Now it becomes clear

[someoneyouknow]

"The president cannot obstruct justice. By the way, he's the one who dictated his son's response to questions about the meeting in The Tower. So yeah, we've lied for an entire year about what took place."

(CNN) In a confidential letter to special counsel Robert Mueller in January, President Donald Trump's legal team acknowledged for the first time that Trump "dictated" the first misleading statement put out about his son's controversial 2016 meeting with Russians at Trump Tower.

"You have received all of the notes, communications and testimony indicating that the President dictated a short but accurate response to the New York Times article on behalf of his son, Donald Trump, Jr.," the letter said, according to The New York Times, which published a copy of it. "His son then followed up by making a full public disclosure regarding the meeting, including his public testimony that there was nothing to the meeting and certainly no evidence of collusion."

Thus why the knuckle-dragging hack attorneys for the con artist have been saying for weeks he can't obstruct an investigation. He's been obstructing the investigation the entire time and they've been trying to shape the battlefield. And failed.

Certainly everyone remembers con artist jr's testimony before the Senate committee investigating the Russian collusion into the election. He's the one who said a) the meeting was only about adoptions an b) he's the one wrote the statement about what happened there, that the con artist had nothing to do with it.

Every time the con artist or his supposed legal team open their mouths, they give more ammunition to Mueller and his crack legal experts. It's only a matter of time until the con artist is surrounded and forced to surrender.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/02/politics/trump-lawyers-statement-trump-tower-russians/index.html

 

[glBock]

At the end of your post, Someone, you wrote something I would like to believe. But it seems much too improbable for me. I still have very strong doubts than you will be able to get rid of the blonde menace any time before 2024. And who knows; he might even be able to overturn the 22nd Ammendment by then.

Every time the con artist or his supposed legal team open their mouths, they give more ammunition to Mueller and his crack legal experts. It's only a matter of time until the con artist is surrounded and forced to surrender.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/02/politics/trump-lawyers-statement-trump-tower-russians/index.html

There's just one discovery I am making these days, which makes me not exactly dislike all that: Trumps true agenda is really Make America small again!. Comparable to Amerca's political role in the world in the 19th century.

If I am honest, I really would not mind if his actions would accomplish that, to some extent at least. America has been much too dominant in the world, before the Joker became POTUS.

Only trouble is: the CIA still has a lot to say in the world, including the USA. And so do Google and Amazon, and a few more enterprises, i.e. the real rulers of America and the world. Not to forget some of your banks .
.

.

 

[Veroe]

He's been obstructing the investigation the entire time and they've been trying to shape the battlefield. And failed.

I am not so sure they haven't. I read recently in a poll that somewhere like 93% of republicans believe what Trump's been constantly tweeting and what Giuliani was sent out on all those tv appearances to repeat, and what Fox news lays out like the gospel truth every day. To convince their supporters that Robert Mueller and his team's investigation is nothing more than a malicious political attack by the hated liberals (despite Mueller being a lifelong republican himself)...its a witchhunt...they haven't found shit because there's nothing to find...its a witchhunt….a witchhunt...a witchhunt!

Right now even if Mueller releases pretty damning evidence that Trump is guilty of collusion or obstruction or other crimes *Cough*Money laundering from Russian oligarchs*Cough*. It'd fall along pretty much party lines among the American public. The libs would want him immediately impeached and the conservatives would want the whole thing dropped and Mueller, the FBI, and Hillary and Obama immediately investigated instead.

 

[phrodeau]

I am not so sure they haven't. I read recently in a poll that somewhere like 93% of republicans believe what Trump's been constantly tweeting and what Giuliani was sent out on all those tv appearances to repeat, and what Fox news lays out like the gospel truth every day. To convince their supporters that Robert Mueller and his team's investigation is nothing more than a malicious political attack by the hated liberals (despite Mueller being a lifelong republican himself)...its a witchhunt...they haven't found shit because there's nothing to find...its a witchhunt….a witchhunt...a witchhunt!

