom Paul Manafort wanted a Russian associate to send polling data. Mr. Manafort wanted the data sent to two Ukrainian oligarchs, Serhiy Lyovochkin and Rinat Akhmetov, not to Oleg V. Deripaska, a Russian oligarch close to the Kremlin.

                    (emphasis mine)

                    But presumably they all look the same…

                    What’s plain to see is that you’re grasping at the thinnest of straws to keep the hope alive.

                    1. you’re grasping at the thinnest of straws to keep the hope alive.

                      Did you read what I wrote below? Posted a good hour before you made your claim.

                      chemjeff radical individualist|3.22.19 @ 9:43PM|#

                      Well, there aren’t any Soviets anymore. So Trump can’t be a “Soviet agent”.

                      For the record, I have always viewed the ‘collusion’ claim as being overblown.

                      Once again I view truth as more important than tribal loyalty. Which is more than I can say for you.

                    2. If collusion is overblown, why are you defending OP’s post so strenuously?

                      The Pigeon’s opinion of me is worth precisely what you would expect.

                    3. He doesn’t take himself that seriously.

                    4. I am defending truthful claims, even if the likes of Ken or Skippy don’t like that they are truthful.

                      Ken wants to trash anyone who makes even truthful claims regarding Trump and Russia to be paranoid and fevered. That isn’t right. Truth should matter for something.

                      And of course you care about my opinion of you. Otherwise you wouldn’t respond.

                    5. No, you’re defending a (perhaps) truthful claim. Let’s go down the list because you made it plural:

                      1)Critical detailed polling information was provided to the Russians at the direction of Trump during the campaign.

                      2)That’s collusion. True or false?

                      3) Trump knew the Russians were involving themselves in the election and Trump invited that involvement. True or false? For that matter define it

                      4) Trump then helped cover up for the Russians by lying and trying to stifle any inquiry into the crimes and activities of this hostile foreign nation. True or false?

                      5) There’s your collusion. There’s your betrayal. True or false?

                      So you’ve been arguing that “truth” means the post was not unhinged, but you’re not sure about the collusion. But maybe. Or not. But then again…

                      Choose. For anyone with English as a first language there is no doubt that you think the post was not unhinged and defensible. So clearly you find the collusion charge quite plausible, so why do you deflect when Ken points that out? I mean, I know you can’t make an honest argument, but do you think that fools anyone besides yourself?

                      And no, I don’t care about your opinion of me. You’re on the internet and you’re wrong and I’m in the mood to kick defenseless animals. Pigeons are high on that list.

                    6. Ken is the one deflecting from my original point that there are facts that are true about Trump and Russia regardless if there is actual “collusion” or not. It’s wrong to just label all of it as “unhinged”.

                      I don’t KNOW if there is actual collusion. I’d like to read what the actual report is before making that judgment call. Wouldn’t you? I think the collusion charge is possible, yes. I think the allegations that have been made about it have been, in the main, overblown. You think that there is absolutely nothing to it, because… oh wait, let me guess – because Democrats! That is about the extent of your logic on this matter. And Ken’s, for that matter.

                      I find it sad that you approach argumentation here with an intent to dehumanize me.

                    7. You’re aware that other people can actually see what I wrote in this thread, right?

                      “Critical detailed polling information was provided to the Russians at the direction of Trump during the campaign. That’s collusion. Trump knew the Russians were involving themselves in the election and Trump invited that involvement. Trump then helped cover up for the Russians by lying and trying to stifle any inquiry into the crimes and activities of this hostile foreign nation. There’s your collusion. There’s your betrayal. Fuck you.”

                      —-Ordinary Person

                      I called that statement fevered and unhinged because it’s fevered and unhinged.

                      If you think it’s merely truthful, then you may also be fevered and unhinged.

              3. Except, this polling information was neither critical or provided by the Trump campaign since it was public knowledge. It was already available to everyone who wanted it.

          2. Actually the conservative CT on JFK was that Oswald was a Russian Commie agent intent on causing chaos in the USA. There were plenty of conservative Democrats back then.

            And now there is real Soviet agent in the White House!

            1. Well, there aren’t any Soviets anymore. So Trump can’t be a “Soviet agent”.

              For the record, I have always viewed the ‘collusion’ claim as being overblown.

              But before I declare the report to be a ‘nothingburger’, I think I perhaps ought to at least read the damn thing.

