It's Mueller Time.

[Vodoun daVinci]

Ax is a play on "ask"....my bad.

My point is that there is utter contempt from all sides in our Government and our Officials are cool with breaking the laws. One side wants to enact unconstitutional laws (that's criminal) and the other side is in contempt (a criminal act) of Congress. They all lie to the other branches of Government with utter contempt. That's a criminal act. We have a Government of criminals and *nothing* useful is getting done as they spend US into oblivion and make their already filthy rich cohorts even richer with *our* money.

What the literal fuck.

VooDoo

 

[ArmyJerry]

two things you should consider

The branches of government are equal branches, so one telling the other to fuck off is normal and legal.

There are two sides in the tragedy, the government against us, the citizen, there are no other sides, the government is our perpetual enemy who modulate the level of danger they pose to the republic, right now they are at their most dangerous and need to be dismantled, at least the unconstitutional parts which is about 95% of Fed and local gov right now..

Best outcome we can hope for right now is civil war within our own government with whoever left standing to be disposed of by the generally abused population.

Our lawless government is the biggest threat the republic and its citizens face right now.

Buy more ammo.

Ax is a play on "ask"....my bad.

My point is that there is utter contempt from all sides in our Government and our Officials are cool with breaking the laws. One side wants to enact unconstitutional laws (that's criminal) and the other side is in contempt (a criminal act) of Congress. They all lie to the other branches of Government with utter contempt. That's a criminal act. We have a Government of criminals and *nothing* useful is getting done as they spend US into oblivion and make their already filthy rich cohorts even richer with *our* money.

What the literal fuck.

VooDoo

 

[ballistic64]

I didn't know Mazei Hirono had a SH login!?!!!

Ax the boss? Did I miss something?

Charger thinks its Hirono, I say its Maddow.

 

[Charger442]

Charger thinks its Hirono, I say its Maddow.

Pretty much the same dude.

 

[vh20]

ad the "redacted" report and are saying What. The. Fuck.

So Congress and The Senate ax the Boss how the Fuck he reads "no collusion" and "it's all fine" out of a report where the investigator reports that there is criminal action and he tells the Senate and the Congress to fuck off and will not play.
VooDoo

Um, that NEVER happened. You totally fabricated that. As Flyer said, show it.

 

[Vodoun daVinci]

What never happened?

We have an edited/censored report (which I have read a couple times now) that shows criminal intent and criminal action but the AG of the USA (who is in Trumps pocket) says no harm/no foul. And then he perjures himself and is in contempt of Congress when they call him to testify and clarify his position.

The whole fucking Government is a bunch of liars and cheaters/criminals. All of them.

You "Ever Trumpers" are pathetic. Where's our Wall? Where's our revised Health Care System that is "beautiful"? Where's our big tax break for the middle/working class? He's raping America and all ya'll can say is he's "better than Hillary"....

Dun't take much to be a smaller turd than Hillary. He's a fake. He's a criminal...but he's "better than Hillary" so he gets a free pass.

Jezus.

VooDoo

 

[ArmyJerry]

Maga,,Maga,,Maga,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG
,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAAG.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA.,,,,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA,,MAGA


Censored??? You mean the report written by 16 Hilary donors? About a investigation that had no crime being named as being investigated? That report?

Gov a bunch of liars,,, and its the guy who has been in office for 2 years fault? They are actually very evil and ritting people not just liars. They are in fact the biggest threat to the republic. But i dont think the Trumpster is to blame...

How did he perjure himself? Give one fact please,? If not you are just another unhinged Erno86

Yep, pissed at the wall and think we should be shooting the invaders until the wall gets built.

You got a tax break, if you didn't see it you should try taking your taxes to an accountant. Not that I couldn't use some more as I didn't get as much as the " working "class who actually pays very little.

How is he raping America? What has he done to enrich himself? the economic numbers dont lie..hell the people having to report the numbers vote for Hilary at 99% levels and they hate trump as much or more than you do.

Back up your lies so I have to apologize to you or just shut the fuck up and go get some treatment.

stop using Jezus name in vane he hates you as much as Trump hates you.

What never happened?

We have an edited/censored report (which I have read a couple times now) that shows criminal intent and criminal action but the AG of the USA (who is in Trumps pocket) says no harm/no foul. And then he perjures himself and is in contempt of Congress when they call him to testify and clarify his position.

The whole fucking Government is a bunch of liars and cheaters/criminals. All of them.

You "Ever Trumpers" are pathetic. Where's our Wall? Where's our revised Health Care System that is "beautiful"? Where's our big tax break for the middle/working class? He's raping America and all ya'll can say is he's "better than Hillary"....

Dun't take much to be a smaller turd than Hillary. He's a fake. He's a criminal...but he's "better than Hillary" so he gets a free pass.

Jezus.

VooDoo

 

[vh20]

I asked you to state WHAT criminal action, but all you did was repeat your completely unsupported conclusion that there was one. The conclusions by Mueller himself are that there was no collusion, and there was not enough evidence to determine if there was (or was not) obstruction of justice. You have something more?

AG in contempt of Congress? Was he subpoenaed? Because he wasn't subpoenaed to my knowledge. He was asked to appear and he agreed to. Then AFTERWARDS Nadler changed to rules to allow staff lawyers to ask the questions instead of the Congressmen themselves. This is unprecedented, and pointless other than to make it appear like an impeachment hearing so Barr withdrew agreement to appear. Can't claim contempt if it was voluntary to begin with.

Wall - have you not watched Congress cut every attempt made, yet the wall is still being built as you speak because he used EO to go around Congress and begin building it. Meanwhile the Left is going insane that it is getting built and you're claiming he hasn't done anything.

Ask John McCain where your healthcare reform went. He lied to everyone and said he would cast the final needed vote to pass reform, they trusted him to do it and he stabbed them in the back. They thought they had the votes because he lied.

I certainly noticed the tax break I got. Perhaps AJ and I have better accountants.

