Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

"But my own preference would be that he not be impeached, but that he be able to serve out his term, because I think he wants to do a good job. And I'm willing to help him, if I can help him, and give him the benefit of the doubt."

---

I should have more respect for the elderly, but having been around so many for so many years all I can think of is: what a sap.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Any evidence yet?

Nope.

I'll be checking back later.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Any evidence yet?

Nope.

I'll be checking back later.

So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?

---

That Trump will not share his tax returns is evidence that he committed felony tax evasion. If 1kiki wasn't such a fucking idiot, she'd know that about the 1 Percenters and their lawlessness. They do have tax returns, but their tax returns are full of lies and misdirection. The IRS can't catch them because its auditing budget is kept small by the GOP Congressmen. Robert Mueller will be able to get around the restrictions on auditing Trump because Mueller's budget is not attached to the IRS budget for tax audits.

In the United States, the IRS estimate of the 2001 tax gap was $345 billion. For 2006, the tax gap is estimated to be $450 billion. A more recent study estimates the 2008 tax gap in the range of $450 to $500 billion, and unreported income to be approximately $2 trillion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_evasion_in_the_United_States

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
You have a very scrambled notion of 'evidence'. Aside from conjecture, to complete your ignorance I suggest you also include fiction, gossip and claims as well.

Any evidence yet?

Nope.

I'll be checking back later.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
All of the Russian diplomats expelled by the West over the UK spy poisoning scandal

https://qz.com/1237419/the-us-expelled-60-russian-diplomats-alongside-
15-european-countries/

Oops

T

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

So nothing Mueller has Investigated, outside of nonexistent Trump-Russia Collusion, or brought charges for (none of which is related to Trump-Russia Collusion) has any merit or Authority.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

So nothing Mueller has Investigated, outside of nonexistent Trump-Russia Collusion, or brought charges for (none of which is related to Trump-Russia Collusion) has any merit or Authority.

---

I'll admit that it's over my head what you are saying here.

Is this an idea that dawned on you while you were sleeping one night, or do you have some citations for this stuff?


That would be great if this was proven as a lot of high profile government people could be jailed for it, but at the same time I'd like this thing to go to fruition now. A lot of time and taxpayer dollars have been poured into it, and simply killing the investigation over technicalities like this, or just replacing them with people who will do whatever Trump says is not really an option.

Remember. Anything that Trump "gets away with" now is going to be something that the next Democratic President can get away with in the future.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
This is from Manafort's lawyers, I presume some Legal Documents filed, likely with SCOTUS, being a Constitutional violation.
Lawyer Kevin Downing.

Using search terms "Manafort lawyers file supreme court" at DuckDuckGo produced some results. The ones dated 27 March look right.
Feel free to post some linkies if you can.

Remember, anything that Mueller gets away with now is going to be something that the next dirty filthy crooked weasel can get away with in the future.
And the massive waste of time and taxdollars spent, mostly outside the purview and mandate, won't be wasted the next time if it is adequately and rightly squashed this time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
This is from Manafort's lawyers, I presume some Legal Documents filed, likely with SCOTUS, being a Constitutional violation.
Lawyer Kevin Downing.

Using search terms "Manafort lawyers file supreme court" at DuckDuckGo produced some results. The ones dated 27 March look right.
Feel free to post some linkies if you can.

Remember, anything that Mueller gets away with now is going to be something that the next dirty filthy crooked weasel can get away with in the future.
And the massive waste of time and taxdollars spent, mostly outside the purview and mandate, won't be wasted the next time if it is adequately and rightly squashed this time.

---

Oh... you can bet I'm not arguing that any of the crooks here shouldn't go down. I'm all for sending a message about trying this again if it's not on the complete up and up if it is determined that laws were broken.

That being said, at this point a legitimate investigation needs to take place. Ending it now or sticking in cronies that are just going to cover things up won't do Trump or the Republican party any good, and will set a precedent that says it's okay for these people in high offices to do whatever the fuck they want.

I'm not even convinced that Trump didn't do something bad. I don't really think he did because of the sources the allegations are coming from, but it's always possible.

It would be nice to know one way or another at some point in our lifetimes. Preferably today or tomorrow at the latest.

Fucking bureaucratic incompetence.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Well, if you insist upon every Jaywalking violation and littering citation of every person who was the assistant to the Deputy aide of Trump's cousin being tracked down, then you are effectively saying that you want all of Hilliary's and Obama's crimes to be ignored, with no further resources expended.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Well, if you insist upon every Jaywalking violation and littering citation of every person who was the assistant to the Deputy aide of Trump's cousin being tracked down, then you are effectively saying that you want all of Hilliary's and Obama's crimes to be ignored, with no further resources expended.