              1. Putin has always been a Soviet and still is. Names change but not philosophy.

                He is a strongman statist nationalist type – like Trump. That is why they eat each others ass-cracks. They are just alike.

                1. He’s not a Soviet. He’s just a nationalist, and a not-too-bright one at that.

            2. “And now there is real Soviet agent in the White House!”

              Seek help, turd.

            3. “Actually the conservative CT on JFK was that Oswald was a Russian Commie agent intent on causing chaos in the USA.”

              Actually the conspiracy theories around the Kennedy assignation were started by European leftists who just couldn’t stand that JFK was shot by a Communist sympathizer. But don’t let historical accuracy get in your way, you’re on too much of a roll.

            4. Yup, Trump is a covert Soviet agent and such a threat that Mueller spent two years prosecuting troll farms and delinquent FBARs before getting to the existential danger to the Republic.

              1. Well, hey, he wasn’t very good at it. But he did find several unpaid parking tickets from those who knew Trump or worked for him at one time or another.
                Both turd and Tony tell me this is true (and Tony seems strangely absent this evening).

                1. Even Tony, unlike some of our other progressive fanatics (but I repeat myself), isn’t stupid enough to try to keep the dream alive here

                  1. Tony’s gone on record saying how much he despises Bernie-bros and has been contemptuous of lefty campus culture in particular. He’s probably mellowing a bit as he ages.

                    1. I have actually agreed with Tony a few times lately, but I’ll still give him shit because it’s the exception rather than the norm for him to be right on issues. Jeff and SimonP on the other hand, they actually think that they’ve scores points. Additionally, they will flat put deny they said something even after you provide the exact quote. And I know Jeff is going to come on and say no he doesn’t and demand proof and even if I provide it he will then deny that as well. OP and Moneyshot are just deranged and Kirkland is a fucking imbecile who actually believes those participation trophies he got mean something.

                    2. And I know Jeff is going to come on and say no he doesn’t and demand proof and even if I provide it he will then deny that as well.

                      The problem here is your second clause. You didn’t provide proof. I’m presuming this all goes back to your claim that I called you a racist simply for wanting secure borders. I’m pretty sure I didn’t do that, because I try not to throw around that word lightly, and besides, it’s not even true. But hey I do make mistakes, so maybe I did. So if you would kindly tell me in which discussion you think I did this, then we can rectify the issue.

                    3. Do you like being so predictable? I mean I even pointed out what you would say and you went ahead and said it anyhow. That takes balls, it really does. I mean you couldn’t make a better caricature of a person lacking self awareness than you Jeffy. Keep up the good work. It just amazes me how someone can be so self assured yet so incompetent. But you always manage to top yourself.

                    4. What do you want me to say? “I’m sorry for something that I didn’t do”?

                  2. Credit where it is due, Tony is a liar but even he sees this is not the hill to die on.

      2. People can form their opinions about which one of us is out to lunch.

        1. I’m a person, and your whole post, there, is unhinged.

          1. You have terrible judgment.

            1. “You have terrible judgment.”

              You’re a fucking lefty ignoramus with a well-deserved rep for lying.

              1. He’s drunk on progressive tears and spittle

                1. Aren’t we all? We had to listen to their stupid fucking rantings, let them eat shit and gat laughed at for a while.

        2. Here is a clue, even Pelosi knows this is a loser. If you guys continue to beat this drum you will probably lose the Presidency, lose more seats in the Senate and lose control of the House again in 2020. Those who are less partisan will take the absence of any further indictments as proof that there is no proof and move on with their life. Most people are more concerned about their lives, their families and their communities. Continuing this will just look vindictive and piss these people off. They think Congress has better things to do then beating a dead horse.

    2. And your source for any of these fever dreams is… Adam-I-have-evidence-hiding-in-my-couch Schiff?

      The only things we know for sure are:

      British and Ukrainian foreign nationals tried to interfere in the election on behalf of Hillary.
      The FISA submission to surveil Carter Page lied about the source of the “evidence.”
      DOJ interfered in the Hillary investigation.
      No American has been charged with colluding with RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA to influence the election, and of the RUSSIAN entities charged, at least one of them did not even exist at the time they are accused of interfering.
      Comey, McCabe, and Simpson all lied to Congress.

      There’s the real betrayal and collusion.