And I'm certainly not an "Ever Trumper." However, l know when the truth is being misrepresented.

 

[ArmyJerry]

Collusion is not illegal BTW.

 

[Vodoun daVinci]

One more attempt and then I'll bow out of this conversation...I'm not going to go line by line and tell you where to reread it. instead I'll take the time to quote several other more credible people (attorneys) who have read the report. I have no credibility and it is not my task to educate folks about what the report really says. If you read it and did not see the truth I'm not going to rail and argue and spend a bunch of time trying to convince you.

Jessica Levinson, law professor, Loyola Law School:
If we were talking about Mr. Trump, not President Trump, we’d be talking about an indictment for obstruction of justice. Today we know that Attorney General Barr put a highly positive (for Trump) gloss on the report. Today we know that Mueller found substantial wrongdoing that would plague, and perhaps end, any other presidency in American history. Today we know that perhaps the difference between a suggestion that Trump be prosecuted for obstruction of justice and a suggestion that he not be was 1) Mueller’s inability to sit down and speak with the Trump without subpoenaing him and Mueller’s decision not to subpoena Trump, and 2) actions by Trump’s staffers that may have protected the president from legal liability.

Stephen Legomsky, law professor, Washington University:
We have been told that the Mueller report had thus “exonerated” President Trump of conspiracy charges, though not on charges that he obstructed justice. Some media reports went further, stating that Mr. Mueller had found “no evidence” of a conspiracy.
Those accounts gave the president an undeserved free pass, for even Mr. Barr’s cherry-picked quotes had made no such claims. We can now see that all Mr. Mueller decided on that issue was that “the investigation did not establish” such a conspiracy. To non-lawyers this might seem like splitting hairs, but lawyers understand how important that difference is. “Establish” is prosecutor talk that simply means “I won’t bring an indictment because I don’t think a jury would find the proof of conspiracy to be ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’” — an extremely high standard of proof. As the Mueller report emphasizes in the introduction, “A statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.”
To the contrary, we now know that Mr. Mueller found abundant evidence of precisely such a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians. The section titled “Trump Campaign and the Dissemination of Hacked Materials” was very heavily redacted, but even the non-redacted evidence of conspiracy was substantial: campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s “periodically” sharing internal polling data and other campaign updates with the Russians; the campaign’s promotion of “dozens of tweets, posts, and other political content created by” the Russian hacking operation; Trump publicly urging Russia to search for Hillary Clinton’s “missing” emails; the campaign’s successful effort to tone down the anti-Russian language in the Republican Party platform at the nominating convention; the president’s bizarre support for Putin, resistance to sanctions, and corresponding antagonism toward our NATO allies; the multiple meetings between top campaign officials and Russians with Kremlin ties, including their famous meeting at the New York Trump hotel for the express, albeit ultimately unsuccessful, purpose of getting dirt on Hillary Clinton; and the lies they were caught in when they tried to deny either the meetings themselves or their content.


Whether or not that pile of evidence rises to the level of “proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” it is of grave concern. There is thus ample reason for Congress — which is not subject to the same standard of proof as a criminal prosecutor — to continue investigating this issue, as well as the obstruction of justice question and all the other disturbing allegations surrounding President Trump and his associates. There are also the continuing, very legitimate investigations by various US attorneys’ offices and state attorney general offices. And, of course, there is still hope that at least Congress, and perhaps the public, will find a way to see the crucial information that Mr. Barr has redacted from the Mueller report. So there is much more to come.

Peter Margulies, law professor, Roger Williams University School of Law:
The Mueller report provides a road map for prosecuting Trump for obstruction of justice but stops short of this finding because of legal doubts about indicting a sitting president. Trump could be charged after he has left the White House, although Attorney General William Barr’s refusal to charge Trump now might make future prosecution seem imprudent or vindictive. In addition, Congress could start impeachment based on Mueller’s road map, although political factors might weigh against that move.

The Mueller report also prompts a mixed verdict on Attorney General Barr. Given the disturbing evidence of Trump’s obstruction in the report, both today’s Barr press conference and the letter Barr released almost four weeks ago seem like exercises in spin. But Barr also released the Mueller report with far fewer redactions than many feared. It’s up to Congress, the media, and the public to read the entire report to get a full picture of the president’s repeated efforts to undermine the justice system and the concerted attempts by government lawyers and other aides to pull him back from the precipice.

Keith Whittington, politics professor, Princeton University:
If this is what a complete and total exoneration looks like, I’d hate to see a damning report. We have often been cautioned not to rush to judgment because we did not know what the Mueller team knows. It turns out that the broad contours of the investigation’s findings had largely found their way into the public sphere, but the report collects all that information in a single place and provides new details that do not put the president in a favorable light.

The good news for the White House is that Mueller could not prove a criminal conspiracy involving the Trump campaign to have Russia influence the 2016 elections and that Mueller did not recommend obstruction of justice charges. The bad news is that the campaign demonstrated an unseemly willingness to benefit from Russian interference and that Russia made lots of efforts to interfere in the election.

Moreover, the president has behaved remarkably badly in regard to the investigation into the 2016 campaign. Mueller was appropriately cautious about reaching legal conclusions regarding obstruction of justice given the aggressive legal interpretation that would be needed to pursue a case against some of the president’s actions and given that Justice Department policies would preclude those legal conclusions from being translated into indictments of a sitting president.


The president might have an innocent explanation for some of his actions, or at least a credible claim of mixed motives, but he repeatedly took actions that he was strongly advised would be highly inappropriate and was saved from more damaging consequences by the willingness of others to ignore the president’s preferences. The courtroom is probably not the right venue for calling the president to account for his actions, but the report leaves little doubt that the president does not appreciate the responsibilities of his office.

