It occurs to me that Special Counsel Robert Mueller and the team of specialists he has assembled have already had extensive experience with political attempts to squash their past investigations. They also watch the news and know President Trump telegraphs his blundering moves miles in advance. So, Mueller and his team are hardly babes in the woods in political situations like this and they have had lots and lots of time to prepare.

I also would also guess their investigation is miles further down the road than we know. These guys are professionals and are now very carefully building a series of interlocking cases, detail by detail. That does not mean they don't already have overwhelming evidence for criminal indictments and impeachment in place, and could not move immediately if forced to do so.

So is there anyone who believes Mr. Mueller doesn't have an extensive and detailed emergency plan in place, updated on a daily basis, to decisively react to Trump's next attempt to interfere with their Trump-Russia-Election Interference / Trump Money Laundering investigations? Is there anyone who believes those secret Grand Juries are just sitting around twiddling their thumbs?

For that matter, wouldn't the very act of firing Mueller provide overwhelming evidence in and of itself of Trump's ongoing Obstruction of Justice efforts, and be grounds for criminal prosecution and/or impeachment? Couldn't that indictment already be drafted in secret and be immediately submitted to a grand jury should Trump make a move? Even better, a secret Grand Jury is quite likely already convened to consider the James Comey Obstruction of Justice charge, and Trump's ongoing public threats to fire Mueller would be part of the evidence that jury is already considering. If Trump now fires Mueller, that Grand Jury could then add the public fact of this new firing as clear proof of intent and bring an immediate indictment.

And then there is the timing. What do you imagine is going to happen around the offices of our congressional representatives if Trump fires Mueller over the August recess? If you thought the protests were large up until now, just wait. Trying to take health care away from kids and seniors, plus supporting Obstruction of Justice, plus covering up investigations into possible treason, are not the issues these politicians want to see screeming outside their offices and recorded for use in their next election campaign.

It doesn't manner how smart and expensive your attorneys are, if you are massively guilty of financial crimes going back decades, conspired with Russia to win your election, have no idea how Washington and our government actually works, and make ridiculous legal mistakes on a daily basis.

Stay tuned. You might even be forgiven for feeling optimistic for a brief moment or so. Trump is an evil idiot, Mueller is wicked smart, and my guess is all hell is going to break loose much, much sooner than we expect.

Comments

zapdam.'s picture
zapdam. 19 weeks 3 days ago
#1

ronsears, honestly Trump will most likely get away with everything. Hell he was charged in a civil court of law rape of a 13 year old girl with a witness, nothing happened , it all went away.

ronsears 19 weeks 3 days ago
#2

Hi zapdam,

I agree there is a real possibility that Trump will get away with all of his crimes. He is such an existential threat to our US Democracy and the stability and safety of the world that he may be able to negotiate a deal where he is never charged for his crimes, if he agrees to resign without tweating out screams of "fake news" and asking for help from his most violence prone supporters. Resignation also has the distinct advantages for Republicans of not dragging Pence and other members of the cabinet further into the investigation, and, for both Republicans and Democrats, ending continued examination and calls for hack-proofing our compromised election system.

On the other hand, by reputation, Mueller is an ethical hard ass, and may bring all sorts of criminal charges against those around Trump, forcing the highly embarassing requirement for Trump and/or Pence to pardon them one by one. To anticipate one scenario, Trump has resigned, and Pence / Republicans are desperately trying to shut down Mueller as fast as they can. More nightly drama. Mueller may even expose vote fixing schemes and, by implication, trigger significant new protections.

In any case, it is my sincere hope / dream that as of a certain date in the next six months, I will never hear Trump's name spoken aloud or see it in print ever again. Perhaps the ultimate and most appropriate punishment for this senile pscyopath will be a permanent media blackout because he has become the ultimate ratings killer, sort of the political equivalent of O. J. My dream here is that just mentioning Trump's name will provoke instant nausia in liberals, conservatives, and everyone else and cause them to immediately switch channels and media outlet. Yeah, I know that is probably wishful thinking, sort of like hoping reality TV dies off, but I can still dream can't I?