      1. I believe Bubba had a short, personal meeting with someone of influence while the hag’s investigation was in progress also.
        I think it was in an airplane; probably just about the wife and kids, right?

        1. Certainly about the wife.

    3. And WHHHOOOOOOOSSSSSHHHH go the goalposts!

    4. “Talking to foreigners is collusion. But only if you’re Trump.”

  8. GOP Right Wing Terrorism News:

    Local “MAGA Bomber” Terrorist Tearfully Pleads Guilty In Federal Court
    Don’t be surprised or even shocked if Donald Trump pardons this fool for enlisting himself in Trump’s war on the media…

    Cesar Altieri Sayoc – GOP Terrorist Hero.

    1. cont.

      The former strip club DJ/bouncer was one of the first examples of how Donald Trump has been radicalizing far right extremists to the point where they turn to violence in an attempt to silence anyone who speaks ill of their golden calf of a idol. Since the MAGA Bomber there have been a few far right terrorist acts carried out in which Donald Trump was named by the radical as being part of the inspiration for his actions.

      1. You’re a fucking retard.

      2. moneyshot|3.22.19 @ 10:32PM|#
        ” …Donald Trump was named by the radical as being part of the inspiration for his actions.”

        Is it your daddy who caused your idiocy turd? Were you born a fucking ignoramus, or did you practice while you were losing money day-trading?
        Pay your bets and make the world a better and smarter place; go die somewhere far enough away the smell won’t carry.

      3. Shriek loves bomber porn almost as much as he loves kiddie porn.

        1. Fake-bomber.

          I’m still not sure what part of mailing inert material arranged to resemble a bomb to prominent politicians is illegal…

          1. It can still be considered a terroristic act because of the threat involved. Thankfully the guy was just a rando fruit loop and not a skilled bombmaker like Kaczynski.

    2. Indeed, Drumpf’s America is a scary place. Don’t forget they still haven’t caught the two perpetrators of the attempted modern-day lynching of Jussie Smollett.

      1. They’re in hiding recovering from the wounds Jussie gave them when he fought them off.
        #Resist

    1. You are the best, OBL. Never quit. 😀

      1. The best part is ordinary person, chemjeff, and moneyshot/buttplug trying to (successfully) outdo OBL in this very thread.
        They’re making him look relatively sane.
        Sad.

    2. Glenn Greenwald has forgotten the power of doublethink.

  9. Even more bad economic news.

    These classic brands you love are in trouble

    …During the second quarter of 2018, McDonald’s missed its same-store sales estimates, a key factor in calculating restaurant sales, for the first time in at least two years, according to Reuters…

    …Overall, Coca-Cola generated $8.25 billion in revenue in 2018, a decline of about 9 percent from the previous year, according to CNBC…

    …In 2017 alone, Mattel’s Barbie sales declined by 8 percent…

    …Kraft Heinz’ recently took another hit when its shares plunged more than 27 percent in February…

    All these longstanding institutions of American business just can’t seem to make a buck in Drumpf’s economy.

    1. “..In 2017 alone, Mattel’s Barbie sales declined by 8 percent…”

      What’s the significance of this? I mean, math is hard.

      (But the Ken doll isn’t)

      1. Math Class is Tough
        https://youtu.be/DFh8WS0s8UQ

    2. Weird how nobody goes to McDonalds now that it costs as much as Five Guys.

  10. I just overheard some Democrats on TV – based on what they said, apparently Mueller isn’t seeking more indictments.

    The investigation wasn’t long enough, there’s still stuff that can be referred to the U. S. attorneys, etc., etc.

    1. “there’s still stuff that can be referred to the U. S. attorneys”

      And they’re right.

      The mistake the Right always makes is thinking that avoiding destruction today means winning.

      The criminal Deep State vermin are still in power. All the Right has accomplished is to weather one of their attacks. Until the Right gets on the offense, and crushes the Deep State, all the defense, even when successful, only delays the inevitable.

      Drain the Deep State

  11. I bet fark is going to be chock full of livid farkers.

    1. Check out the Reddit r/The_Mueller page for some fine salt mining.

      1. I had to speed rush my tear barrels out of storage.

        I thought I had until Nov 2020 before bringing them back out.

        Poor Lefties filling up that salt supply.

    2. I was wrong. Fark had one thread and dropped it like a hot rock. They just couldn’t bear the shame, I guess. Move along, nothing to see.