Victoria Nourse, law professor, Georgetown University:
“Putin has won.” Election Day 2016, an intercepted message to Kirill Dmitriev, a Russian national “closely connected to Putin.” (On page 149 of the Mueller report.) This line says everything that the American public should remember about the Mueller investigation. Russian interference in the election has been established beyond doubt. Worse, Mueller found that the Trump campaign “expected to benefit” from criminal actions by Russians who successfully targeted the American election. It is not a crime for any citizen to associate with criminals and spies, nor to enjoy their favors, but that is surely too low a standard for a president of the United States.

Viewing this case through the lens of criminal law is a mistake. The president takes an oath “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Few constitutionalists believe that the special counsel would indict a sitting president for an ordinary crime. The constitutional power to judge a president is left to Congress. Congress must determine whether there has been a constitutional offense.

We now know that, contrary to his oath to “take care” that the laws be faithfully executed, the president tried to fire the special counsel, and he fired the head of the FBI, among other acts to thwart the investigation of criminal election interference by our enemies. These are not the acts of one faithful to the law. They are acts of one who would put his own election above the integrity of America’s democracy.

Frances Hill, law professor, University of Miami:
The Mueller report, with redactions and without appendices, does not exonerate President Trump. Instead, it raises more questions about more forms of culpability. The one I find most concerning is the cyberwar launched by Russia against the United States around the 2016 campaign and election. These sections of the report documented the scope of the hostile activities aimed at the heart of our democracy. What was missing was a recounting of the president’s refusal to acknowledge the attack and to take reasonable steps to prevent a recurrence in 2020.

If there were to be impeachment proceedings, articles of impeachments under the “take care” clause and the “commander in chief” should be included in the case against Trump, whose budget cuts and failures to act in the national interest of the United States should not be overlooked or excused. These failures need to be explained to all of us so that we can decide in the 2020 election whether Trump is acting in the interest of the United States.

Finally, the analysis of obstruction of justice efficiently destroys many of the arguments made by the current attorney general in his job application memorandum of June 2018. It appears to provide sufficient evidence for a strong case that Trump obstructed justice in multiple ways. There are instances where the language of the Mueller report appears to be inconsistent with the spin offered this morning by the attorney general.

The paths forward are becoming clearer. Congress should continue to investigate the financial connections between Trump and Russia. But the issue of Trump’s conduct will be in the hands of the voters. This is no time for us to become weary of the betrayals and dysfunctions of this administration. Removing Trump from our national life by defeating him at the polls in 2020 may be the best way to preserve our republic. He can always be tried for his crimes when he is out of office.


And it goes on, and on, and on....The Mueller Report doe not exonerate The President. The report I read merely states that politically and legally there is insufficient information to impeach a sitting President. The guy obstructed justice and sold the US down the river to the Russians but he did not go far enough to be impeached. I suspect he'll be prosecuted when he is a civilian again. If this means he's good enough for another person because there is insufficient evidence to remove him from office and jail him then you go on and revere the man. He's a lying piece of shit and has sold US down the river for personal profit.

You read it again and see if you come to any other conclusions and apologies for the long winded rant. If you took the time to read 10% of the stuff above and reflect and search the report for proof of these statement of proof a verbiage that refutes them I thank you for your indulgence.

Done.

VooDoo

 

[FS1]

Maybe voodoo did not see his tax break because he does not pay taxes.

 

[FS1]

If you think deleting emails and smashing devices after they have already been ordered preserved is not obstruction. But being pissed about false accusations is?

I would say your mind is incapable of rational thought.

 

[ArmyJerry]

Funny you cant find any practicing lawyers to give that opinion, just tenured leftist professors.

VDV I am trying to hope you are right here, I really want to see your kind be right, I want you all to march up and arrest trump and remove him from the white house... at that point you and your kind will have to leave my country or be dealt with in a way that would make pol pot proud.

I really really want you all to impeach and remove him you hypocritical POS, go for it.

 

[Northfl]

Its all pretty simple really
One cannot get a ticket for running a red light if there is no red light.
Even a child in first grade can understand that yet we have people in this country and on this forum that simply cannot grasp the idea that he dindo nuffin.
Trump could do backflips around the country shooting hundred dollar bills out of his ass to every single person in the country and the left would would be saying he should have been doing front flips instead and scream impeachment

 

[ballistic64]

One more attempt and then I'll bow out of this conversation...I'm not going to go line by line and tell you where to reread it. instead I'll take the time to quote several other more credible people (attorneys) who have read the report. I have no credibility and it is not my task to educate folks about what the report really says. If you read it and did not see the truth I'm not going to rail and argue and spend a bunch of time trying to convince you.

Jessica Levinson, law professor, Loyola Law School:
If we were talking about Mr. Trump, not President Trump, we’d be talking about an indictment for obstruction of justice. Today we know that Attorney General Barr put a highly positive (for Trump) gloss on the report. Today we know that Mueller found substantial wrongdoing that would plague, and perhaps end, any other presidency in American history. Today we know that perhaps the difference between a suggestion that Trump be prosecuted for obstruction of justice and a suggestion that he not be was 1) Mueller’s inability to sit down and speak with the Trump without subpoenaing him and Mueller’s decision not to subpoena Trump, and 2) actions by Trump’s staffers that may have protected the president from legal liability.

Stephen Legomsky, law professor, Washington University:
We have been told that the Mueller report had thus “exonerated” President Trump of conspiracy charges, though not on charges that he obstructed justice. Some media reports went further, stating that Mr. Mueller had found “no evidence” of a conspiracy.
Those accounts gave the president an undeserved free pass, for even Mr. Barr’s cherry-picked quotes had made no such claims. We can now see that all Mr. Mueller decided on that issue was that “the investigation did not establish” such a conspiracy. To non-lawyers this might seem like splitting hairs, but lawyers understand how important that difference is. “Establish” is prosecutor talk that simply means “I won’t bring an indictment because I don’t think a jury would find the proof of conspiracy to be ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’” — an extremely high standard of proof. As the Mueller report emphasizes in the introduction, “A statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.”
To the contrary, we now know that Mr. Mueller found abundant evidence of precisely such a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians. The section titled “Trump Campaign and the Dissemination of Hacked Materials” was very heavily redacted, but even the non-redacted evidence of conspiracy was substantial: campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s “periodically” sharing internal polling data and other campaign updates with the Russians; the campaign’s promotion of “dozens of tweets, posts, and other political content created by” the Russian hacking operation; Trump publicly urging Russia to search for Hillary Clinton’s “missing” emails; the campaign’s successful effort to tone down the anti-Russian language in the Republican Party platform at the nominating convention; the president’s bizarre support for Putin, resistance to sanctions, and corresponding antagonism toward our NATO allies; the multiple meetings between top campaign officials and Russians with Kremlin ties, including their famous meeting at the New York Trump hotel for the express, albeit ultimately unsuccessful, purpose of getting dirt on Hillary Clinton; and the lies they were caught in when they tried to deny either the meetings themselves or their content.