Right now even if Mueller releases pretty damning evidence that Trump is guilty of collusion or obstruction or other crimes *Cough*Money laundering from Russian oligarchs*Cough*. It'd fall along pretty much party lines among the American public. The libs would want him immediately impeached and the conservatives would want the whole thing dropped and Mueller, the FBI, and Hillary and Obama immediately investigated instead.

Funny how polls have no meaning until they fit the conservative narrative.

 

[Oblimo]

I am not so sure they haven't.

At the same time, lots of the numbers guys are saying he hasn’t grown his base in the slightest. So, in theory, the 2020 Democratic candidate only needs to reach a relatively small number of Republic voters to switch.

 

[Oblimo]

Funny how polls have no meaning until they fit the conservative narrative.

Remember when Trump and company shouted from the rooftops that the Unemployment numbers were fake? And now apparently they’re real, even though neither the methodology of data collection nor how the data is analyzed has changed?

Yeah. The level of incuriousity in the Republican Party makes me ill.

 

[someoneyouknow]

"It was a mistake," Giulani, a lawyer for Trump in the Russia investigation, said on CNN's "Cuomo Prime Time" Monday. "I swear to God, it was a mistake."

The former New York City mayor said a mistake like that "happens all the time" among attorneys in the early stages of a case, and noted that there was no testimony to that effect under oath.

The "mistake" Giuliani is talking about is the lie the con artist had no input into the statement about what took place at the Tower. When the con artist and his cabal first made their lying statements, they all said he had nothing to do with the statement presented by his corrupt son-in-law. In fact, his corrupt protege said he didn't bother to talk to the feckless coward.

Of course we all know the con artist's ego has once again gotten him into trouble because he was the one who made up the lie that the meeting had nothing to do with getting dirt on Hillary Clinton. This lie carried over to the Frau Sanders who, during yesterday's propaganda meeting, said she was not going to even discuss the lie or the lies she said in defense of the lie.

"I'm not going to get into a back and forth," Sanders said.

It is interesting to note, Giuliani had to point out the statements about who did what were not under oath, heading off that aspect of the criminal investigation. It's almost as if the lies they're trying to cover up are coming back to haunt them and they're looking for any way out before the indictments come down.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/04/politics/rudy-giuliani-trump-tower-cnntv/index.html

 

[beerlovr88]

...its a witchhunt...they haven't found shit because there's nothing to find...its a witchhunt….a witchhunt...a witchhunt!

Do you even know what a witch hunt is? Imaginary evidence? Discredited sources paid by political opponents? Secret informants reporting on Trump campaign officials to the FBI? Curious how you seem to disagree that it's NOT a witch hunt and yet fail to provide any evidence that Trump has been guilty of anything at all.

Right now even if Mueller releases pretty damning evidence

Then it would be a bombshell; the investigation would have been justified all along and Trump would be subject to impeachment. Which of course, sounds like very wishful thinking by liberals who hate America so much that they'd rather see the country fail rather than succeed with Trump. This is by far the most common symptom of liberalism; completely out of sync with reality while repeatedly refusing to acknowledge basic facts.

And sorry to burst the leftwing bubble here but Mueller will have to hurry up with his investigation, otherwise he'll be seen as interfering with the 2020 election for mystery reasons based on mystery evidence, and all while insisting that it isn't a witch hunt.

 

[phrodeau]

Do you even know what a witch hunt is? Imaginary evidence? Discredited sources paid by political opponents? Secret informants reporting on Trump campaign officials to the FBI? Curious how you seem to disagree that it's NOT a witch hunt and yet fail to provide any evidence that Trump has been guilty of anything at all.


Then it would be a bombshell; the investigation would have been justified all along and Trump would be subject to impeachment. Which of course, sounds like very wishful thinking by liberals who hate America so much that they'd rather see the country fail rather than succeed with Trump. This is by far the most common symptom of liberalism; completely out of sync with reality while repeatedly refusing to acknowledge basic facts.