  12. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    >>>>>>>>>> http://www.GeoSalary.com

  13. Musing over the consequences, it’s obvious the Dems aren’t going to give up. They are going to sputter and fume for the next two years. The public gets tired of smoke without fire, and combine that with the socialists and their Green New Deal, Trump would have to be an utterly incompetent politician to not win 2020. Assuming he is not assassinated or caught with the proverbial dead boy in his hotel room, he’s going to win 2020 in a landslide.

    That means the Dems will sputter about this for four more years. The public will be bored to death and tune them out. Assuming that carries over to burnout over the socialists and their Green New Deal, there will be plenty of recrimination and probably some moderates popping up. But Trump is one of a kind, and if the GOP chooses a Trump copycat for an heir, they stand to implode just like Tim Cook after Steve Jobs or any one of several who followed Bill Gates. There is a good chance the Dems will re-invent themselves for 2024, less likely the GOP will, but the Dem baggage may prevent their re-invention from doing them any good, in which case 2028 is when GOP stands a better chance at re-invention, and then the real fun begins.

    Of course, this assumes Trump’s trade wars and deficits won’t break the economy, which is the most likely way for Trump to screw things up.

    It’s going to be interesting.

    1. Alinsky’s 13th rule for radicals- ALWAYS have the next ‘thing’ ready.

    2. But Trump is one of a kind, and if the GOP chooses a Trump copycat for an heir, they stand to implode just like Tim Cook after Steve Jobs or any one of several who followed Bill Gates.

      This is not a good analogy. Apple may not be the powerhouse it was under Jobs from a creative standpoint, but their fanboys still buy millions of iPods and Apple terminals. Microsoft is still standard on every PC, and their Office suite is pretty much the standard for email, slides, and spreadsheets. Both are still multi-billion-dollar corporations.

      Just because the media isn’t licking their ass doesn’t mean they’ve imploded.

      It’s a lot more likely that if Trump wins 2020, his successor will lose to a Dem in 2024 just because of the cyclical nature of politics, or because a recession took place. It won’t be because of his personality, because his need to talk shit to his enemies is precisely why the GOP base loved him to begin with. They don’t want a McCain type that persistently demurs to the other side in the vain hope that liberals will vote for them as a uniter.

      1. Good analogy yes it is. Heirs almost always screw the pooch, whether it is apparent immediately or takes a few years. Trump’s heir will have some success following Trump’s policies in part because Trump will be bellowing from the sidelines, and the Dems will still be flailing away about socialism and the Green New Deal and the evils of Trump, instead of the evils of Trump’s policies; thus 2024 stands a good chance of being a GOP win. I’m not predicting a guaranteed win in 2024, but I think it more likely than not unless the Dems go moderate and actually have different policies than the GOP.

      2. Was wondering the same thing AAPL was selling at around $80 and paying no dividends when Steve Jobs died. It is around $190 now and pays a 1.53 dividend.

        All of those poor schmucks who sold off their shares because of Jobs must be kicking themselves in the butt now.

        1. I’ll admit I thought Apple was going to start a decline around 4-5 years after Jobs died. Another recession could potentially hurt them in a bad way, but the difference between now and Jobs’ first departure is that the consumer cult around the brand is entrenched enough to maintain its own momentum without a bunch of gee-whiz product releases.

          They won’t be able to get away with that forever, but they’re not anywhere close to going under.

        2. I did not know that. I was only referring to Apple’s lack of anything much new. Guess that means the stock market doesn’t care, and I should put my techie head back under its beanie.

    3. “Musing over the consequences, it’s obvious the Dems aren’t going to give up. They are going to sputter and fume for the next two years.”

      The American people are leaving it behind. Every Monday, a new news cycle begins, and every week that goes by, memory of the Mueller probe will fade. If the Democrats run the 2020 campaign based on a nothingburger from 2016, they’ll run the most irrelevant campaign ever.

      If they’re clinging to the Mueller probe now, it may be because they dread what that means for campaign 2020. What is their sale pitch to middle American now? The Green New Deal? Medicare for All? Reparations for Slavery? Socialism? It doesn’t matter if California, Massachusetts, and New York go even more blue in 2020 than they did in 2016–they get the same amount of delegates to the electoral college anyway.

      The Democrats have a hard and lonely road ahead of them now, and they are lurching ever more to left of center every day. If the Democrats are clinging to Mueller, it’s because they were hoping he would save them from themselves.