---

No. I didn't.

There is no reason these two things need to be mutually exclusive.

They have more than enough employees and our tax dollars to do the job. If they can't do the fucking jobs they're paid good money and nice pensions to get done, then they should be fired.

Fucking government employees are worthless at every level. They'd never make it in the private sector.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
This is slightly off the topic of No Evidence, but doesn't really fit in the shitted-up opposite threads.

Perhaps it should be a separate thread.

Sounds like Manafort's lawyers are pursuing a legal challenge which should have been done long ago.

AG Sessions, Appointed and Confirmed by Senate, recused himself soley and specifically on the subject of Trump-Russia Collusion.

He appointed Deputy AG Rosenstein (not a Cabinet Member or Line-of-Succession Office) to appoint a Special Counsel for the specific issue which Sessions recused himself.

Rosenstein, acting AG for this sole specific subject, appointed Mueller and has clearly stated several times that any expansion of Investigation must be approved by himself, Rosenstein.

Either Mueller has secured the approval from Rosenstein on each expanded Witch Hunt Fishing Expedition, or Mueller did such without approval and Rosenstein neglected and failed to corral him in, failing to curtail the ever widening Witch Hunt into areas which the actual AG Sessions never refused himself from.

Thus, Rosenstein has effectively annointed himself defacto AG, outside of his Constitutional Authority.

So nothing Mueller has Investigated, outside of nonexistent Trump-Russia Collusion, or brought charges for (none of which is related to Trump-Russia Collusion) has any merit or Authority.


Sessions had recused himself specifically from the Trump-Russia Collusion Investigation because he had been an advisor and surrogate for the 2016 Trump Campaign. He did not recuse himself from any tax or IRS matter, or any business dealings from before the campaign, or any misstatements uttered by subordinates, or anything that the SC has filed charges about, or convened Grand Juries about.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Well, if you insist upon every Jaywalking violation and littering citation of every person who was the assistant to the Deputy aide of Trump's cousin being tracked down, then you are effectively saying that you want all of Hilliary's and Obama's crimes to be ignored, with no further resources expended.

---

No. I didn't.

There is no reason these two things need to be mutually exclusive.

They have more than enough employees and our tax dollars to do the job. If they can't do the fucking jobs they're paid good money and nice pensions to get done, then they should be fired.

Fucking government employees are worthless at every level. They'd never make it in the private sector.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

But MSM cannot manage both. Once the Jaywalking bystander is covered intensely 24/7, then Kardashians, King James, Twin Chains, and psychotropic drugged Spree Killers fill the rest of attention span - no room for checking on Actual crimes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Not only do you have a fictional notion about evidence, you have strange, Mengele ideas about science. As for subpoenas, your hero Mueller holds that power, which, to date, he's refused to exercise for some strange reason. Mueller may not be the truth-seeker you're looking for.

Meanwhile, any evidence yet?

Nope.

I'll be checking back later.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
You repeatedly misrepresent what I post. And then spend post after post arguing - not with me - but with the voices in your head. Well, I'm sure you do a better job arguing in the fantasy land you create. But this is REAL WORLD EVENTS.

Why don't you take this opportunity and try and figure out (if you can) where you go so wrong?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Not only do you have a fictional notion about evidence, you have strange, Mengele ideas about science. As for subpoenas, your hero Mueller holds that power, which, to date, he's refused to exercise for some strange reason. Mueller may not be the truth-seeker you're looking for.

Meanwhile, any evidence yet?

Nope.

I'll be checking back later.

---

There is no need to check back here at an insignificant website because the Robert Mueller Report, full of the evidence you crave, will be widely announced all over the Internet. There are only two sources of evidence on Trump/Russia:

#1) Ask Trump about Trump/Russia. If anybody knows, it is him, but he has given the same silly "non-evidence" many times by tweeting "No Collusion". Trump will never give believable evidence until he is placed under serious, life-threatening duress. Sadly, the Secret Service won't let that happen. So, we have to get evidence from:

#2) Ask Robert Mueller about Trump/Russia. Mueller is gathering second- and third-hand evidence by asking everybody, including Trump, to tell him about Trump/Russia. Mueller has to use duress on some of his second-hand sources to get them to talk. Happily, the Secret Service is not protecting most of those sources.

For now Mueller has not yet leaked a report about Trump/Russia. Every time 1kiki or JewelStaiteFan writes "No Evidence" what they should write is "No Mueller Report has been issued". Trump is doing what he can (see point #1) to make sure point #2 never happens.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
You repeatedly misrepresent what I post. And then spend post after post arguing - not with me - but with the voices in your head. Well, I'm sure you do a better job arguing in the fantasy land you create. But this is REAL WORLD EVENTS.

