As Tucker Carlson is saying right now, for the last year all you heard from the mouths of democrats was “Russia, Russia, Russia.” They called Trump a Russian dupe and Michael Flynn a traitor. After a year with zero evidence of any Trump-Russia collusion and Robert Mueller inexplicably indicting a ham sandwich, people are catching on to this whole charade being what Trump says it is- a witch hunt. A number of signals are being sent from democrats revealing their intent to put as much room as they can between them and all the nasty things they’ve said about Trump.
Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) began to soften expectations:
The top Democrat on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence acknowledged in a recent interview that contacts between Trump campaign associates and Russians could be “a set of coincidences” rather than collusion.
“I’m reserving my final judgement until we’ve seen all the witnesses we need to see, and we’ve gotten all the facts. So I’m going to hold off,” Virginia Sen. Mark Warner said in an interview with The New Yorker’s David Remnick when asked whether he believes that Trump associates conspired with the Kremlin to influence the 2016 presidential election.
democrat pollster Doug Schoen warned democrats not to even think about impeaching Trump.
A former pollster for former President Bill Clinton is warning House Democrats about trying to impeach President Donald Trump if they win the House in November, arguing that it likely won’t pass the Senate and could cause serious gridlock within the government.
“Yet, if the Democrats do win back the House and pursue impeachment against the president, there is little on the record to suggest House Democrats have enough evidence to get a conviction in the Senate,” Douglas Schoen, a former pollster for Clinton, wrote in an op-ed in The Hill Sunday.
“We could thus see a divided government much like we encountered in 1998. Such an outcome does not serve the American people’s interests and only serves to further embroil Washington in divisive gridlock. It also, ironically maybe, would bode well for President Trump’s reelection bid in 2020,” Schoen wrote.
Media figures are also looking to change the discussion. Nicholas Kristof:
New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof said Sunday that the media is too obsessed with talking about President Trump in lieu of more pressing matters across the world.
“I do think that we have to acknowledge that there is so much more happening in the world than Donald Trump. And we in the media are essentially all Trump all the time,” Kristof said during an interview Sunday on CNN, while commenting on a column he wrote on the topic.
The “addiction” is so bad, that the journalist quipped that it even happens during pillow talks with his wife.
Even late night comedians, who hate Trump so much they’re not funny any more, are thinking of toning it down:
In an interview with Deadline, Kimmel was asked whether he had prepared a “barrelful of barbs” for President Trump in his upcoming standup routine for ABC’s upfronts.
“Oh, wow. Yeah, you know, I hadn’t really thought about it that way, but I guess you’re right. Hopefully, it’ll be the last upfront of the Trump era, too,” Kimmel said.
“So, I don’t know, I don’t know how much focus there will be on that. I think people have had an ass-full of Donald Trump, and I feel like the upfront is a time to look within and make fun of ourselves,” Kimmel said of his comedy routine for the annual event that sees major advertisers gather to purchase airtime on networks, like ABC, ahead of the summer and fall TV seasons.
As documents find their way into the sunlight, it becomes clear that Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson was working as a Russian agent:
“So Glenn Simpson was working, effectively, also as an agent for the Russian government, as an adjunct to the Russian FSB,” the KGB’s successor. “At the same time . . . he’s doing this project to create a dossier on Trump." https://t.co/2xy2jUvGLc via @WSJOpinion
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) May 14, 2018
Also, Robert Mueller shot himself in the foot.
So, what does all of this mean? Metaphorically speaking, it would appear that the yapping dog chasing the car has sunk its teeth into the spinning tire. There is no way for Rover to escape injury. Even if Mueller and his pit bulls win the discovery battle and the case at trial, what’s the prize? A $500,000 fine or compensation to victims? How will they collect?
Mueller has a conflict on his hands involving a Russian oligarch:
Melanie Sloan, a former Clinton Justice Department lawyer and longtime ethics watchdog, told me a “far more significant issue” is whether the earlier FBI operation was even legal: “It’s possible the bureau’s arrangement with Mr. Deripaska violated the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits the government from accepting voluntary services.”
George Washington University constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley agreed: “If the operation with Deripaska contravened federal law, this figure could be viewed as a potential embarrassment for Mueller. The question is whether he could implicate Mueller in an impropriety.”
The Russian trail leads to Clinton lobbyists.
That’s not all: The busy Podesta Group also represented Uranium One, a uranium company acquired by the Russian government which received approval from Hillary Clinton’s State Department to mine for uranium in the U.S. and gave Russia twenty percent control of US uranium. The New York Timesreported Uranium One’s chairman, Frank Guistra, made significant donations to the Clinton Foundation, and Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 for one speech from a Russian investment bank that has “links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.” Notably, Frank Giustra, the Clinton Foundation’s largest and most controversial donor, does not appear anywhere in Clinton’s “non-private” emails. It is possible that the emails of such key donors were automatically scrubbed to protect the Clinton Foundation.
And let’s not forget Facebook’s collusion with the Russians.
James Comey can’t get his story straight. Nor can the rest of the conspirators:
The report states the committee “received conflicting testimony” from then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, Comey, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Mary McCord and McCabe about the purpose of the Flynn interview.
It listed several possible reasons for the interview, including whether the FBI was investigating Flynn’s “potentially misleading” statements to Vice President Pence, a possible violation of the Logan Act or to obtain more information about the Russia counterintelligence investigation.
And, of course, it was the Clinton campaign and the DNC who paid for Russian propaganda in the dossier.