Whether or not that pile of evidence rises to the level of “proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” it is of grave concern. There is thus ample reason for Congress — which is not subject to the same standard of proof as a criminal prosecutor — to continue investigating this issue, as well as the obstruction of justice question and all the other disturbing allegations surrounding President Trump and his associates. There are also the continuing, very legitimate investigations by various US attorneys’ offices and state attorney general offices. And, of course, there is still hope that at least Congress, and perhaps the public, will find a way to see the crucial information that Mr. Barr has redacted from the Mueller report. So there is much more to come.

Peter Margulies, law professor, Roger Williams University School of Law:
The Mueller report provides a road map for prosecuting Trump for obstruction of justice but stops short of this finding because of legal doubts about indicting a sitting president. Trump could be charged after he has left the White House, although Attorney General William Barr’s refusal to charge Trump now might make future prosecution seem imprudent or vindictive. In addition, Congress could start impeachment based on Mueller’s road map, although political factors might weigh against that move.

The Mueller report also prompts a mixed verdict on Attorney General Barr. Given the disturbing evidence of Trump’s obstruction in the report, both today’s Barr press conference and the letter Barr released almost four weeks ago seem like exercises in spin. But Barr also released the Mueller report with far fewer redactions than many feared. It’s up to Congress, the media, and the public to read the entire report to get a full picture of the president’s repeated efforts to undermine the justice system and the concerted attempts by government lawyers and other aides to pull him back from the precipice.

Keith Whittington, politics professor, Princeton University:
If this is what a complete and total exoneration looks like, I’d hate to see a damning report. We have often been cautioned not to rush to judgment because we did not know what the Mueller team knows. It turns out that the broad contours of the investigation’s findings had largely found their way into the public sphere, but the report collects all that information in a single place and provides new details that do not put the president in a favorable light.

The good news for the White House is that Mueller could not prove a criminal conspiracy involving the Trump campaign to have Russia influence the 2016 elections and that Mueller did not recommend obstruction of justice charges. The bad news is that the campaign demonstrated an unseemly willingness to benefit from Russian interference and that Russia made lots of efforts to interfere in the election.

Moreover, the president has behaved remarkably badly in regard to the investigation into the 2016 campaign. Mueller was appropriately cautious about reaching legal conclusions regarding obstruction of justice given the aggressive legal interpretation that would be needed to pursue a case against some of the president’s actions and given that Justice Department policies would preclude those legal conclusions from being translated into indictments of a sitting president.


The president might have an innocent explanation for some of his actions, or at least a credible claim of mixed motives, but he repeatedly took actions that he was strongly advised would be highly inappropriate and was saved from more damaging consequences by the willingness of others to ignore the president’s preferences. The courtroom is probably not the right venue for calling the president to account for his actions, but the report leaves little doubt that the president does not appreciate the responsibilities of his office.

Victoria Nourse, law professor, Georgetown University:
“Putin has won.” Election Day 2016, an intercepted message to Kirill Dmitriev, a Russian national “closely connected to Putin.” (On page 149 of the Mueller report.) This line says everything that the American public should remember about the Mueller investigation. Russian interference in the election has been established beyond doubt. Worse, Mueller found that the Trump campaign “expected to benefit” from criminal actions by Russians who successfully targeted the American election. It is not a crime for any citizen to associate with criminals and spies, nor to enjoy their favors, but that is surely too low a standard for a president of the United States.

Viewing this case through the lens of criminal law is a mistake. The president takes an oath “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Few constitutionalists believe that the special counsel would indict a sitting president for an ordinary crime. The constitutional power to judge a president is left to Congress. Congress must determine whether there has been a constitutional offense.

We now know that, contrary to his oath to “take care” that the laws be faithfully executed, the president tried to fire the special counsel, and he fired the head of the FBI, among other acts to thwart the investigation of criminal election interference by our enemies. These are not the acts of one faithful to the law. They are acts of one who would put his own election above the integrity of America’s democracy.

Frances Hill, law professor, University of Miami:
The Mueller report, with redactions and without appendices, does not exonerate President Trump. Instead, it raises more questions about more forms of culpability. The one I find most concerning is the cyberwar launched by Russia against the United States around the 2016 campaign and election. These sections of the report documented the scope of the hostile activities aimed at the heart of our democracy. What was missing was a recounting of the president’s refusal to acknowledge the attack and to take reasonable steps to prevent a recurrence in 2020.

If there were to be impeachment proceedings, articles of impeachments under the “take care” clause and the “commander in chief” should be included in the case against Trump, whose budget cuts and failures to act in the national interest of the United States should not be overlooked or excused. These failures need to be explained to all of us so that we can decide in the 2020 election whether Trump is acting in the interest of the United States.

Finally, the analysis of obstruction of justice efficiently destroys many of the arguments made by the current attorney general in his job application memorandum of June 2018. It appears to provide sufficient evidence for a strong case that Trump obstructed justice in multiple ways. There are instances where the language of the Mueller report appears to be inconsistent with the spin offered this morning by the attorney general.

