And there we are subjected to the rumbling of the chamber pot again ....

Why don't you stop posting then.

And there we are subjected to the rumbling of the chamber pot again ....

Well....maybe, it's kind of impossible to tell.

It could either be Meuller having a concrete idea about what happened and knows exactly what he's looking for, a massive fishing expedition, or something in between.
I'd be suprised if it were a fishing expedition given the stakes though.

Any single Trump supporters out there?

Have no fear.

https://trumpsingles.com/

Comes with a 100% guarantee that you'll get fücked.










Maybe just not the way you hoped.

Donald J. Trump
‏
Verified account

@realDonaldTrump
4h4 hours ago
More
Why did the Obama Administration start an investigation into the Trump Campaign (with zero proof of wrongdoing) long before the Election in November? Wanted to discredit so Crooked H would win. Unprecedented. Bigger than Watergate! Plus, Obama did NOTHING about Russian meddling.

"There was no meddling" is now "It was Obama's fault"

Probably more importantly Trump's rolled back the Obama regulations that prevented taking over companies and simply loading the debt onto the company purchased.

It's just madness. Open season for the massive private equity firms to grab fundamentally sound companies and screw them.

He did that? Wow. I remember all the threads on here where, almost uniquely, the bored united all as one in the spirit of the Lord above and decreed that that was, like, one of the best laws evah!

"There was no meddling" is now "It was Obama's fault"

Recent tweet from the Stable Genius

And people say he doesn't call out Russian meddling.

"Crooked H"

Sam Nunberg (former advisor and Stone apprentice) had a meltdown on 2-3 different channels about his grand jury subpaoena. Quite funny.

Recent tweet from the Stable Genius

Also, the narrative that the investigation was initiated to help Crooked H win is kind of undercut by the fact that no one mentioned it till after the election.....

I don't particularly care for the idea that the investigation was started to help Hillary win - who's pedaling that by the way - but for arguments sake how do you figure that works? How does not mentioning it until after the election undercut the claim? If we assume that it was initiated for that purpose the matter of when it was mentioned is irrelevant.

Cause if they iniated it to help Hillary, why didn't they actually do anything with it to help Hillary?

Unless you don't think publicising the fact that at least two prominent former members of Trump's team (Manafort & Page) were under active investigation by intellegence services for links to a foreign power would have cost Trump votes.

The FISA court might have taken a dim view of that. Anyway that whole line doesn't hang together as far as I can see.

Yeah, but if the object was to aid Hillary rather than actually pursue a conviction, the FISA court doesn't matter all that much.

There are a bunch of reasons why the idea that the investigation was started to help Hillary doesn't hold water, but for me the fact that anyone connected to it never did a damn thing to actually try and influence the election is the most obvious and clear.

I think you might be undermining your position there. it is conceivable, for example, that the investigation might have been started to do both: help and convict.

if so there woulld be contradictory imperatives in play at different times.

I was going to say more but I ran out of energy for this.

back to what did Trump tweet next watch.

Sam Nunberg (former advisor and Stone apprentice) had a meltdown on 2-3 different channels about his grand jury subpaoena. Quite funny.

If there were conflicting imperatives at play, how come on of those imperatives seems to have been completely ignored?

Simple question - can you name a single instance where the investigation or any information gleaned from it was used to aid Hillary's election campaign?

So how much of what Nunberg has said will be in-admissable(he was having a break down - this is not normal behaviour) / questionable.

Stephen Gutowski
‏Verified account @StephenGutowski
27m27 minutes ago

Oh man. This is spiraling out of control. Erin Burnet says she smells alcohol on Sam Nunberg's breath.

Jill Colvin
‏Verified account @colvinj
31m31 minutes ago

Sam now seems to be rethinking his bluster, tells me he'll likely end up cooperating with Mueller's team, but would like to see the subpoena's scope narrowed

“I think it would be funny if they arrest me.”

This will definitely end well for him.

I don't particularly care for the idea that the investigation was started to help Hillary win - who's peddling that by the way - but for arguments sake how do you figure that works? How does not mentioning it until after the election undercut the claim? If we assume that it was initiated for that purpose the matter of when it was mentioned is irrelevant.

Just listening to his phonecall with CNN now... just a little unhinged there.

Trump himself peddled it in the previously quoted, well thought out tweet.
"Why did the Obama Administration start an investigation into the Trump Campaign (with zero proof of wrongdoing) long before the Election in November? Wanted to discredit so Crooked H would win."

You'll have to check with him the logic behind it all.