Jump to content

ROMAD1

POTUS Impeachment Watch

Recommended Posts


14 hours ago, stanpapi said:

 

If you guys actually wanted to design a prototypical russian compromised president, would you want him to massively build up the military, go big on border security, do everything he can to bring manufacturing jobs back, open up trade deals and play hard ball all the while shouting "america first" everywhere he goes? 

 

Yes,  we should elect someone like that in 2020. Any suggestion who? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ROMAD1 said:

Great point, Seth

Because Mexico is paying for the wall

And the promise of a 10% tax break, right before the midterms, while Congress wasn't even in session. Any voter with half a brain knew it was a lie the second he said it. Lucky for Trump, most of his supporters are knuckle dragging mouth breathers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ROMAD1 said:

 

This is what I'd thought for a long time.   As evidence I would also submit the following 2 events:

1) WikiLeaks drops emails hours after Access Hollywood tape drops.

2) Russia veto'd Romney as Secretary of State and installed Putin friend Rex Till, who proceeds to hollow out the state Department.

I'm not an expert by any means but I know Russia has always hated our State Department.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Romney veto'd story is the most underrated story of the last 5 years I think.  It still blows my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CMRivdog said:

In other words.....

 

love that 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pfife said:

The Romney veto'd story is the most underrated story of the last 5 years I think.  It still blows my mind.

The Russians are after Mitt with a white hot vengeance today.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if anyone has linked this yet or not

https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-if-obstruction-was-collusion-new-york-timess-latest-bombshell

 

Quote

Second, if it is correct that the FBI’s principal interest in obstruction was not as a discrete criminal fact pattern but as a national security threat, this significantly blurs the distinction between the obstruction and collusion aspects of the investigation. In this construction, obstruction was not a problem distinct from collusion, as has been generally imagined. Rather, in this construction, obstruction was the collusion, or at least part of it. The obstruction of justice statutes become, in this understanding, merely one set of statutes investigators might think about using to deal with a national security risk—specifically, the risk of a person on the U.S. side coordinating with or supporting Russian activity by shutting down the investigation.

It was about Russia. It was always about Russia. Full stop.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ROMAD1 said:

 

She's easy on the eyes but she gets 0 votes from me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the FBI opened a CI investigation and found nothing wouldn’t the proper thing to do, for security reasons, to say so publicly?  Don’t the American people need to be reassured their president is not working on behalf of foreign government? Since this broke on Friday night i would give them until COB Monday to say something.  Otherwise I assume it’s still going on. This is a different thing than the “collusion” investigation even if both were/are being done under Mueller.  It wasn’t publicly known until now so that’s why nothing was said.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schmidt and Wittes on MTP...this should be good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oblong said:

If the FBI opened a CI investigation and found nothing wouldn’t the proper thing to do, for security reasons, to say so publicly?  

It certainly is possible that in this case it might have been the wisest policy, but wouldn't it run against the grain of 80 yrs of procedure in the Bureau? US Attys make charging decisions, the Bureau usually doesn't say much of anything other than in court documents, which is why Comey was off the reservation talking about the Clinton probe in public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, ROMAD1 said:

 

GLOMAR response is usually a good tell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ROMAD1 said:

GLOMAR response is usually a good tell

speaking of GLOMAR. You may know this one but I just came across it and got a chuckle:

The CIA opened its Twitter account with, "We can neither confirm nor deny that this is our first tweet."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

speaking of GLOMAR. You may know this one but I just came across it and got a chuckle:

The CIA opened its Twitter account with, "We can neither confirm nor deny that this is our first tweet."

I can neither confirm nor deny that I've seen that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, ROMAD1 said:

I can neither confirm nor deny that I've seen that. 

👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ROMAD1 said:

 

Mark Warner is the wrong guy to be quoting on eithics in government. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×