Quote:

---

You want to see histrionics and manufactured hysteria? Trump’s attorney said that he would be filing a legal complaint against Comey.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Yep, MORE histrionics from SECOND. Yanno SECOND, this may be news to you but ... WHO THE FUCK CARES WHAT YOU POST? I barely skim your posts. Do you want to know why?

They're irrelevant to my concerns, and the concerns of many. Your pointless diatribes don't address the pain that many Americans are still feeling after YEARS of the so-called "Obama recovery", which has xfered huge amounts of wealth to the wealthy (such as yourself). You and your endless whinging are an irritant. You, yourself, are a fluffer for the Dem Party, which is nothing but the party for the wealthy with a fig-leaf of FDR.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Last week I gave Agnes a $3,500 gift so her family won’t be evicted. And I loaned $15,000 at zero percent to pay off a high interest loan. Repayment starts in a year. I probably will never see that money again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:
Uv cours, theze are like the red dots in the field uv green dots on a color blind detection chart for 1KIKI, Sig & 6.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
I noticed how brave your Trump is.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:
-250,000$

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
And for a thread which claims to be about 'evidence', I sure haven't seen any.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

I can't even begin to guess what that means . . .

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:
Post #8. Trump failz to sine 'Punish Russia' bill

OOPS! Didnt happen yet. Wait a few daze, its suppozed to be this week. The only way Trump sinez it iz if its so lame that it cant even be called a slap on the rist.

---

Quote:

---

Uv cours, theze are like the red dots in the field uv green dots on a color blind detection chart for 1KIKI, Sig & 6. - JO

---

Quote:

---

I feel like I've said this a dozen times: amazing how SNIGLET posts accusing others of the very thing she does. - GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

You want to see histrionics and manufactured hysteria? Trump’s attorney said that he would be filing a legal complaint against Comey. - SECOND

Yep, MORE histrionics from SECOND. Yanno SECOND, this may be news to you but ... WHO THE FUCK CARES WHAT YOU POST? I barely skim your posts. Do you want to know why?

They're irrelevant to my concerns, and the concerns of many.- SIGNY

How do you know that if you "barely skim" them? Magic?- SECOND

---

Quote:

---

Second frequently skewers your extreme pov

---

Quote:

---

And he's wealthy! You hate people with money! You had the same jealous reaction to Zuckerberg. You don't know them very well (if at all) and are willing to insult them based on internet postings. Shallow much?

---

Quote:

---

And you never addressed why you thought calling him "she" was appropriate as an insult. Care to comment?- SIGNY

---

Quote:

---

Your pointless diatribes don't address the pain that many Americans are still feeling after YEARS of the so-called "Obama recovery", which has xfered huge amounts of wealth to the wealthy (such as yourself). You and your endless whinging are an irritant. You, yourself, are a fluffer for the Dem Party, which is nothing but the party for the wealthy with a fig-leaf of FDR.- SIGNY

Hahahaha! Right - Trump is waaaaay better < / snark >: = GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Yanno, since the intelligence community is fighting Trump so hard, he MUST be better because he's pissing off all the right people.

---

Quote:

---

Actually he is no worse than his policies, which are mainstream Republicanism. Pence would be no better than Trump- SECOND

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Actually he is no worse than his policies, which are mainstream Republicanism. Pence would be no better than Trump- SECOND

---

Domestic policies are the purview of Congress, not the President. You should be figuring out how to win Congress back. Focusing on the Presidency was one of the many mistakes that the Dems made in 2016 and earlier.

The Dems can win, not by offering a better alternative, but by being the party of last resort. But I would hope that they would offer workable alternatives to the GOP. I can even imagine a winning platform, one which engages the problems and worries of most Americans. Starting with healthcare.

Workable. Sustainable. Will they do it? Or will they let Americans continue to suffer, hoping to pick up the pieces.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:
I'm in the other 1% - peepl with a net worth uv -250,000$ or less.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:
-250,000$

---

I can't even begin to guess what that means in NooAlf.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

I can't even begin to guess what that means . . .