The paths forward are becoming clearer. Congress should continue to investigate the financial connections between Trump and Russia. But the issue of Trump’s conduct will be in the hands of the voters. This is no time for us to become weary of the betrayals and dysfunctions of this administration. Removing Trump from our national life by defeating him at the polls in 2020 may be the best way to preserve our republic. He can always be tried for his crimes when he is out of office.


And it goes on, and on, and on....The Mueller Report doe not exonerate The President. The report I read merely states that politically and legally there is insufficient information to impeach a sitting President. The guy obstructed justice and sold the US down the river to the Russians but he did not go far enough to be impeached. I suspect he'll be prosecuted when he is a civilian again. If this means he's good enough for another person because there is insufficient evidence to remove him from office and jail him then you go on and revere the man. He's a lying piece of shit and has sold US down the river for personal profit.

You read it again and see if you come to any other conclusions and apologies for the long winded rant. If you took the time to read 10% of the stuff above and reflect and search the report for proof of these statement of proof a verbiage that refutes them I thank you for your indulgence.

Done.

VooDoo

Any more libs you care to quote? The one that really stands out is Whittington. With the report out, he is still not able to distinguish DNC election meddling from supposed Russian election meddling.

 

[wilson1911]

I watched all of the hearing. I can't believe they only attacked him. There was not one person who tried to use the data (report) in front of them.....of which I get they have not even read. Now that !!! would have been a great question to ask.

I would have loved to see barr tell kamilla how he had to work his way to the top, while she just spread her legs.

 

[FS1]

I'll bet Horowitz was laughing when she said she would ask him to investigate if Barr asked Trump to investigate anyone. The President can ask his AG to investigate anyone he wants. If the AG thinks it's wrong he can refuse and resign.

She rode a dick while it was climbing the ladder.

 

[Erno86]

Any more libs you care to quote? The one that really stands out is Whittington. With the report out, he is still not able to distinguish DNC election meddling from supposed Russian election meddling.

Ralph Nader: "Donald Trump is the most impeachable president in American history." ---- he also said --- "Trump is trying to bar key witnesses from testifying. He is suing his own accounting firm an Deutsche Bank to shield his sordid business relationships and potential tax violations." --- and --- "Our lawless lying president is about to face the laws of the land, backed by our Constitution. It is time for Republicans to start looking at themselves in the mirror of history. And it is time for all Americans to challenge their elected officials to stand tall and uphold the rule of law."

https://www.alternet.org/2019/05/ralph-nader-donald-trump-is-the-most-impeachable-president-in-american-history

 

[ArmyJerry]

its Sunday morning, aren't you supposed to be at a black babies killing Satan ritual or something or was that yesterday on your baby sacrificing calendar?

you and your tribe are some evil vile baby killing people,,, I only hope I am around to partake when things come to a head..

Ralph Nader: "Donald Trump is the most impeachable president in American history." ---- he also said --- "Trump is trying to bar key witnesses from testifying. He is suing his own accounting firm an Deutsche Bank to shield his sordid business relationships and potential tax violations." --- and --- "Our lawless lying president is about to face the laws of the land, backed by our Constitution. It is time for Republicans to start looking at themselves in the mirror of history. And it is time for all Americans to challenge their elected officials to stand tall and uphold the rule of law."

https://www.alternet.org/2019/05/ralph-nader-donald-trump-is-the-most-impeachable-president-in-american-history

 

[FS1]

Ralph Nader: "Donald Trump is the most impeachable president in American history." ---- he also said --- "Trump is trying to bar key witnesses from testifying. He is suing his own accounting firm an Deutsche Bank to shield his sordid business relationships and potential tax violations." --- and --- "Our lawless lying president is about to face the laws of the land, backed by our Constitution. It is time for Republicans to start looking at themselves in the mirror of history. And it is time for all Americans to challenge their elected officials to stand tall and uphold the rule of law."

https://www.alternet.org/2019/05/ralph-nader-donald-trump-is-the-most-impeachable-president-in-american-history

Wow everytime I think that you have the said most ignorant thing I have possibly ever heard...you open your mouth again and prove me wrong.

 

[Threadcutter308]

its Sunday morning, aren't you supposed to be at a black babies killing Satan ritual or something or was that yesterday on your baby sacrificing calendar?

AJ, those parties are reserved for the "A Listers" and maybe a select few "B list" Libs.........Your boy is "d list" at best. I doubt he gets many invitations of any kind to any of the Libs festivities......

 

[ArmyJerry]

man ,,, i know it shouldnt get to me but the amount of delusion they have to be under is amazing... they call others names when their actual party platform is to kill babies, before and after birth,, and I am no bible thumper by any means... I am getting in shape just to live long enough to partake.

 

[Inifinty]

All speed bumps in front of many planned things like the H.R.5 - Repression Act

Where one groups beliefs can and will repress another groups beliefs with full force of the .gov

Freedom is in the balance if/when these people gain control over all three branches again

 

[sirhrmechanic]

Ralph Nader? That geezer is more senile than Bernie... he hasn’t been relevant since he babbled his way into the American Zeitgeist by killing off the Corvair. And he has been on the wrong side of every single topic... before and since. That Sterno-drinking mouth breather is the 20th century’s William Jennings Bryan and Upton Sinclair and Ida Tarbell all rolled into one retarded package.

Quoting Ralph Nader... Ah hahahahah these cutting-themselves over historionic personality disorder types are a laugh a
Minute...