      1. I have a side theory that the “wise elder” Dems are letting the kids run wild now because they know they can’t win in 2020. What better way to prepare for 2024 by letting the kids show how unprepared they are?

        1. I think the kids are running wild because the elders are powerless to stop them.

          This is like the Democrat version of the Tea Party vs. John Boehner. The difference is that the Tea Party’s success translated into election victories–and ultimately into unseating Boehner from the Speaker’s chair. If Trump hadn’t won, the President might be a Tea Party guy like Ted Cruz. Trump winning meant the end of the Tea Party as white, blue collar, former Democrats from the rust belt flooded into the party.

          The problem with the Democrat version of that is that the kids (why not call them “socialists” if that’s what they are) are not likely to have their agenda translate into election victories. If Trump wins reelection, there’s a good chance that the House will go back to the Republicans on his coattails.

          The Tea Party was emboldened by their wins.

          If the Democrats lose the House, that will probably be the end of Pelosi’s speakership, but after Pelosi, it’s just gonna get worse.

      2. “The American people are leaving it behind.”

        With the bodies of the Trump loyalists crushed by the lawfare coup.

        Dems will keep on importing Not Americans, and keep on using their institutional power to grind the Right to dust.

        Not being totally destroyed *today* is not the same thing as winning.

  14. The most remarkable thing about this drama is that 40-45% of the nation thought it was plausible that an American candidate for president conspired with a Putin to rig a presidential election. The odds of Mueller proving that Trump entered into a secret agreement with a foreign head of state (like some James Bond villain) to alter a national election was zero. Real life isn’t a James Bond movie.

    This wasn’t quite the witch hunts we’ve seen partisan hacks launch without ever facing consequences, but it’s close. The Mueller probe and the BK saga is just the latest indication that the left in the country have the clout and resources to go after anyone at any time.

    Not a SINGLE person at the MSM confronted Smollett despite the police finding no footage of the incident. Random sleuths at Reddit discovered that Ford lied about when she put up the second door. She flew all over the place, including trips to Hawaii with an ex. As surely as I’m typing this, half the country still believes she’s a hero.

    Make the report public, and laugh at the people who were invested in this farce.

    1. “The most remarkable thing about this drama is that 40-45% of the nation thought it was plausible that an American candidate for president conspired with a Putin to rig a presidential election. ”

      They thought they could bleed the Trump administration with this lawfare coup, and they were right.

  15. How about this, we allow the full report to be released, but starting now every candidate in the general election gets the last 20 years of their life and the lives of their immediate family and anyone they did business with in the course of the campaign audited and made public.

    1. I believe life audit is already happening. Joe Biden will be questioned on votes he made 20 years ago. Camilla Harris is questioned on her work as a prosecutor and on why she married her husband. Liz Warren is questioned on a job application entry when she started teaching. So what’s wrong with looking over Trumps past business deals and affairs? Make the report public, period.

      1. False equivalency and you know it? The press asking g pertinent questions about putting LIC records are one thing, Congress and a special prosecutor investigating with the power of subpoena every aspect of you, your families and your friends life is entirely different and you know it. The former is normal and the job of the media, the latter is an abuse of power to attempt to discredit (rather you have evidence or not) your opponent. And no it wasn’t right when the Republicans did similarthing to Obama (though one investigations into Fast and Furious and Benghazi etc was warranted but not endless ones).

    2. A great idea, however it would be better if these same people who are demanding the full release get investigated to the degree that Trump has been subjected to for the last 3 years.
      Does anyone think that Feinstein would withstand such scrutiny considering she had a Chinese spy for a driver for years and supposedly was unaware of this fact.
      Or how about Pelosi who’s husbands got super rich in his dealings with the Chinese, many of these deals related directly to decisions made by Pelosi herself
      Or how about Waters who has been voted the most corrupt congress person several time.
      Or how about Schummer who many believe is an Israeli agent.
      I doubt any one of them would have withstood the investigations Trump has been under, and that includes many republicans.
      Looking at this, it seems odd that Trump must be the cleanest president to ever enter the Whitehouse, because you can bet your life that if Mueller had found even a sniff of anything corrupt, someone in Mueller’s team would have leaked it to every major news source on the planet.
      MSNBC and CNN would have blasted it 24/7 for weeks .
      There is absolutely nothing. All the narrative about Trump being dirty when the exact opposite is true. Thump must be squeaky clean.
      If I were Trump, I would milk this all the way to 2020. God knows the Dems will certainly continue to push their narrative of ‘orange man bad’. If I were Trump, I would proclaim very loudly, ‘Put up or shut up’.