And sorry to burst the leftwing bubble here but Mueller will have to hurry up with his investigation, otherwise he'll be seen as interfering with the 2020 election for mystery reasons based on mystery evidence, and all while insisting that it isn't a witch hunt.

So Mueller's got two more years to go? Or did you mean the 2018 elections?

And will Trump stop using Twitter, or will he be seen as interfering with the elections?

 

[beerlovr88]

So Mueller's got two more years to go?

I'd say 6 months. Mueller is on a bit of a clock, and the closer to 2020 we get the more weight there'll be on the criticism for an investigation -- already openly accused of being conducted solely for political reasons -- for not producing anything remotely concrete, especially when other government agencies have already concluded that there was no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

So as things currently stand there'll be a bit of a stand off; either provide the evidence needed for impeachment or drop the investigation entirely for the sake of the integrity of the 2020 elections.

Really, all things considering I think all this 'witch hunt' and 'spy gate' rhetoric is pure genius.

And will Trump stop using Twitter, or will he be seen as interfering with the elections?

Don't be silly; posting on twitter is not an investigation.

 

[KeithD]

So, you're trying to say that what someone posts to Twitter can't be used against them in court? Interesting. Trumpian even.

 

[JackLuis]

I don't think what Muller is doing is building a case against Trump, in particular. He is uncovering the Russian Mob/Oligarcy's role in the Election and American Political Corruption. Trump is just a Russian chump so if he goes down, who cares?

So far he has Manafort and Cohen, and others in his vice, soon one will flip and join a witness protection program in Boise. The others will go to jail. (See John Dean)

Let's face it, Trump is a disaster. None of his hot button issues can pass the courts, and what he brags about is really Mitch and Paul's work, Trump is the distraction so the Kochsuckers can get paid off.


I expect the Congress will shift against Trump in the Midterms, it usually does if the people aren't satisfied with reasults. The issue is how much the Democratic Establishment will allow the party to shift away from the Corporatocracy's interests?

 

[beerlovr88]

So, you're trying to say that what someone posts to Twitter can't be used against them in court?

No, I was trying to say exactly what I said; that posting on twitter isn't an investigation. And if you're having trouble understanding the distinction then let me use an analogy: driving over the speed limit isn't an investigation, and yet miraculously, it can still be used against you in court.

And feel free to keep it up with the liberal logic though. Because if you can't rely on anything remotely concrete, then as a last resort you can always rely on gross mischaracterizations and false equivalencies.

 

[phrodeau]

No, I was trying to say exactly what I said; that posting on twitter isn't an investigation. And if you're having trouble understanding the distinction then let me use an analogy: driving over the speed limit isn't an investigation, and yet miraculously, it can still be used against you in court.

And feel free to keep it up with the liberal logic though. Because if you can't rely on anything remotely concrete, then as a last resort you can always rely on gross mischaracterizations and false equivalencies.

How can an investigation interfere with an election? Will the lawyers use up all the campaign money, maybe?

 

[FEELINGLUCKYPUNK]

So, you're trying to say that what someone posts to Twitter can't be used against them in court? Interesting. Trumpian even.

Get back with us when you can validate who made the TWITTER post.

 

[FEELINGLUCKYPUNK]

No one buys polls that say MAN YOU SUCK. And no one does a poll where they gotta leave the office to interview real people.

 

[KeithD]

Get back with us when you can validate who made the TWITTER post.

Get back with us when you have learned how to do simple analysis, James.

 

[KeithD]

No one buys polls that say MAN YOU SUCK. And no one does a poll where they gotta leave the office to interview real people.

Is there an English translation of this available?

 

[TeflonGuy]

Pay no attention to Pops (KeithD).

He woke up on the wrong side of the bed and got stuck between it and the wall