Why don't you take this opportunity and try and figure out (if you can) where you go so wrong?

So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Roger Stone’s growing Russia investigation problem — and what it means for Trump

Now the Wall Street Journal has the email in which Stone claimed to Nunberg that he had met with Assange. “I dined with Julian Assange last night,” Stone wrote to Nunberg on Aug. 4, 2016.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Roger Stone’s growing Russia investigation problem — and what it means for Trump

Now the Wall Street Journal has the email in which Stone claimed to Nunberg that he had met with Assange. “I dined with Julian Assange last night,” Stone wrote to Nunberg on Aug. 4, 2016.

---

Well I could tell you that Stone had involvement with Assange. No need to look any further than the Alex Jones show for him admitting that himself right around that time frame.

Do you have cites where Stone is denying that now? Because if he says he didn't than I'll back up the claim that he is lying about that.

---

Quote:

---

Stone said in an email on August 4, 2016, that he had "dined with Julian Assange last night." However, Stone has denied ever meeting Assange. In a text exchange on Friday before the WSJ report, Stone said he "never met or spoke with Assange ever," and Stone told The Journal the contents of the email were "said in jest."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Roger Stone’s growing Russia investigation problem — and what it means for Trump

Now the Wall Street Journal has the email in which Stone claimed to Nunberg that he had met with Assange. “I dined with Julian Assange last night,” Stone wrote to Nunberg on Aug. 4, 2016.

---

Well I could tell you that Stone had involvement with Assange. No need to look any further than the Alex Jones show for him admitting that himself right around that time frame.

Do you have cites where Stone is denying that now? Because if he says he didn't than I'll back up the claim that he is lying about that.



Thanks for finally putting in the closing italics, btw.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Alex Jones, you watch Alex Jones, wow. That says it all.


T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I don't give a shit what Google says, Second. You're just quoting some MSM story that I otherwise wouldn't believe if I hadn't heard Stone say it himself.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

One of the biggest obstacles to the Justice Department making public findings about the investigation is that Rosenstein has repeatedly said publicly that prosecutors should not discuss their reasons for not filing charges in a specific case, particularly when individuals are involved.

Indeed, the memo Rosenstein prepared last year that the White House initially seized upon to justify the firing of FBI Director James Comey sharply faulted him for publicly revealing and assessing the evidence found in the course of the probe into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email account while secretary of state.

"Derogatory information sometimes is disclosed in the course of criminal investigations and prosecutions, but we never release it gratuitously," Rosenstein wrote. "The Director [Comey] laid out his version of the facts for the news media as if it were a closing argument, but without a trial. It is a textbook example of what federal prosecutors and agents are taught not to do."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I don't see any anonymous sources in that story.

I hope that answers your question.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
No reason anyone should put all their cards out on the table.

No real reason to speculate at this point either.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
No reason anyone should put all their cards out on the table.

No real reason to speculate at this point either.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

It should have never turned into a competition, but Trump had to fire Comey because Comey was investigating the 2016 election. Then Trump threatened to fire Mueller, than threatened to fire Mueller's supervisor Rosenstein, then threatened to fire the supervisor's supervisor, Attorney General Sessions. Everybody has to keep Trump in the dark or else they will never finish investigating the 2016 election before they are either fired by Trump or the next election happens in 2020.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
No reason anyone should put all their cards out on the table.

No real reason to speculate at this point either.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

It should have never turned into a competition, but Trump had to fire Comey because Comey was investigating the 2016 election. Then Trump threatened to fire Mueller, than threatened to fire Mueller's supervisor Rosenstein, then threatened to fire the supervisor's supervisor, Attorney General Sessions. Everybody has to keep Trump in the dark or else they will never finish investigating the 2016 election before they are either fired by Trump or the next election happens in 2020.

---

You mean that they should do their jobs correctly?

I can't imagine a scenario where it's a good practice for the investigators to brief the prosecuted party every step of the way. Either directly or indirectly via the MSM.

What a shit show so far.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
The "prosecuted party" is being "briefed" every step of the investigation. Republican Congressional committees have forced Comey and Rosenstein and Sessions and Andrew McCabe, the fired #2 at the FBI, to testify about what they know about the investigation of the 2016 election. The Republicans have made it very clear they don't want that election investigated, but they also don't want the voters to see Congress and Trump give clear orders and job terminations making it perfectly obvious to the public why they want the investigation stopped.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Hmmm.. a lot of speculation and hope on the part of Trump-haters but .... still no evidence.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
This is slightly off the topic of No Evidence, but doesn't really fit in the shitted-up opposite threads.