  16. There’s not a “transparency fight” going on. Everyone, including the President, the Attorney General, Congress, and the federal regulations on special counsels, has said they want it released to the public.

    The only talk about not releasing it has been fron liberal media outlets. I came to Reason so many years ago because it used to offer a different take on the news, but I and so many others are no longer regulars here because, since Trump, all you do is parrot the same shit as WaPo and CNN, occasionally with a bit of token “but both sides are bad” hand-wringing.

    1. The progs know that the full unredacted version can never be fully released (at least for decades) because it probably contains intelligence from human sources. So they figure this is a fight they can continue without getting to much egg on their face. And if Trump did declassify it and one of those human sources is harmed they will blame Trump for putting his own needs in front of the sources safety. The

      1. They can get him coming and going. At least with their base.

        1. He can’t even declassify all of it, as evidence presented to a grand jury involving people not indicted can’t be legally revealed

  17. Mueller’s investigation took two years so it seems only right that it takes two years for DoJ to release Mueller’s report.

  18. RACHEL MADDOW SPENDS OPENING SEGMENT ABOUT MUELLER REPORT ON VERGE OF TEARS

    http://tinyurl.com/y5lz3rat

    Hahaahahahaaaa

    1. Tucker Carlson spends every on-air moment on the verge of pooping.

      1. Tony = people have to poop from time to time.

        1. Nonsense. Some of us have absolved ourselves of responsibility. We live from self-induced crisis to self-induced crisis. Someone does our hair, someone chooses what we wear, someone does our brain, someone tells us what to eat and three times a week someone sticks a hose up our bum and flushes it all out of us.

          It’s called colonic irrigation darling, it’s not to be sniffed at.

          1. You homos and your butt cleanouts.

            Gotta make room for those penises.

            1. Why do you idiots brag about how dirty your assholes are?

    2. Her tears were delicious on election night 2016, too.

      Here’s a great clip of Maddow:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-Iznv2gqY4

      1. Delicious because Trump is such a great president and you were rooting for him, or because you’re just an asshole?

        1. Tony, you’re a fancy pants, ascot wearing, ‘New Yorker’ reading, white wine sipping, French cheese eating, elite nut job. Let me mansplain.

          Sometimes there’s a man? I won’t say a hero, ’cause, what’s a hero? Sometimes, there’s a man. And I’m talkin’ about The Donald here ? The Donald from New York City. Sometimes, there’s a man, well, he’s the man for his time and place. He fits right in there. And that’s the Donald The Donald, from New York City. And even if he’s a crude man ? and The Donald is most certainly that. Quite possibly the crudest in all of New York City, which would place him high in the runnin’ for crudest worldwide. Sometimes there’s a man, sometimes, there’s a man. Well, I lost my train of thought here. But? aw, hell. I’ve done introduced him enough.

          1. You think my pants are fancy? *blushes*

              1. He definitely did, and he also called me elite.

                That’s a compliment, for the mouth-breathing retards among you.

                1. Nope.

                  You’d think with your 250k in studentt loan debt you’d have learned how to read instrad of lying about it.

            1. They would be fancy, except for those stains in the rear.

      2. Ken, that url gave me a clip of Stallone’s movie First Blood.

        1. He’s a stand-in for Maddow.

          For goodness’ sake:

          “Nothing is over! Nothing! You don’t just turn it off!”

          1. “Nothing is over! Nothing! You don’t just turn it off!”

            That’s a good one for today.

        2. lol, I believe that was on purpose.

          Nice one Ken

  19. You’re satisfied with getting your information from “leaks”? The corrupt are glad you are.

    You get zero accountability when you expect none.

    You’ll see only what you’re allowed, but because it’s a “leak” you can’t ask for more, and you’ll think you’re getting more than you’re “allowed “.

    Works every time.

    1. What are you yammering on about? Are you drunk already?

  20. Google is now paying $17000 to $22000 per month for working online from home. I have joined this job 2 months ago and i have earned $20544 in my first month from this job. I can say my life is changed-completely for the better! Check it out whaat i do…..

    click here ======?? http://www.Aprocoin.com

  21. Donald Trump and his offspring aren’t going to prison today!

    That’s what makes a great president!