Coalage3 12 weeks 1 day ago
#3

From Philip Giraldi: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/who-in-the-white-house-trump-decided-to-wiretap-manafort/

Sifting through what might have happened is interesting, but we will never know the truth until the federal government releases more evidence regarding what prompted the two FBI inquiries in the first place. And the analysis at this point is lacking some important considerations. First of all, someone in the Obama administration had to make the extremely politically sensitive decision to secretly investigate the campaign manager of the Republican Party’s nominee when the surveillance was renewed in summer 2016. Obama has denied that he did any such thing and a Justice Department investigation has asserted that there was no evidence of any Trump Tower surveillance. But put aside the lawyerly language, and it becomes clear that while Obama might not have personally approved the eavesdropping, someone in his White House surely did. And as for the Justice Department, evidence can easily be destroyed or erased or never recorded in the first place.

It has also been claimed that FISA warrants are only issued when there is significant probable cause that a crime has been committed, meaning that Manafort “must have done something,” but the fact is that nearly all FISA requests are approved and few of them result in actual prosecution. FISA warrants are also top secret and exposing them is a felony. The fact that the details of FISA involvement with Manafort vis-à-vis Ukraine leaked to the media shortly after the investigation was reopened in 2016 is suggestive. It eventually forced Manafort to resign, embarrassing Trump. And the fact that stories damaging to Trump based on classified information are continuing to appear in the media is yet another indication that the war of the leaks against the current administration is continuing. Since the leakers and other government officials cited in the media coverage are anonymous, allegations of guilt or innocence should be considered with some skepticism.

ronsears 11 weeks 6 days ago
#4

Coalage3, thanks for resurrecting this old post. It is even more relevant now as Republican efforts to undermine Mueller’s investigations become more overt and desperate. Consider Republican Rep. Devin Nunes recent subpoena interference and Democratic Rep. Mike Quigley's reports a day or so ago of Republican obstruction during testimony in House Intelligence Committee hearings.

The Philip Giraldi American Conservative article you cite is a typical political hit job, starting out sounding oh so reasonable, then becoming increasingly snarky, and finally ending up in a crescendo of wild presumptions that the Obama White House must have had a secret group of operatives using law enforcement and intelligence services to undermine Trump’s campaign, all without a single spec of evidence. The obvious question that “If the Great Black Satan Obama and all the Evil Rugula Munching Democrats were so powerful, how did a geriatric psychopath like Trump win?” is never brought up. This conservative clap trap has no more validity than one of Trump’s tweets, just a lot longer to read with better grammar.

In response to the wild claims in this American Conservative article, let's make some very obvious and highly likely assumptions and see where we end up. Some patriotic individuals in our intelligence agencies, in the course of their normal work, ran across clear evidence that Russian operatives closely linked to Putin no less, were extensively involved in Trump's campaigns, as is now public knowledge as verified from many, many separate sources around the world through normal vetted media channels. One of the key sources you will recall was an opposition research investigation originally paid for by Republicans opposing Trump during the primary, the now infamous “pee tapes.”

Back then, what exactly were the patriots in our intelligence services and law enforcement supposed to do? Are you honestly suggesting they should have ignored evidence of treason and should not have been concerned about foreign interference in future elections?

Was it not their duty to protect Trump by getting Manafort away from his campaign as quickly as possible? Also, since Nixon-Watergate, it is now standard government procedure (before Trump at least) to completely separate the President from Justice Department and FBI activities to avoid any possible suspicion of White House influence. From what I have read and heard, Obama was particularly insistent that this distance and protection of his integrity be carefully maintained. Simply stating the opposite is true proves nothing, other then your political bias.

How about considering the very likely scenario that these individuals in law enforcement and our intelligence forces assumed, like almost all political experts back then, that Trump could never win, and they were quietly waiting to handle the problem later, specifically choosing to take this chance in order to make sure there was no possible interpretation of their actions as politically motivated prior to the November election? Wouldn’t that also be the likely judgment in Obama’s White House, if under these extraordinary circumstances they were informed about these threats to our nation? Remember the political crap storm over Comey's public statements about Hilliary’s e-mails?

Now, when Trump won, were these patriots supposed to just stay quiet? Or were they duty-bound to do everything they could to protect our country and the presidency itself from past and future Russian influence and the continued treason of those around Trump, maybe even Trump himself? That's not to mention Trump's more mundane but increasingly obvious conflicts of interest and money laundering crimes for Russian oligarchs going back decades. And then there is the wide spread use of undemocratic and often illegal manipulations of political campaigns and voting by our own political parties and interest groups, the same methods that were exploited by Russian operatives that will continued to be used by all these operatives if we don't fix them now.