---

Quote:

---

Can you guess what Trump means by this?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
lol

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
About 1.5% of American's regularly tune into MSNBC or CNN collectively in any given week. I think "a majority of Americans" is being a little generous.

---

Quote:

---

As a former FBI counterintelligence agent, what I saw as the most explosive aspect of the testimony was the prima facie evidence that Comey presented that Trump appears unwilling to uphold his oath “to preserve, protect, and defend” the country — which puts the security of our nation and its democracy at stake. In the nine times Trump met with or called Comey, it was always to discuss how the investigation into Russia’s election interference was affecting him personally, rather than the security of the country. He apparently cared little about understanding either the magnitude of the Russian intelligence threat, or how the FBI might be able to prevent another attack in future elections.

When Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) asked Comey whether Trump had ever appeared concerned about Russian interference or how to stop it in the future, Comey’s answer was blunt: “No.” After a moment of reflection, he added, without prompting, that he had “attended a fair number of meetings on that with President Obama.” This contrast alone underscores Trump’s disregard for his fundamental duty, which is to ensure the security of the nation, its government and its citizens from foreign enemies.

It’s worth noting that there is unanimity among senior intelligence officials that the Russian interference in our election not only happened, but that it was extraordinary and unprecedented.

It does not require an FBI investigation to see that a president of the United States who finds no reason for concern in any of these assertions — and indeed considers them a “hoax” — cannot have the best interest of the country at heart.

---

Quote:

---

And SECONDRATE conveniently posts cartoons as an example of why I barely skim its posts. (see above)- SIGNY
"It's" posts? Called out on "she" as an insult so going for "It" instead - classy!- GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

I see that GSTRING is picking up his skirts and shrieking about nothing...- SIGNY
Another insult to women.- GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

Mistakenly calling someone a "she" is not an insult unless you think "she's" are inferior. So, do you? - SIGNY
You lie. You called him She as an insult and now don't have the class to own it. What a fraud.- GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

Yanno, since the intelligence community is fighting Trump so hard, he MUST be better because he's pissing off all the right people. Including you and SECONDRATE and JOLAMEBRAIN and that other idiot, what's-his-name.- SIGNY

6ix? Kiki?- GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

Pissing off the right people - you mean a majority of the American people? Good one! Did you misspeak or did we just catch you being honest?- GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

Finally, we have prima facie evidence about Trump. Prima facie means accepted as correct until proved otherwise. As of today, Trump has not claimed that at any time he asked concerned questions about hacking or Russian interference or how to stop it in the future. Has Trump retracted his claim that it is all a hoax?- SECONDHAND

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
lol

---

It is laughable. You never worked in an office, have you? If Trump doesn't hire experts, his "Make America Great Again" plan will not fly in the next 3.5 years. Congress doesn't have the experts to help Trump. Success or failure is all up to him and nobody else although I do expect him to blame everybody but himself when he campaigns in the Summer of 2020.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
23 posts so far today. I think all this hysteria is due to the fact that they were really, REALLY counting on Comey's testimony to be the final solution. But then, it turned out to be nothing but hot air.

Now they're talking about everything BUT what just didn't happen, trying to find reasons to support their completely unsupported beliefs.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
One advantage Trump has in Russia-related decision-making is that he knows more than either his allies or his antagonists in Congress about what the underlying facts of the case are. Trump is in a unique position to evaluate whether the political costs of a cover-up exceed the political costs of a thorough investigation.

---

Quote:

---

Trump’s media allies are making the case for firing Robert Mueller. Saturday Night Massacre, redux?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
lol

---

It is laughable. You never worked in an office, have you? If Trump doesn't hire experts, his "Make America Great Again" plan will not fly in the next 3.5 years. Congress doesn't have the experts to help Trump. Success or failure is all up to him and nobody else although I do expect him to blame everybody but himself when he campaigns in the Summer of 2020.