    Such high standards you people have.

    1. Tony|3.23.19 @ 1:34PM|#
      “Donald Trump and his offspring aren’t going to prison today!”

      Because he hasn’t done anything; you’ve been proven to be full of shit once more, you fucking lefty ignoramus.

      1. “Anything”? Really? How much Tucker McFuckerson do you mainline?

        1. “”Anything”? Really? How much Tucker McFuckerson do you mainline?”

          Care to prove otherwise shitbag? I thought not.
          He hasn’t done anything Mueller could find in two years, unlike that miserable hag who should be in jail for selling political access at least.

          1. Tony – “JUST YOU WAIT!!! Mueller is still investigating!!!!”

            When Tony wasn’t busy lying of course.

    2. Poor Tony. He’s had a very rough 2 years since Trump won the election.

      1. There’s a reason he’s called “Rough Trade Tony” and yes it’s because of who he sells himself to.

      2. Been a rough year for Honduran refugees and Syrian civilians too. Not that you give the first whiff of a shit.

        1. Their lives would be so much better if their governments didn’t enact economic policies favored by America’s mainstream progressives.

        2. Stop pretending you do you lying shitbag.

        3. “You have racist wrongfeelz!”

          Racebaitertony gonna race bait

    3. Ok so on top of being an admitted liar, Tony sneaks in to corpsefuck this thread because he knows he’d get his fucking teeth kicked in if he tried it when everyone was watching.

      It’s not that he’s smart enough not to die on this hill, it’s that he’s a fucking coward.

      People actually gave you some credit and you turned out to be even worse than anyone thought possible Tones.

      1. First I didn’t think anyone could be more annoying than me.

        Then I thought nobody could be more annoying than Tony.

        And now…

        1. You realized you were right the first time.

          1. Would that I *were* the most annoying feature of H&R, but I’m sorry to say I’m not.

            1. Don’t be so hard on yourself you absolutely are.

    4. Donald Trump and his offspring aren’t going to prison today!

      Wassa matta Tubby, another Fitzmas and no Cha Cha heels again?

  22. Democrats – Sore losers, since 1960.

    That is what this whole charade is about

    1. ::Checks 1960 Presidential election results::

      Ummm…, i have some bad news for you….

      1. I mean, they did shoot the guy who won in 1960…

        1. You mean a communist? Ie someone on the left…

          1. Yes, I was equating communist with Democrats.
            I see nothing to indicate that this is anything but a fair and accurate characterization.
            The only difference is that there used to be Democrats who might’ve disagreed with communism, but now the hive mind has full control

  23. The letter from Attorney General Robert Barr to ranking members of Congress indicates that he found no actions by the Mueller’s special investigation to be inappropriate.

    No it doesn’t. It says nothing about Barr’s opinion of Mueller’s actions. It says that the AG or Acting AG did not find any proposed actions by Mueller to be so inappropriate that they were forbidden. Which clearly speaks to the opinion of the person or persons who were AG or Acting AG at the time of the actions in question. Which wouldn’t have been Barr, since he was AG for about the last twenty minutes of Mueller’s investigation.

    Barr may think that everything Mueller did was just fine, but his letter certainly doesn’t say so. It’s just a boilerplate confirmation that neither Rosenstein nor Whittaker forbade any Mueller actions (or at least actions they were forewarned of.)

  24. I really have to give credit to Mueller, congress and Trump on this one. If the goal was to beat, bludgeon, frappe, mangle, and otherwise make an unrecognizable mess of this whole investigation and Russia issue they have all succeeded beyond any expectations.

    Bravo. If anyone had doubts that government works as its practitioners intend this last pitiful concluding whimper should erase those for all eternity.

    1. “Bravo. If anyone had doubts that government works as its practitioners intend this last pitiful concluding whimper should erase those for all eternity.”