These "damned if you do, damned if you don't” attacks on the patriots in our law enforcement and intelligence forces are both illogical and suspiciously compatible with the currently ramped up attacks on Mueller's investigations by those who want all this Russian treason stuff to conveniently go away. At the very least, well-paid Republican operatives are now working full time to undermine Mueller's credibility and give House Republicans political wiggle room to ignore Mueller's likely findings, indictments, and calls for impeachment.

And finally there is this matter of resurrecting a two month old post so you could get the American Conservative "...who-in-the-white-house-trump-decided-to-wiretap-manafort..." link posted on this web site. What would motivate such an extraordinary effort? In any case, thanks for this opportunity to bring this discussion up to date.

Coalage3 11 weeks 4 days ago
#5

What did the Obama White House know, and when did they know it? Where is the evidence that Trump colluded with Russia, or that anyone in his employ colluded with Russia to swing the election? Where is the clear evidence of money laundering that you speak of?

This has been going on now for quite some time. How long is it going to take? But make no mistake...Mueller will find "something". Now he has to.

ronsears 11 weeks 4 days ago
#6

Dear Coal Age 3, you asked for evidence? See:

http://russiatrumpcollusion.com/rusmanip.html

It will take hours to skim and days to actually read.

It took me about 48 seconds on DuckDuckGo to find this site, dispite all the "no proof yet" denial noise currently being spread around the Internet. All the money and all the right wing trolls in the world won't cover up this steaming pile of crap. All the treason, blind greed, mind-bending immorality, and disgusting conceit, funded by all the self-serving rich psychopaths in the world is not going to work this time around. At least you and I need to hope and pray it does not work, or our Democracy is dead.

And, of course there is all the damage to our country being done by Trump's cabinet and the ultra-right wing politicians hiding behind him. See:

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/07/12/trumps-worst-collusion-isn...

I strongly suggest you get yourself into some sort of detox program for those unfortunate enough to have believed all these lies for all these years, to lessen the personal impact of the shock wave of legal evidence Mueller is meticulously assembling.

All the best, Ron

Coalage3 11 weeks 3 days ago
#7

You're a funny guy. How long is this going to take? Where are the arrests then? Where are the court hearings? I strongly suggest you go into a detox program for your advanced case of TDS.

I am sure that Mueller will find "something" to report about. But I bet it is not collusion with the Russians. Want to bet?

Coalage3 11 weeks 3 days ago
#8

From: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/09/we-know-a-lot-and-nothing-a...

Excerpt: One individual who is familiar with an aspect of the Mueller inquiry but asked to not be named told New York that, unlike other federal probes that he’s seen in action, where prosecutors build their cases from clear allegations, this one feels different. “This is a backward investigation,” the individual said. “You don’t have a crime. You’re searching. And so you’re not really sure exactly what you’re searching for. So you start asking around and you see what comes up. And you start creating a paradigm and you see what else comes up and figure out at some point whether or not there’s a crime.”

ronsears 11 weeks 3 days ago
#9

Coal Age 3, again, all the money and distractions in the world pumped into the media will not cover up this steaming pile of political and quite likely good old traditional treason. Even assuming your "nothing Russian to see here" suggestions turn out to be right, at worst, Mueller will find extensive evidence of money laundering going back decades by Trump and his operatives.

Sorry my comments seemed funny to you. Just a personal defensive tactic I've developed trying to keep my sanity as I watch these endless attacks on our Democracy by Trump and, more importantly, the money hiding behind his disgusting clown act.

None of this is funny. We are living through an overt attemp to overthrow our Democracy by oil oligarchs inside and outside the US and it is sickening. If this were not in and of itself bad enough, we are rapidly running out of time to drive a massive effort to end burning carbon before we can no longer stop run-a-way environmental disruptions that will cause unprecedented human suffering, migrations, wars, and deaths, all because of the political bribes of the oligarchs currently profiting from burning carbon.

May I suggest you consider the possible outcomes here and use that reality to direct your future actions. If you are correct, and Mueller finds nothing, everything stays the same, and we continue our march to tyranny, and environmental disaster, if not partial extinction. On the other hand, if I am correct, change is more likely and we might just be able to take back enough political power to fund massive investments in ending our dependence on burning carbon fuels.