Ralph Nader

Cheers, sirhr

 

[j-huskey]

Let's give Voodoo the benefit of the doubt, that he and many of those he quoted are correct........

a. Voodoo is correct.
b. The past occupants did more illegal and criminal things than the current.
c. It was not in those in power's benefit to expose, so all was hidden... buried, and they profited.
d. Foreign gov interference in our elections has existed since wayyyyy back when, and our Gov has done the same. BFD.....
e. Those past occupants profited from foreign gov interference and buried it. F'ng hypocrites...
f. If a true body of Congress n Senate, used an honest judicial branch to investigate the past occupants or themselves, we would see one huge barrel of bad apples, they are all the same...
g. the piranha are attacking themselves and it's a blood frenzy. We are being splattered by the shit and drawn into the vortex, only if we let it happen. Dont be drawn in.
h. It will take time and history to show the current occupant for exactly what he is, sinner or saint.
i. All now is smoke and mirrors, and like an onion, layered, and it's a huge onion. There are lots of layers to be exposed. A lot of you peel back layers in your posts and expose truths.
j. Some truths are less palatable than others... just because you dont believe it, doesnt make it less true.
k. Historically, there is a prediction of a false prophet many will follow, there is a children's tale of the pied piper, Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler preached their version of truth (truth mixed with agenda) and many followed to their ruin. Today we had the previous occupant...
l. Previous occupant interspersed enough truth in his propaganda that ignorance followed as whole truth...
m. Too many pick a sliver of truth and hold on to it like a drowning man to a life jacket with a slow leak. Dont fall for that illusion...

We do live in interesting times !!!!!

Voodoo IS NOT the enemy people...

 

[Inifinty]

Ralph Nader? That geezer is more senile than Bernie... of every single topic... before and since.

But as we poke fun, he and his cohorts have full support of the media to televise their propaganda campaigns that a very large segment of the country swallows hook, line, and sinker.

 

[ArmyJerry]

he is the norm for a government worker, a dangerously evil bunch all. we gotta get back to base Constitutionalism and crush every level of government not prescribed in that document.

But as we poke fun, he and his cohorts have full support of the media to televise their propaganda campaigns that a very large segment of the country swallows hook, line, and sinker.

 

[Inifinty]

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

But if things like in the article below are accurate, then it seems there would be multitudes of snail trails to bring the good old boy network down with.

https://www.lifenews.com/2019/02/21...y-parts-from-planned-parenthood-are-arrested/

""The Isaias family began dumping large amounts of campaign contributions into American political campaigns, including $90,000 to Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign. As a result, after reaching out to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for asylum, the Isaias’ were granted expedited immigration into the U.S. Clinton’s State Department then rebuffed attempts by Ecuador to extradite them to face justice.""

 

[wilson1911]

I'll bet Horowitz was laughing when she said she would ask him to investigate if Barr asked Trump to investigate anyone. The President can ask his AG to investigate anyone he wants. If the AG thinks it's wrong he can refuse and resign.

She rode a dick while it was climbing the ladder.

It baffles me that HoLDeR can work so close to barry that his hand had to be in his pants......all the while its against the law for a repub to do the same. Its divide and conquer by the dems. No one ever talks about this tho.

I wish don had put the guy who is suing the govt for hillary's emails..I forgot his name/organization. He would make washington burn.

 

[PusherX11]

One more attempt and then I'll bow out of this conversation...I'm not going to go line by line and tell you where to reread it. instead I'll take the time to quote several other more credible people (attorneys) who have read the report. I have no credibility and it is not my task to educate folks about what the report really says. If you read it and did not see the truth I'm not going to rail and argue and spend a bunch of time trying to convince you.

Jessica Levinson, law professor, Loyola Law School:
If we were talking about Mr. Trump, not President Trump, we’d be talking about an indictment for obstruction of justice. Today we know that Attorney General Barr put a highly positive (for Trump) gloss on the report. Today we know that Mueller found substantial wrongdoing that would plague, and perhaps end, any other presidency in American history. Today we know that perhaps the difference between a suggestion that Trump be prosecuted for obstruction of justice and a suggestion that he not be was 1) Mueller’s inability to sit down and speak with the Trump without subpoenaing him and Mueller’s decision not to subpoena Trump, and 2) actions by Trump’s staffers that may have protected the president from legal liability.

Stephen Legomsky, law professor, Washington University:
We have been told that the Mueller report had thus “exonerated” President Trump of conspiracy charges, though not on charges that he obstructed justice. Some media reports went further, stating that Mr. Mueller had found “no evidence” of a conspiracy.
Those accounts gave the president an undeserved free pass, for even Mr. Barr’s cherry-picked quotes had made no such claims. We can now see that all Mr. Mueller decided on that issue was that “the investigation did not establish” such a conspiracy. To non-lawyers this might seem like splitting hairs, but lawyers understand how important that difference is. “Establish” is prosecutor talk that simply means “I won’t bring an indictment because I don’t think a jury would find the proof of conspiracy to be ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’” — an extremely high standard of proof. As the Mueller report emphasizes in the introduction, “A statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.”
To the contrary, we now know that Mr. Mueller found abundant evidence of precisely such a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians. The section titled “Trump Campaign and the Dissemination of Hacked Materials” was very heavily redacted, but even the non-redacted evidence of conspiracy was substantial: campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s “periodically” sharing internal polling data and other campaign updates with the Russians; the campaign’s promotion of “dozens of tweets, posts, and other political content created by” the Russian hacking operation; Trump publicly urging Russia to search for Hillary Clinton’s “missing” emails; the campaign’s successful effort to tone down the anti-Russian language in the Republican Party platform at the nominating convention; the president’s bizarre support for Putin, resistance to sanctions, and corresponding antagonism toward our NATO allies; the multiple meetings between top campaign officials and Russians with Kremlin ties, including their famous meeting at the New York Trump hotel for the express, albeit ultimately unsuccessful, purpose of getting dirt on Hillary Clinton; and the lies they were caught in when they tried to deny either the meetings themselves or their content.


Whether or not that pile of evidence rises to the level of “proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” it is of grave concern. There is thus ample reason for Congress — which is not subject to the same standard of proof as a criminal prosecutor — to continue investigating this issue, as well as the obstruction of justice question and all the other disturbing allegations surrounding President Trump and his associates. There are also the continuing, very legitimate investigations by various US attorneys’ offices and state attorney general offices. And, of course, there is still hope that at least Congress, and perhaps the public, will find a way to see the crucial information that Mr. Barr has redacted from the Mueller report. So there is much more to come.