---

What does working in an office have to do with anything?

I have worked in an office. I've also worked in the political realm was well.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
And yet you do not realize that the work of Making America Great Again requires Trump to do the planning and the paperwork. He hasn't.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
One advantage Trump has in Russia-related decision-making is that he knows more than either his allies or his antagonists in Congress about what the underlying facts of the case are. Trump is in a unique position to evaluate whether the political costs of a cover-up exceed the political costs of a thorough investigation.

---

Yeah... or, yanno... the third option.

The one where he knows that there is nothing to cover up. Just sayin'.

---

Quote:

---

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=61712

Prosecutor's Record Destroys Credibility of Mueller Probe
(AP)

By Sidney Powell | Wednesday, 07 Jun 2017 11:28 AM


Former FBI Director, now special prosecutor, Robert Mueller has added Andrew Weissmann to the prosecution team investigating allegations of the Trump Administration's "collusion" with Russia.

Mainstream media has touted both men's credentials, but there is a huge back-story they all ignore.

Mr. Weissmann's real record as a "special prosecutor" is so egregious that Mr. Mueller's decision to choose his former counsel Weissmann should cause concern for anyone with even a passing interest in truth and justice.

From a tough mob prosecutor in the Eastern District of New York United States Attorney's Office (with former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell), Mr. Weissmann became the first Deputy Director — and then Director — of the elite Enron Task Force, formed in 1991.

The Task Force quickly devolved into a cabal that used mob tactics itself.

It dealt the death penalty to the venerable accounting firm of Arthur Andersen LLP, which employed 85,000 people world-wide and represented approximately 2500 publicly-traded companies. It even coerced a guilty plea out of Andersen partner David Duncan.

In a trial rife with prosecutorial misconduct obviously calculated to win at any cost, Weissmann helped rewrite crucial jury instructions defining the "crime" and the intent required.

Three years later, a unanimous Supreme Court reversed the conviction. All the justices agreed that Andersen's conduct was not a crime, and it was "shocking how little criminal culpability the jury instructions required."

In plain English, Mr. Weissmann concocted a crime, destroyed a company and 85,000 jobs, spent millions of tax dollars, and obtained a wrongful conviction — all for nothing.

The prosecutors were so over-reaching that the judge even allowed Mr. Duncan to withdraw his guilty plea.

Weissmann ran the grand jury like a petty tyrant. He instructed one defendant (my client) — who had appeared voluntarily — to share his "personal understanding" of a telephone call he had not even participated in, "whether his understanding was accurate or not." Then, Weissmann indicted him for perjury and obstruction of justice for his answer.

Determined to "send a message to Wall Street," Weissmann supervised the prosecution of four Merrill Lynch executives on charges that were unprecedented.

Like a character from the TV series The Blacklist, Weissmann himself often made multiple phone calls to lawyers for potential defense witnesses, threatening the indictment of anyone who might testify for the defense — including in-house legal counsel.

To top it off, Weissmann and team actually yellow-highlighted evidence that was favorable to the defense before the Barge trial, but hid it for six years while four Merrill executives served a year in prison on an indictment that failed to allege a crime as charged.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed 12 out of 14 counts of conviction, acquitted one defendant completely, and later held that the prosecutors "plainly suppressed evidence" favorable to the defense and provided misleading summaries instead.

Weissmann left the Enron Task Force amid escalating allegations of prosecutorial misconduct during the Enron Broadband case. No one seemed to notice what had happened to the victims, or that all of the cases they actually tried and at least two of the guilty pleas they coerced were reversed.

Not only has our Department of "Justice" failed to drain the swamp, it has just restocked it with a swamp-monster who has proven that he is willing to do anything to win. To paraphrase Billy Jack, "When [prosecutors] break the law, there is no law."



