Trump investigation documents release starting Wednesday, full criminal investigation underway

[TLK Valentine]

I think impeaching emboldens Trump as least as much as an impeachment acquittal would. It's an excuse.

The Democrats have more than enough evidence to impeach, but, as usual, don't have the backbone to go with it.

So long as McConnell rules the Senate, impeachment is a pointless gesture.

McConnell can be voted out in 2020, but so could Donald, which would make impeachment a moot point.

The Dems are spinning their wheels and feeding into the Donald martyr machine with impeachment talk.

 

[cow451]

Let's take stock of the situation. Three years now, with 100% support from so-called "mainstream" news networks, 100% backing from Obama holdovers in the nations intelligence services, a special counsel which appoints only Democrat affiliated investigators ... and still no impeachment.

Sounds more like Dems might want to consider doing something else. What they've been doing hasn't worked for them. Of course, as Trump keeps pointing out, continuing with the same failed policies is what Democrats have done for years in places like Baltimore, San Francisco and Detroit.

But, do carry on about how everything is the fault of Republicans.

FoxBabeNews is now on board?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Perhaps. A third of Republicans would need to break ranks.

Commit career suicide, you mean.

That can happen in a heartbeat ... just as soon as Democrats convince voters that Trump has committed a real and serious crime.

What would it take, for example, to convince you?

Put it this way: what would it take for you, had you known it in 2016, to have supported Hillary over Donald?

Don't forget that not very many years ago Democrats set precedent by not removing a Democrat president who had committed crimes.

Indeed -- what would it take to prevent the Dems from repeating the GOP's failure?

 

[hislegacy]

This guy who hasn't worked in government in 25 years has this inside information how, exactly?

Possibly through the DOJ, who hired him to investigate. I have heard they have some resources.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Possibly through the DOJ, who hired him to investigate. I have heard they have some resources.

Oh? What did the DOJ hire him to investigate? Wikipedia doesn't mention him being hired to investigate anything since GHWB's search of Bill Clinton in 1992.

 

[DaisyDay]

This guy who hasn't worked in government in 25 years has this inside information how, exactly?

From Wikipedia:

Joseph diGenova is an American lawyer, political commentator, and conspiracy theorist who served as the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia from 1983 to 1988. He is known for promoting conspiracy theories about the Department of Justice and the FBI.

Maybe he's buddies with Q?

I'll admit I'm hoping to get the pony I was promised for Christmas. I really don't want to end up with socks.

Nowadays, I'd prefer socks and underwear to a pony of my own.

 

[NightHawkeye]

From Wikipedia:
Joseph diGenova is an American lawyer, political commentator, and conspiracy theorist who served as the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia from 1983 to 1988. He is known for promoting conspiracy theories about the Department of Justice and the FBI.

... and what are those conspiracy theories? According to your link ...

DiGenova... has accused FBI officials of trying to "frame" President Donald Trump for "nonexistent" crimes. On March 19, 2018, he and his spouse, Victoria Toensing, were hired to serve on Trump's legal team for the Special Counsel investigation.
...
He also led investigations into corruption in the administration of Washington, D.C., Mayor Marion Barry that led to convictions of 12 officials, including two deputy mayors.

DiGenova later served as Independent Counsel investigating the 1992 preelection search of then-candidate Bill Clinton's passport file by officials of the George H. W. Bush administration. DiGenova concluded that the passport search had been "stupid, dumb and partisan," but not illegal ...​

 

[Speedwell]

Let's take stock of the situation. Three years now, with 100% support from so-called "mainstream" news networks, 100% backing from Obama holdovers in the nations intelligence services, a special counsel which appoints only Democrat affiliated investigators ... and still no impeachment.

Was that the goal of the Mueller investigation? Somehow I missed that in Comey's appointment letter to Mueller.

But the Mueller investigation found the one thing that the Right didn't want them to find: credible evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 election. All the whining from the Right about how the Mueller investigation didn't "get Trump" so it must be a failure isn't going to make that go away.

 

[Speedwell]

I'm not sure that was ever in question.

I stated from the beginning of the investigation that Russians interfered in the election ...

Now if you could just convince the administration and their lackeys in the Senate...

just like the US interferes in Russian elections, just like Obama interfered in Israeli elections. Nations interfere in the elections of other nations. It's not new. Everyone has a vested interest in the election outcome. I'm just surprised that you are surprised.

So we should let them do what they like to us? Quite the patriot, aren't you.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Well, it's July 31. Judgment Day. No drops yet.

Is this how Sarah Connor felt?

 

[Fantine]

Perhaps. A third of Republicans would need to break ranks.

That can happen in a heartbeat ... just as soon as Democrats convince voters that Trump has committed a real and serious crime. Don't forget that not very many years ago Democrats set precedent by not removing a Democrat president who had committed crimes.