Of course, if Trump triggers a nuclear exchange with North Korea as he continues to try and distract from Mueller's investigation, all of these concerns become secondary.

Coalage3 11 weeks 2 days ago
#10

You are making a big assumption aren't you?

Partial extinction? Needless to say, a little overly dramatic. There will be no nuclear war with NK.

Mueller is just a fancy version of Bill Dance going on a fishing expedition who hopes to land the big one.

ronsears 11 weeks 2 days ago
#11

Coal age 3,

Regards "partial extinction" being overdramatic, first you might want to listen to Tom's show, in particular his guest speakers on Monday and Tuesday, Sept. 25 and 26th. See the current home page of this web site and the reference:

Crossing Climate Change's Event Horizon: The Point Of No Return For Humanity (Prof. Daniel Rothman)

Thom talks with Climate Scientist, Professor Daniel Rothman on the point of no return for climate change, at what point will we not be able to turn things around?

The essential point that one of Tom's guest experts made is that when you plug a 5% probability into the best current climate models, there is a 1 in 20 chance there will be significant extinction event for humans in the next 30 to 100 years. That is, die offs of a large number of humans because the areas they currently occupy or depend on for food will become incapable of supporting human life (heat, no water, under water, dying seas). These new dead zones would be so large, simple migration would not be a possible fix. Also, even when migration was possible, political and territorial fights would assure many of the individuals attempting such migration end up dying in resulting wars to protect remaining resources, just as our CIA has predicted. Of course, slightly less disasterous scenarios are much more likely. See for example Syria's current civil war triggered by mass migrations of farmers from climate catastrophe to Syrian cities.

To make this threat easier for you to appreciate, imagine I told you that my road construction crew was going to do some work on the street in front of your house and that because of our work, sometime in the next 30 to 80 years their is a 1 in 20 chance your house will collapse completely, killing anyone unfortunate enough to be inside at that time. No rational person would allow my road repairs to proceed. In fact, anyone suggesting such a high risk road construction project - that threatened JUST ONE HOUSE - would be driven out of the community if not business entirely by irate citizens. And, you would be leading the irate citizens going after me and my construction crew.

Here is another attempt to make the implications of catastrophic climate change real for you at an emotional and logical level. Let's talk about what hurricane Harvey actually means. Based on all the available historical weather data (see for example http://www.losc.lsu.edu/tech97_2.pdf), the maximum expected rainfall for any single 24 hours over a 100 year period along the Gulf Coast of Texas and Louisiana was supposed to be 16 inches. So, before it happened, what was the predicted chance of a storm like Harvey dumping 50 inches of rain in three days?

Setting aside the highly unlikely chance of observing these record rainfalls on any three consecutive days across 100 years, a very conservative estimate of the likelihood of Harvey's 50 inches of rain, or ~16 inches of rain for each of three days, is 1/100 x 1/100 x 1/100, or 1 in a million. Extreme storms like Harvey are clearly no longer 1,000,000- or 1,000- or 100-year events. We will me very lucky if they turn out to be 1 in 10 or even 5 year events.

Now consider what's going to happen when 50 inches of rain falls on New Orleans. Their flood control system, if it works, presumes this same maximum of 16 inches of rain per single event once every 100 years. Look up a cross section elevation map of the City of New Orleans between the Mississippi River and Lake Pontchartrain to see where all the water will go when their flood control system is overwhelmed.

Of course, the crimes against humanity current in progress by Trump's cabinet are off topic for this discussion. They are only a side effect of the continued presence of Trump and his criminal administration.

Coalage3 11 weeks 1 day ago
#12

People have been predicting the end of the earth since the beginning of time. So far, all of the predictions have been wrong.

Most dire predictions about food shortages, peak oil, over populations, etc., have also turned out to be wrong. And in some cases, horribly wrong. Generally speaking, I am confident that mankind will develop whatever technology is necessary for our species to survive and even thrive. There will be "disasters" from time to time, as there have always been since time began.

If you and Thom Hartmann want to play the role of Chicken Little, please have at it.