Peter Margulies, law professor, Roger Williams University School of Law:
The Mueller report provides a road map for prosecuting Trump for obstruction of justice but stops short of this finding because of legal doubts about indicting a sitting president. Trump could be charged after he has left the White House, although Attorney General William Barr’s refusal to charge Trump now might make future prosecution seem imprudent or vindictive. In addition, Congress could start impeachment based on Mueller’s road map, although political factors might weigh against that move.

The Mueller report also prompts a mixed verdict on Attorney General Barr. Given the disturbing evidence of Trump’s obstruction in the report, both today’s Barr press conference and the letter Barr released almost four weeks ago seem like exercises in spin. But Barr also released the Mueller report with far fewer redactions than many feared. It’s up to Congress, the media, and the public to read the entire report to get a full picture of the president’s repeated efforts to undermine the justice system and the concerted attempts by government lawyers and other aides to pull him back from the precipice.

Keith Whittington, politics professor, Princeton University:
If this is what a complete and total exoneration looks like, I’d hate to see a damning report. We have often been cautioned not to rush to judgment because we did not know what the Mueller team knows. It turns out that the broad contours of the investigation’s findings had largely found their way into the public sphere, but the report collects all that information in a single place and provides new details that do not put the president in a favorable light.

The good news for the White House is that Mueller could not prove a criminal conspiracy involving the Trump campaign to have Russia influence the 2016 elections and that Mueller did not recommend obstruction of justice charges. The bad news is that the campaign demonstrated an unseemly willingness to benefit from Russian interference and that Russia made lots of efforts to interfere in the election.

Moreover, the president has behaved remarkably badly in regard to the investigation into the 2016 campaign. Mueller was appropriately cautious about reaching legal conclusions regarding obstruction of justice given the aggressive legal interpretation that would be needed to pursue a case against some of the president’s actions and given that Justice Department policies would preclude those legal conclusions from being translated into indictments of a sitting president.


The president might have an innocent explanation for some of his actions, or at least a credible claim of mixed motives, but he repeatedly took actions that he was strongly advised would be highly inappropriate and was saved from more damaging consequences by the willingness of others to ignore the president’s preferences. The courtroom is probably not the right venue for calling the president to account for his actions, but the report leaves little doubt that the president does not appreciate the responsibilities of his office.

Victoria Nourse, law professor, Georgetown University:
“Putin has won.” Election Day 2016, an intercepted message to Kirill Dmitriev, a Russian national “closely connected to Putin.” (On page 149 of the Mueller report.) This line says everything that the American public should remember about the Mueller investigation. Russian interference in the election has been established beyond doubt. Worse, Mueller found that the Trump campaign “expected to benefit” from criminal actions by Russians who successfully targeted the American election. It is not a crime for any citizen to associate with criminals and spies, nor to enjoy their favors, but that is surely too low a standard for a president of the United States.

Viewing this case through the lens of criminal law is a mistake. The president takes an oath “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Few constitutionalists believe that the special counsel would indict a sitting president for an ordinary crime. The constitutional power to judge a president is left to Congress. Congress must determine whether there has been a constitutional offense.

We now know that, contrary to his oath to “take care” that the laws be faithfully executed, the president tried to fire the special counsel, and he fired the head of the FBI, among other acts to thwart the investigation of criminal election interference by our enemies. These are not the acts of one faithful to the law. They are acts of one who would put his own election above the integrity of America’s democracy.

Frances Hill, law professor, University of Miami:
The Mueller report, with redactions and without appendices, does not exonerate President Trump. Instead, it raises more questions about more forms of culpability. The one I find most concerning is the cyberwar launched by Russia against the United States around the 2016 campaign and election. These sections of the report documented the scope of the hostile activities aimed at the heart of our democracy. What was missing was a recounting of the president’s refusal to acknowledge the attack and to take reasonable steps to prevent a recurrence in 2020.

If there were to be impeachment proceedings, articles of impeachments under the “take care” clause and the “commander in chief” should be included in the case against Trump, whose budget cuts and failures to act in the national interest of the United States should not be overlooked or excused. These failures need to be explained to all of us so that we can decide in the 2020 election whether Trump is acting in the interest of the United States.

Finally, the analysis of obstruction of justice efficiently destroys many of the arguments made by the current attorney general in his job application memorandum of June 2018. It appears to provide sufficient evidence for a strong case that Trump obstructed justice in multiple ways. There are instances where the language of the Mueller report appears to be inconsistent with the spin offered this morning by the attorney general.

The paths forward are becoming clearer. Congress should continue to investigate the financial connections between Trump and Russia. But the issue of Trump’s conduct will be in the hands of the voters. This is no time for us to become weary of the betrayals and dysfunctions of this administration. Removing Trump from our national life by defeating him at the polls in 2020 may be the best way to preserve our republic. He can always be tried for his crimes when he is out of office.


And it goes on, and on, and on....The Mueller Report doe not exonerate The President. The report I read merely states that politically and legally there is insufficient information to impeach a sitting President. The guy obstructed justice and sold the US down the river to the Russians but he did not go far enough to be impeached. I suspect he'll be prosecuted when he is a civilian again. If this means he's good enough for another person because there is insufficient evidence to remove him from office and jail him then you go on and revere the man. He's a lying piece of shit and has sold US down the river for personal profit.

You read it again and see if you come to any other conclusions and apologies for the long winded rant. If you took the time to read 10% of the stuff above and reflect and search the report for proof of these statement of proof a verbiage that refutes them I thank you for your indulgence.

Done.

VooDoo

Ralph Nader: "Donald Trump is the most impeachable president in American history." ---- he also said --- "Trump is trying to bar key witnesses from testifying. He is suing his own accounting firm an Deutsche Bank to shield his sordid business relationships and potential tax violations." --- and --- "Our lawless lying president is about to face the laws of the land, backed by our Constitution. It is time for Republicans to start looking at themselves in the mirror of history. And it is time for all Americans to challenge their elected officials to stand tall and uphold the rule of law."

https://www.alternet.org/2019/05/ralph-nader-donald-trump-is-the-most-impeachable-president-in-american-history

 

[QuickNDirty]

man ,,, i know it shouldnt get to me but the amount of delusion they have to be under is amazing... they call others names when their actual party platform is to kill babies, before and after birth,, and I am no bible thumper by any means... I am getting in shape just to live long enough to partake.