Sidney Powell served in the Department of Justice for 10 years, in three federal districts under nine United States Attorneys from both political parties. She was lead counsel in more than 500 federal appeals. She is the author of Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice – a legal thriller that tells the inside story of high-profile prosecutions including Arthur Andersen LLP, the Ted Stevens case, and the Enron Barge case in which she represented one of the Merrill Lynch executives.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
I haven't looked into Mueller very deeply. On the other hand, he brought in Weissmann, who left the Enron investigation due to rising evidence of prosecutorial misconduct.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Weren't you a Bernie person? When did you join the legal team defending the GOP?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Weren't you a Bernie person? When did you join the legal team defending the GOP?

---

Ah, the old ad hominem ... a SECOND-RATE special.

What does that have to do with Weissmann's overturned convictions, where his actions unanimously had the Supreme Court aghast? Or his prosecutorial misconduct? Or, after falsely instructing a witness to testify about hearsay conversation, and who appeared voluntarily, he then prosecuting him for perjury?

Do you have any response to the facts, SECOND-RATE?

I'm sure you don't. in fact, I guarantee you'll do one of three things 1) shift the topic, 2) disappear for a while and then shift the topic, or 3) continue with an ad hominem; or some combination.

Putting you back on 'ignore', again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Weren't you a Bernie person? When did you join the legal team defending the GOP?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

What does that have to do with Weissmann's overturned convictions, where his actions unanimously had the Supreme Court aghast? Or his prosecutorial misconduct? Or, after falsely instructing a witness to testify about hearsay conversation, and who appeared voluntarily, he then prosecuting him for perjury?

Do you have any response to the facts, SECOND-RATE?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Weren't you a Bernie person? When did you join the legal team defending the GOP?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Weren't you a Bernie person? When did you join the legal team defending the GOP?

---

Ah, the old ad hominem ... a SECOND-RATE special.

What does that have to do with Weissmann's overturned convictions, where his actions unanimously had the Supreme Court aghast? Or his prosecutorial misconduct? Or, after falsely instructing a witness to testify about hearsay conversation, and who appeared voluntarily, he then prosecuting him for perjury?

Do you have any response to the facts, SECOND-RATE?

I'm sure you don't. In fact, I guarantee you'll do one of four things 1) shift the topic, 2) disappear for a while and then shift the topic, 3) continue with an ad hominem, or 4) some combination of those.


Putting you back on 'ignore', again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Weren't you a Bernie person? When did you join the legal team defending the GOP?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Weren't you a Bernie person? When did you join the legal team defending the GOP?

---

Ah, the old ad hominem ... a SECOND-RATE special.

What does that have to do with Weissmann's overturned convictions, where his actions unanimously had the Supreme Court aghast? Or his prosecutorial misconduct? Or, after falsely instructing a witness to testify about hearsay conversation, and who appeared voluntarily, he then prosecuting him for perjury?

Do you have any response to the facts, SECOND-RATE?

I'm sure you don't. In fact, I guarantee you'll do one of four things 1) shift the topic, 2) disappear for a while and then shift the topic, 3) continue with an ad hominem, or 4) some combination of those.


Putting you back on 'ignore', again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Weren't you a Bernie person? When did you join the legal team defending the GOP?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Weren't you a Bernie person? When did you join the legal team defending the GOP?

---

Ah, the old ad hominem ... a SECOND-RATE special.

What does that have to do with Weissmann's overturned convictions, where his actions unanimously had the Supreme Court aghast? Or his prosecutorial misconduct? Or, after falsely instructing a witness to testify about hearsay conversation, and who appeared voluntarily, he then prosecuting him for perjury?

Do you have any response to the facts, SECOND-RATE?

I'm sure you don't. In fact, I guarantee you'll do one of four things 1) shift the topic, 2) disappear for a while and then shift the topic, 3) continue with an ad hominem, or 4) some combination of those.


Putting you back on 'ignore', again.

---