Kilosqrd's picture
Kilosqrd 11 weeks 1 day ago
#13

Ronsears,

Do this: This coming May (2018) there will be a horse race at Churchill Downs, KY. It's called the Kentucky Derby. Take your entire life savings and bet it on any horse with 20-1 odds. I dare you.

1 in 20 odds of a mass extinction sometime before 2117? Please.

Read Paul Erlich's Population Bomb. How did that work out?

K2

gumball's picture
gumball 11 weeks 1 day ago
#14

This whole Russian thing begs the question, why did Putin's RT underwrite Thom's show? What is it in Thoms message did Putin want to promote?

Coalage3 11 weeks 13 hours ago
#15

Ehrlich has proven to be nothing more than an alarmist whose predictions of mass starvation and overpopulation are spectacularly wrong. Bozo the Clown probably has a better track record on environmental predictions.

Coalage3 11 weeks 12 hours ago
#16

Make no mistake....Mueller will find something to crow about. He has to, otherwise his reputation goes down the proverbial toilet.

But I bet it won't be collusion.

Coalage3 11 weeks 12 hours ago
#17

From Glenn Gleenwald: https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-is-skepticism-permissible-yet/

Excerpts:

LAST FRIDAY, most major media outlets touted a major story about Russian attempts to hack into U.S. voting systems, based exclusively on claims made by the Department of Homeland Security. “Russians attempted to hack elections systems in 21 states in the run-up to last year’s presidential election, officials said Friday,” began the USA Today story, similar to how most other outlets presented this extraordinary claim.

They were one small step away from demanding that the election results be nullified, indulging the sentiment expressed by #Resistance icon Carl Reiner the other day: “Is there anything more exciting that [sic] the possibility of Trump’s election being invalidated & Hillary rightfully installed as our President?”

So what was wrong with this story? Just one small thing: it was false. The story began to fall apart yesterday when Associated Press reported that Wisconsin – one of the states included in the original report that, for obvious reasons, caused the most excitement – did not, in fact, have its election systems targeted by Russian hackers.

But this is no isolated incident. Quite the contrary: this has happened over and over and over again. Inflammatory claims about Russia get mindlessly hyped by media outlets, almost always based on nothing more than evidence-free claims from government officials, only to collapse under the slightest scrutiny, because they are entirely lacking in evidence.

gumball's picture
gumball 11 weeks 5 hours ago
#18

I watched Rachel the other night. Apparently, the whole election turned on $100,000 in FaceBook ads placed by Russia.

ronsears 10 weeks 5 days ago
#19

Kilosqrd#13

Regards your post 3 days ago, sorry I was busy and missed it until now. You stated:

"Do this: This coming May (2018) there will be a horse race at Churchill Downs, KY. It's called the Kentucky Derby. Take your entire life savings and bet it on any horse with 20-1 odds. I dare you."

To point out what should be obvious, your implied analogy ignores the relative risks involved. If I bet a pile of money on a 1 in 20 chance of predicting the winner of a horse race, and then loose, then everyone on Earth ends up with one unfortunate person, me, who has lost a pile of money. End of story.

If everyone on Earth bets on a 20 to 1 partial extinction event, and we loose our bet, we all go on living. If we "win" and the 20 to 1 extinction events happen, 100's of thousands of people die and many more suffer for centuries. And the pile of money we place on this 1 in 20 bet costs us what? Lots of new jobs, a modernized energy infrastructure, a decentralized power grid that is more secure, and a related decentralized political structure no longer distorted by centralized political contributions from the oil, gas, and coal industries. That's a big win if we "loose" the bet (19 in 20) and the survival of millions if we win (1 in 20). Note, in this discussion, we are not even considering the less severe environmental disastors and related suffering and death in the remaining more likely scenarios.

To move away from a flawed analogy and back to reality, I suggest you consider buying seaside property and related storm surge / flood insurance along the Gulf Coast. I predict you should be able to get a really good deal in the next few years on the property, but the flood insurance will be a bit more difficult. In the short term, it might be a great place to live out the last few years of your life with beautiful views, if you are lucky. If you plan to live a long time, you could also build your CAT 6 Hurricane proof house high up on really deep pilings. Lots of solar panels and a small wind turbine would also be nice and responsible.

All the best, Ron

ronsears 10 weeks 5 days ago
#20

Dear Coal Age 3 and Gum Ball,

It occurs to me, that just like the counter-argument to global climate change denial just posted above for Kilo sqrd, a similar argument for responsible caution should be made regards Russian interference / collusion in Trump's ascendency (ass-endency?) .