No fuckin' shit...

I got into a discussion with a couple of rabid leftists the other day. I started it off with how whiney and annoying ANTIFA is with their "No Trump... No kkk... no fascist USA" bullshit, and it went downhill from there to a point where I was able to establish that:

1.) Freedom of speech is great, except for the fascists
2.) All fascists should be executed
3.) Prosecuting crimes committed by the mentally ill is a waste of money because it doesn't help them
4.) We need to be better to our homeless
5.) Government is the answer


Like... how the fuck can someone sit there and claim to be a compassionate human being when they're LITERALLY advocating for mass executions of people they disagree with, babies, and all of those other folks, and while simultaneously trying to say it's unfair to prosecute someone that flips out and kills because because they are "mentally ill".

Oh, and Pelosi, Schumer, Kamala, AOC, et al are "centrists" whereas the Republicans are Very Very Very far right.

There's some sick motherfuckers we've got before us.

 

[ArmyJerry]

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...iam-barr-prepare-for-war-over-mueller-report/

 

[Erno86]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx BREAKING!!! xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"House Committee just voted to hold Bill Barr in contempt of Congress"

 

[FS1]

In other news...Rope futures were at an all time high today.

Never stop your enemy from making a mistake.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

US attorney from CT appointed...

Barr assigns US attorney in Connecticut to look into government surveillance involving Trump campaign: source

Attorney General William Barr has appointed a U.S. attorney to examine the origins of the Russia investigation and determine if intelligence collection efforts targeting the Trump campaign were "lawful and appropriate," a person familiar with the situation told Fox News on Monday evening.

www.foxnews.com

The guy is a pit bull and has put FBI types behind bars in the Whitey Bulger case... and Holder put him in the enhanced interrogation trail... but I think that led nowhere.

Best thing about him? No Ivy League ringknocker connections. Blue collar boy who has a jones for the truth and a record of putting away guys who think they are above the silly rules, laws and Constitution.

Rope futures gonna go up further when the commodities markets open... indeed!

Cheers, Sirhr

 

[FS1]

The best part is all the perps know this guy. I wonder how they are sleeping?

 

[ArmyJerry]

probably should start a letter writing campaign encouraging the guy to jail and hang everyone involved to even have a chance at restoring any sense of justice in this country.,.. If he doesn't get them all there will be war in our life time.

 

[FS1]

probably should start a letter writing campaign encouraging the guy to jail and hang everyone involved to even have a chance at restoring any sense of justice in this country.,.. If he doesn't get them all there will be war in our life time.

We should start a GoFundMe to buy Durham rope

 

[sirhrmechanic]

This did not hit me until later... but Muller and Comey were both, IIRC, involved in bulger fiasco. So he may be looking at fish that got away... As a bonus! Sirhr

 

[ArmyJerry]

Yes i posted earlier in another thread. Rotten to the core.

 

[FS1]

This did not hit me until later... but Muller and Comey were both, IIRC, involved in bulger fiasco. So he may be looking at fish that got away... As a bonus! Sirhr

When I look at that pic of Durham...I see a Sirh needs a dress look in his eye.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

When I look at that pic of Durham...I see a Sirh needs a dress look in his eye.

I wil wear it proudly!!!! If some sierra bravos go to the hoosegow1

Sirhr

 

[Erno86]

US attorney from CT appointed...

Barr assigns US attorney in Connecticut to look into government surveillance involving Trump campaign: source

Attorney General William Barr has appointed a U.S. attorney to examine the origins of the Russia investigation and determine if intelligence collection efforts targeting the Trump campaign were "lawful and appropriate," a person familiar with the situation told Fox News on Monday evening.

www.foxnews.com

The guy is a pit bull and has put FBI types behind bars in the Whitey Bulger case... and Holder put him in the enhanced interrogation trail... but I think that led nowhere.

Best thing about him? No Ivy League ringknocker connections. Blue collar boy who has a jones for the truth and a record of putting away guys who think they are above the silly rules, laws and Constitution.

Rope futures gonna go up further when the commodities markets open... indeed!

Cheers, Sirhr

Now that's what I call a 'witch hunt' --- It's not only a 'witch hunt', it 'is a joke'. ☠☠☠

 

[Charger442]

Now that's what I call a 'witch hunt' --- It's not only a 'witch hunt', it 'is a joke'. ☠☠☠

Are you going to say that when the Inspector General report hits that says the FISA warrant process used in all of this was completely illegal?

 

[Dunraven]

Horowitz is comin, and hell is comin with him....

The nerves are beginning snap, get some popcorn boys it might get interesting.

Quoting Lone Wadi: Hell is coming to breakfast.

 

[SilentStalkr]

Blah blah blah, neither side is willing to concede anything or actually uphold any laws. It’s just more BS to waste time, attention and money on. LEGOWI

Simple truth, nobody trust the gov anymore at any level. 2020 will be interesting me thinks.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

 

[Dunraven]

I watched all of the hearing. I can't believe they only attacked him. There was not one person who tried to use the data (report) in front of them.....of which I get they have not even read. Now that !!! would have been a great question to ask.

I would have loved to see barr tell kamilla how he had to work his way to the top, while she just spread her legs.

She WAS working..

 

[ArmyJerry]

welp, i hope Di Genova is right but I really want hangings, many many hangings, I want the institutions that pose the existential threat to the republic dismantled... if they are not there will be a war in this country in the next generation, maybe 2020. A watering is in order.

 

[clcustom1911]

welp, i hope Di Genova is right but I really want hangings, many many hangings, I want the institutions that pose the existential threat to the republic dismantled... if they are not there will be a war in this country in the next generation, maybe 2020. A watering is in order.