Perhaps it should be a separate thread.

Sounds like Manafort's lawyers are pursuing a legal challenge which should have been done long ago.

AG Sessions, Appointed and Confirmed by Senate, recused himself soley and specifically on the subject of Trump-Russia Collusion.

He appointed Deputy AG Rosenstein (not a Cabinet Member or Line-of-Succession Office) to appoint a Special Counsel for the specific issue which Sessions recused himself.

Rosenstein, acting AG for this sole specific subject, appointed Mueller and has clearly stated several times that any expansion of Investigation must be approved by himself, Rosenstein.

Either Mueller has secured the approval from Rosenstein on each expanded Witch Hunt Fishing Expedition, or Mueller did such without approval and Rosenstein neglected and failed to corral him in, failing to curtail the ever widening Witch Hunt into areas which the actual AG Sessions never refused himself from.

Thus, Rosenstein has effectively annointed himself defacto AG, outside of his Constitutional Authority.

So nothing Mueller has Investigated, outside of nonexistent Trump-Russia Collusion, or brought charges for (none of which is related to Trump-Russia Collusion) has any merit or Authority.


Sessions had recused himself specifically from the Trump-Russia Collusion Investigation because he had been an advisor and surrogate for the 2016 Trump Campaign. He did not recuse himself from any tax or IRS matter, or any business dealings from before the campaign, or any misstatements uttered by subordinates, or anything that the SC has filed charges about, or convened Grand Juries about.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
None of the criminals from either side are ever going to jail.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
None of the criminals from either side are ever going to jail.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Easy for the Trump side, where there are no Criminals.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
None of the criminals from either side are ever going to jail.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Easy for the Trump side, where there are no Criminals.

---

While I maintain that I don't believe that Trump himself is a criminal, I find the above statement to be one of the funnier things I've seen posted in these forums in quite a while.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
None of the criminals from either side are ever going to jail.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Easy for the Trump side, where there are no Criminals.

---

While I maintain that I don't believe that Trump himself is a criminal, I find the above statement to be one of the funnier things I've seen posted in these forums in quite a while.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

You enjoy the Deep Diving for Process Crimes? Sure somebody is guilty of lying to the FBI when they say they live on Main Street while the truth is Main Avenue.
Nothing like destroying tens of thousands of subpoenaed emails.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
This is slightly off the topic of No Evidence, but doesn't really fit in the shitted-up opposite threads.

Perhaps it should be a separate thread.

Sounds like Manafort's lawyers are pursuing a legal challenge which should have been done long ago.

AG Sessions, Appointed and Confirmed by Senate, recused himself soley and specifically on the subject of Trump-Russia Collusion.

He appointed Deputy AG Rosenstein (not a Cabinet Member or Line-of-Succession Office) to appoint a Special Counsel for the specific issue which Sessions recused himself.

Rosenstein, acting AG for this sole specific subject, appointed Mueller and has clearly stated several times that any expansion of Investigation must be approved by himself, Rosenstein.

Either Mueller has secured the approval from Rosenstein on each expanded Witch Hunt Fishing Expedition, or Mueller did such without approval and Rosenstein neglected and failed to corral him in, failing to curtail the ever widening Witch Hunt into areas which the actual AG Sessions never refused himself from.

Thus, Rosenstein has effectively annointed himself defacto AG, outside of his Constitutional Authority.

So nothing Mueller has Investigated, outside of nonexistent Trump-Russia Collusion, or brought charges for (none of which is related to Trump-Russia Collusion) has any merit or Authority.


Sessions had recused himself specifically from the Trump-Russia Collusion Investigation because he had been an advisor and surrogate for the 2016 Trump Campaign. He did not recuse himself from any tax or IRS matter, or any business dealings from before the campaign, or any misstatements uttered by subordinates, or anything that the SC has filed charges about, or convened Grand Juries about.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
None of the criminals from either side are ever going to jail.

---

Easy for the Trump side, where there are no Criminals.

---

While I maintain that I don't believe that Trump himself is a criminal, I find the above statement to be one of the funnier things I've seen posted in these forums in quite a while.

---

You enjoy the Deep Diving for Process Crimes? Sure somebody is guilty of lying to the FBI when they say they live on Main Street while the truth is Main Avenue.
Nothing like destroying tens of thousands of subpoenaed emails.

---

I'm not comparing crimes. You're a fool if you believe that people at that level of power aren't corrupt to the core simply because they are part of the GOP though.

Draining the swamp was one of the promises that Trump has been keeping. Every day somebody on either side quits or is fired is a day that brings a smile to my face. Even better when charges are brought up against them.

---