If there really is nothing here, and all the overwhelming evidence to date somehow suddenly proves to be an illusion, Mueller's investigation was a worthwhile investment to prove exactly that. Our election integrity has been verified, and Russian operations in all those other countries around the world magically did not happen here.

On the other hand, if some or all of this overwhelming evidence of Russian tampering in our election is further strengthened and also tied to coordination with operatives inside of Trump's campaign, then we can take immediate critical steps to protect the integrity of future elections and root out several traitors to our country.

So, given the relative risks and payoffs involved, what possible reason could anyone have for arguing against the vigorous pursuit of this investigation and it's quick resolution with specific, actionable recommendations?

Only the guilty, or perhaps those suffering from crippling cognitive dissonance, obstruct justice and participate in massive black-PR efforts intended to soften the impact of future indictments.

What's this? I just got a tweet from Glueciflur-38 that proves Bob Mueller and his entire investgation team all had a steamy affair with ...

All the best, Ron

Coalage3 7 weeks 2 days ago
#21

This whole Russian dossier story about Trump is now starting to fall apart, and hard. Mueller will either resign over this, or Trump would be well within his authority to fire him.

It will be interesting to see how the media starts falling over themselves to disavow knowledge of this whole made up dossier scandal. What democrat will be thrown to the wolves and asked to fall on his/her sword?

Coalage3 7 weeks 1 day ago
#22

http://nypost.com/2017/10/25/why-doesnt-hillarys-dossier-trick-count-as-...

The Obama administration reportedly relied on the dossier to bolster its spying on US citizens. We know of at least one case where the information was used to justify a FISA warrant on a Trump adviser. And let’s not forget that Steele had reached an agreement to be compensated for his efforts by the FBI.

None of this excuses the actions of Paul Manafort and others who may have benefitted from their relationship with the Russians. Yet, using the very standards Democrats have constructed over the past year, the Fusion GPS story is now the most tangible evidence we possess of Russian interference in the American election.

And at some point, Democrats will have to decide whether it’s wrong for a political campaign to work with foreigners when obtaining opposition research or whether it’s acceptable. We can’t have different standards for Democrats and Republicans.

Otherwise people might start to get the idea that all the histrionics over the past year weren’t really about Russian interference at all, but rather about Hillary losing an election that they assumed she’d win.

Coalage3 7 weeks 1 day ago
#23

I guess if the democrats keep pushing impeachment against Trump, the republicans can push for treason charges against Obama and the Clintons. Putin has got to be laughing his rear end off over the calamity.

More from John Kass: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-met-trump-dossier-clinton-kass-1026-story.html

Excerpts:

The Trump-Russia collusion theme has been a chorus of barking dogs everywhere you turn, in online news hyped to feed anti-Trump appetites, on cable, where the appetites are sated, and even in happy-talk banter of radio and TV news anchors.

The driving force has been a partisan desire to excuse Hillary Clinton for losing her 2016 election to Trump. It’s been aggressive and passive and all Russia-Trump all the time.

Many, but not all, of the Russia stories have been debunked, and precious little, if any, evidence has come out of the congressional investigations directly linking the president to an alleged effort by the Russians to steal Clinton’s presidency.

Will Mueller pick his teeth with the bones of creepy former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort? That seems likely. And Tony Podesta — of the Democratic Chicago Podestas — has come under scrutiny too.

Many pro-Hillary pundits avoid the Fusion GPS explosion altogether, just as they’ve avoided examining the equally toxic Uranium One deal.

Uranium One is the mining company controlled by the Russians. More than $140 million was donated to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One board members and associates. And Bill got a $500K chunk for related speaking fees in Moscow, because, well, he was such thrilling speaker when his wife was favored to win the White House.

What’s appalling is that the Obama administration quietly approved the deal handing 20 percent of American uranium reserves to the Clinton-friendly Russian mega-company, so that President Barack Obama could curry favor with Russia to win support for his Iran nuclear policy.

ronsears 7 weeks 1 day ago
#24

Dear Coal Age 3:

What are you so afraid of?

If Mueller's investigation turns up nothing on Trump, but does reveal information on how the Russians messed with our election, we move on with better protections of our democratic process.

