Talk to me about these items.. new investigations incoming?

Was Mueller removed? Nope. Indeed Mueller had no idea any of these discussions had taken place until talking to Mc Gahn.

I don't see how any of this could have impeded or obstructed the investigation in any way. Talking about firing him is one thing, doing it another.

Obama used executive privilege for Fast and Furious and other scandals. Trump did not.

Trump more transparent and more innocent than Obama.

When you pick up your brains off the floor, get back to me on that one.

quote:

---

But the evidence does indicate that a thorough FBI investigation would uncover facts about the campaign and the President personally that the President could have understood to be crimes OR...in case you missed it.....OR.....OR....OR that would give rise to personal and political concerns.

---

I always love when people think they are slick by slipping a key OR in their sentence and they successfully bamboozle rubes like the OP

How are people actually so stupid that such a simple rhetorical trick works so well?

I mean, ya really gotta love "could be.....or" sentence construction

quote:

---

But the evidence does indicate that a thorough FBI investigation would uncover facts about the campaign and the President personally that the President could have understood to be crimes or that would give rise to personal and political concerns.

---

You do realize the investigation went forward, right? Trump’s actions, being cited here, were investigated by the SC.

I’m not sure if you’re cherry-picking or if you’re just regurgitating the opinion of some journalist, but if you read the entire report, it’s quite clear that Trump fired Comey because Comey refused to publicly state that Trump was not under investigation. And he sought counsel from his advisors who concurred with Comey’s figuring.

Honesty, if the Dems wanted to go after something, they’d stay away from the Comey firing and Sessions’ directives. Not only are they most-likely not obstruction, Trump has valid legal defenses for both.

quote:

---

new investigations incoming?

---

Yes, but you won't like these.

quote:

---

A thorough investigation of BMY "could" uncover evidence that BMY is a child molester OR give rise to personal concerns"

---

It’s a neat little psychological trick. A sleight of hand, if you will.

The first part makes an allegation. The second part covers the accuser’s arse by implying that the allegation isn’t necessarily true...but is vague enough that nobody’s paying attention to it. And anyway, the seed of accusation is already planted by the first part.

quote:

---

A thorough investigation of BMY "could" uncover evidence that BMY is a child molester OR give rise to personal concerns"

I mean shite. What I just wrote is indisputably factual! And nonsense all at once!

---

I believe it.


We must In Peach 45, reeeeeee.

Jesus it's an unforgivable waste of resources that we have to share oxygen with progressives