There is a big difference between lying about a liaison with a young adult woman....

And the long laundry list of Trump crimes, obstruction, payoffs to open stars during the campaign, profiteering from his office in numerous ways, and many others.

 

[Speedwell]

There is a big difference between lying about a liaison with a young adult woman....

Once upon a time it would have been considered an honorable thing to do, to protect the public reputation of the young woman.

 

[NightHawkeye]

No, but I’ve been around nut case conspiracy baloney like the OP.

That seems overly harsh. Everyone knows the documents are coming out.

The only question is exactly when. On a related matter, it's more than a little interesting that subsequent to DiGenova's statement, the FBI Director announced he was fighting release of documents on account of sources and methods.

Chris Wray's FBI continues to cover for Team Comey's Russia shenanigans | The Hill

Mark Meadows bypasses FBI to appeal for release of info linked to FISA abuse report

 

[cow451]

That seems overly harsh. Everyone knows the documents are coming out.

The only question is exactly when. On a related matter, it's more than a little interesting that subsequent to DiGenova's statement, the FBI Director announced he was fighting release of documents on account of sources and methods.

Chris Wray's FBI continues to cover for Team Comey's Russia shenanigans | The Hill

Mark Meadows bypasses FBI to appeal for release of info linked to FISA abuse report

The OP was very clear. Now....

 

[cow451]

Thanks for your continued interest in the thread.

 

[LostMarbels]

Look no further than Donald's own administration.

No, look at Donald's own administration, but defiantly look further.

 

[Fantine]

Once upon a time it would have been considered an honorable thing to do, to protect the public reputation of the young woman.

Once upon a time, senators would have strongly condemned invitations from a presidential candidate for hostile foreign governments to hack their opponents. They would have condemned presidents ignoring subpoenas for witnesses and information needed by committees. They would have condemned presidents spending 1 out of every 3 days in their resorts--and charging the federal government top dollar for the stay, including hundreds of thousands, for Secret Service golf cart rentals. They would have condemned spending $92 million on a military parade while cutting funds for SNAP and other compassionate programs. They would have condemned presidents willingly accepting "bribes" by foreign countries courting favor by holding events at his Washington hotel, etc. They would have voted against the cabinet appointments of lobbyists and big spenders--like the Wall St. billionaire Minuchin who took his actress wife to Nashville to see the eclipse on the government's dime. This of course is just scratching the surface--the list of horrific acts increases daily, along with the list of unqualified and often dishonest cabinet members, and judges who are barely out of law school. And speaking of the reputation of young women, doesn't the president's friendships with a number of pedophiles concern them?

If President Clinton had had the presence of mind (or the income) to pay off scores of mistresses in return for their silence, there wouldn't have been anything Congress could have found fault with.

Sadly, that is not the case with President Trump. We can only speculate (beyond the two verified cases) about how many mistresses might have been paid off in return for silence, but mistress payoffs are the least of our worries about his suitability to lead.

 

[Hank77]

Joe diGenova: “Declassified documents will be released this week … by Wednesday” (July 31st)

Speaking to WMAL radio, former U.S. Attorney Joe diGenova informs the audience that declassified documents will begin to be made public starting Wednesday July 31st.

Additionally, Mr. diGenova states confidently that U.S. Attorney John Durham is not conducting a “review”, but is conducting a full criminal investigation with a grand jury empaneled and currently receiving testimony from witnesses.​

This is some background from an article back in May when Durham was hired. In the last paragraph I quoted, what do you think 'public progress ' means.
The exact outlines of Mr. Durham’s investigation remain unclear, and it’s also not immediately apparent what it means for John Huber, the U.S. attorney in Utah whom then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions had named in 2017 to look at some of the same ground.

Mr. Jordan described it as a change of pitcher in order to get things going.
“Sometimes the manager has to make a trip to the mound and make a change,” Mr. Jordan said. ‘We haven’t heard anything from John Huber.”


Indeed, it was Republicans’ frustration with Mr. Huber’s lack of public progress that fueled calls for a new special counsel to get to the bottom of the Obama administration’s efforts to snare the Trump campaign.
GOP pleased with investigator of FBI’s Trump-Russia probe

 

[essentialsaltes]

This is some background from an article back in May when Durham was hired. In the last paragraph I quoted, what do you think 'public progress ' means.
The exact outlines of Mr. Durham’s investigation remain unclear, and it’s also not immediately apparent what it means for John Huber

Place your bets on the three investigations. Which will reach the finish line first?

Huber (Nov 2017-???)
Horowitz (March 2018-???)
Durham (May 2019-???)

 

[cow451]

Place your bets on the three investigations. Which will reach the finish line first?

Huber (Nov 2017-???)
Horowitz (March 2018-???)
Durham (May 2019-???)

My bet is that they will all pull up lame.