If Mueller's investigation exposes criminal money laundering with Russians using high end property deals (good bet), as well as collusion with Russian operatives to defeat Clinton, as well as information on how the Russians messed with out election, we expose criminals and traitors in the White House, and protect our democratic process in future elections.

If Mueller's investigation exposes Trump as a crook and traitor, and spells out how the Russians interfered with our election, and also spells out how political and financial interests inside the US illegally manipulate our elections, then again, our democracy wins really big time.

Common sense and patriotism demand we support Mueller's investigation and then act decisively on its results.

On the other hand, current PR efforts by Republicans and other interest groups to: 1) discredit mounting evidence, 2) disparage Mueller's team of the most skilled and respected investigators in the country, and 3) switch the public's focus to Obama or Clinton or other manufactured and/or irrelevant issues, border on obstruction of justice. It is one thing to suffer a bit of cognitive dissonance and resist admitting you may have backed a monster. It is something completely different to systematically muddy an investigation of possible money laundering, treason, and illegal political manipulations of a presidential election.

Assuming your concerns are honestly motivated, I again suggest you wait, like everyone else, for the results of Mueller's investigation. If you are a troll paid by the post, my sympathy for where your life has led.

Coalage3 7 weeks 14 hours ago
#25

What are you afraid of? So far, everyone with any knowledge of the information has had to admit that there is no evidence of any alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians to influence the presidential election. How much longer is this investigation going to take?

In the meantime, now we find out that Obama and the Clintons gave the Russians 20 percent of our uranium reserves while their foundation gets $140 million. Now that is big time collusion if there ever was any. Is Mueller going to raid the Obama and Clinton homes in the early morning hours looking for evidence?

No, as usual the Clintons are up to their necks in political stink (and maybe Obama too) and they will walk away with their millions. Nothing to see here...just move along. But please leave your money at the door.

ronsears 7 weeks 6 hours ago
#26

Attention site monitors...

This discussion has now gotten down to the painfully obvious.

In good faith, I respond to coalage3's suggestions we should stop the ongoing investigations into proven Russian interference in our election, likely collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia (documented meetings with Russian spies, ongoing refusal to enforce new Russian santions, just to mention a few), likely high-end Trump property deals with Russian Oligarchs to launder money, and so on.

Coal age 3 then ignores the arguments I present that we have a logical and patriotic duty to complete the investigation, and instead takes the opportunity to repeatedly push the latest chunk of big money PR propaganda designed to distract from and illogically invalidate Mueller's investigation and evidence BEFORE Mueller releases his conclusions. (Don't look at the Russia investigation. Instead look at this ancient story about the Clintons. Shinny keys. Gingle, gingle...)

What's worse, coalage3 resurects my now ancient post anytime he has some new propaganda he wants to conveniently push, I answer in good faith, and the cycle repeats. My guess is he thinks the original title attracts attention to his latest propaganda.

Apologies to other participants in Thom Hartman's site for taking so long to catch on to this scam. I won't play anymore, and I suggest anyone else following this discussion ignore any further thought-killing posts by coal age 3.

Also, if this is a reasonable request, as the original author I request that monitors for Thom's site completely remove this string from their site, because it is being used to push obvious propaganda.

rs allen 7 weeks 5 hours ago
#27

Yo ron,

If you admit to getting a BJ at sometime in your life then you too can be inclued on koal keart kine's hit list he reserves for the forever damned.

Coalage3 7 weeks 5 hours ago
#28

How long will it take to finish this supposed Russian investigation? One day? One week? One month? One more year?

I will answer my own question for you. It will end when Mueller finds something on somebody so he can say that the millions of dollars spent "were not in vain". Right...

Remember when the dems were crying over the length of the Whitewater investigation (and with good reason)?

You won't "play" anymore because you are out of reason. What propoganda? Didn't the Obama administration turn over the uranium to a Russian based group? Is that propaganda? And didn't the Clinton foundation subsequently receive a big donation? Is that propaganda? Didn't Bill Clinton get a $500,000 speaking fee in Moscow? Is that propaganda?

Just because they are democrats does not make them immune.

Coalage3 6 weeks 2 days ago
#29

As to RS, as usual, your comment has nothing to do with the topic being discussed. This is all about the money.

Add comment

Login or register to post comments