      Nope.
      The left, beginning with the talkies tomorrow, will start shoving the goal posts, walking back various claims, flat-out lying, all in support of the base claim that the hag should have won, and something nefarious must have occurred to prevent that. They will fault one part of the government for not tossing Trump out on his ass, since they *know* he should be tossed and HRC should be “installed” as POTUS.
      “Faith” in governmental action is a given among the left; they hold that “faith” regardless of data; note the self-proclaimed socialists hoping the voters are stupid enough to support what amounts to Venezuela north.
      And TDS is not imaginary; it is real and a common condition of those on the left. They simply do not accept that their world-view is not shared by enough people to have elected that miserable, slimy, crooked hag. They do not accept that she was properly identified as such and folks would have probably voted for, oh Trump, to avoid having that hag as POTUS.
      Your optimism is touching, but I doubt it is realistic.

    2. Echospinner, the entire affair was mangled from the moment Brennan made up the idea.
      It has always been fiction. Bad, ridiculous fiction at that.

  25. Ah but all that is to take yesterday’s mush of a crock pot dinner over cooked and left out overnight, put it in a blender and drink it for breakfast.

    Hilary should have just stayed around the house. She could have got a cat or two for company. I heard she likes cats. Perhaps making craft purses for children and selling them on Etsy to keep busy. Then there is always a glass or two of vodka for those nights when Bill dozes off in the lounge chair.

    I saw Trump played golf with Kid Rock today. He could be doing stuff like that every day. Or building models of his towers with Barron. They have legos I remember Ivanka talking about it at the convention.

    I just do not understand these people. I can’t wait to retire and do those things.

    I gave up on democrats, republicans, and whatever Trumpers are long ago.

    1. Echospinner|3.23.19 @ 11:57PM|#
      “I gave up on democrats, republicans, and whatever Trumpers are long ago.”

      I gave up on nihilists long ago.
      Did you have a point other than you’d like to avoid blame for anything which happens? I thought not.

      1. Lighten up Sevo.

        I am a loser in politics because I went to a libertarian way of thinking.

        I am not at all a nihlist. In fact I believe, that involves faith which nihlists reject, that there is a better way for humanity to coexist. I have a belief that there is a purpose for our existence and humanity will find it. Sounds a lot like religion right? I am kinda that too.

        Neither am I an anarchist, not as things are.

        Small government, individual rights, free markets. What is so hard about that.

        Avoiding blame? We do not know each other. I accept responsibility for every harm I have caused.

        You use the word Nihilism. I do not think it means what you think it means 😉

  26. I bought 12 Robert Mueller Devotional Candles and they didn’t work.

    Now, I’m asking for a refund !!!

    https://tinyurl.com/yxgqru3b

  27. The conclusions of the Mueller Report were just released to Congress, which means we should be getting leaks soon.

    “Mueller Says Report Does Not Conclude Trump Committed Crime, but Also Does Not Exonerate President”

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/to…..553454918?

    Presumably, the report doesn’t exonerate Melania Trump, the Pope, or LeBron James either; however, I suspect there also wasn’t enough evidence to charge them with obstruction of justice or collusion with the Russians either.

  28. “he found no actions by the Mueller’s special investigation to be inappropriate. ”

    Besides the lawfare coup which bled the Trump administration, robbing Americans who voted for him for two years of a Justice Department actually under some control of the president they elected into office.

  29. on Saturday I got a gorgeous Ariel Atom after earning $6292 this ? four weeks past, after lot of struggels Google, Yahoo, Facebook proffessionals have been revealed the way and cope with gape for increase home income in suffcient free time.You can make $9o an hour working from home easily……. VIST THIS SITE RIGHT HERE >>=====>>>> http://www.GeoSalary.com

  30. on Saturday I got a gorgeous Ariel Atom after earning $6292 this ? four weeks past, after lot of struggels Google, Yahoo, Facebook proffessionals have been revealed the way and cope with gape for increase home income in suffcient free time.You can make $9o an hour working from home easily……. VIST THIS SITE RIGHT HERE >>=====>>>> http://www.GeoSalary.com

  31. The liberal tears from this one should be good! I hope a few million of them off themselves when they find out Trump legitimately just won the presidency because not enough Americans are insane enough to vote for Hillary Clinton!

  32. Maybe they could have just conducted a smaller, more focused investigation on Russian attempts to contact or influence the Trump organization. As far as I can tell, the Trump side was mostly uninterested.

    The democrats did to Trump what he had threatened to do Hillary Clinton. This little fiasco set a real bad precedent, and under a rather vindictive Trump they might get a taste of their own medicine sooner or later. A few fair minded people (including some liberal) warned that our political process would grind to a halt if this kind of investigation became common.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.