We know for a fact that Devin Nunes is right over the target:
https://twitter.com/AshaRangappa_/status/996009777548406785?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fdailycaller.com%2F2018%2F05%2F14%2Fcnn-asha-rangappa-devin-nunes%2F&tfw_creator=%40ChuckRossDC&tfw_site=dailycaller
Keep the name Stefan Halper handy in your mind.
The water is receding from the shore faster and faster and democrats are scrambling for their lives to get to high ground before it comes.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
@Greg: Uneven justice, wasnt Holder gun runner to drug cartels in contempt of congress, didnt Ms Clinton have an illegal server, destroy records under subpoena? Didnt the IRS Learner destroy government records? Its lack of accountability. Add spying on the oppositions campaign. The pattern that developed was an out of control executive branch.
Arent you tired of asking moronic questions yet?https://www.infowars.com/bloomberg-debunked-heres-75-scandals-under-obama/
@Greg: Yes, I do see a pattern, especially proven by the Obama administration. When Democrats control the DOJ, criminal government officials get away with crimes. Was that what you were looking for?
@kitt: Add to that the head of the EPA and Lynch using aliases on private email accounts doing government business to avoid the required preservation of records and, of course, all the new stuff we are still finding out. And, under Obama, not only was no one ever punished, but they weren’t even fired, being allowed to retire into silent obscurity with their full pensions. Yeah, there’s a pattern alright. Violate the law, citizens’ rights and/or Constitution, have the media and a weaponized, biased DOJ cover for you, retire with full benefits, go on a lucrative liberal talk show circuit. Breaking the law in a Democrat administration is big business with lucrative rewards… for the perps.
This is why Trump said, “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.”
@Greg: But he didn’t you dope, but Obama claimed executive privilege with fast and furious, Mexican authorities claim 211 people have been killed with those weapons. One of the guns used in the November 13, 2015 Paris terrorist attacks came from Phoenix, Arizona where the Obama administration allowed criminals to buy thousands of weapons, so those weapons are ending up in terrorists hands in Europe. C’est la vie does not translate to “You got a friend”
Keep digging this is fun.
@Deplorable Me, #52:
Something like that was pretty much what I expected. I’m curious about what you imagine constitutes Democratic control of the DOJ. Consider:
Trump’s Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, is a Republican; the Deputy Attorney General, Rob Rosenstein, is also a Republican. And let’s not forget that Richard Mueller, the Special Counsel who is presently investigating him, is also a Republican.
George W’s Attorney Generals—John Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzales, and Michael Mukasey—were all Republicans.
Ronald Reagan’s Attorney Generals—William French, Edwin Meese, and Dick Thornburgh—were all Republicans.
Richard Nixon’s Attorney Generals—John Mitchell, Richard Kleindienst, and Elliot Richardson—were all Republicans.
Even thought the DOJ is administratively part of the Executive Branch, NO president controls the DOJ. That is the job of the Attorney General, who is appointed by the president but not controlled by the president.
Nixon was charged with High Crimes and Misdemeanors for attempting to influence the course of an investigation into the wrongdoings of his own administration.
@Greg: Notice Hillary didn’t say, “I could set up a private, secret, unsecured email server in my bathroom, run thousands of classified documents through it, exposed to foreign powers, destroy evidence, lie before Congress on video, lie to grieving loved ones of those I got killed in Benghazi and profit off the sale of our uranium to Russia and you people will STILL vote for me!” Of course she didn’t; it has too much incriminating truth in it.
Yeah, you should have seen it coming a mile away, because it’s true.
Yeah, Nixon was impeached, not for being involved in an operation spying on the opposition campaign, but for trying to cover up the actions of operators from outside the government after the fact. Obama DIRECTED the FBI to spy on the opposition campaign without any credible legal motivation. Let THAT simmer for a moment.
@Greg: Greg, you must be the dumbest SOB I have ever heard about! You pretend to know so much about everything, yet you always make up some way out law or historical event that has no applicable to the topic. We all know you believe that because Comey lied about intent to not protect classified information is not a crime, it isn’t a crime. You also believe that information not marked “Classified” is not classified, but you are wrong again. You are wrong about The president not having the power to order the DOJ to investigate. They all work for him. Congress has the power to rule on abuse of power. It is not abuse of power for the President to investigate the integrity of the voting system of this country. It is also within the power of the president to clean house in any of the organizations within the administrative branch of the government for cause. I would expect that lying under oath or conspiring to enhance the success of one party in an election is also cause. Your stupidity is only surpassed by your lack of integrity.
@Randy: Bringing up Nixon is Gregs little way of admitting Obama knew everything about the spying and was in on it.
He is historically challenged, fact challenged, and politically challenged, Yeah, “Nixon was impeached” bwahahahaha he cant get facts correct on history even if it happened in his lifetime, what a dolt.
@kitt:
Sorry, that was me. Thanks for pointing out my error. Nixon was GOING to be impeached. Fellow Republicans, who always showed more integrity than Democrats, convinced Nixon to resign. It was, of course, CLINTON that was impeached for perjury. Seems to run in the family.
@Deplorable Me: Yeah in a reply to you know who, the rest of the post is accurate
@Deplorable Me, #59:
Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives, and then acquitted by the U.S. Senate—which, you may recall, had a 55-to-45 Republican majority at the time.
Nixon promptly resigned upon being charged with High Crimes and Misdemeanors. He knew perfectly well what would happen if the impeachment process were to proceed.
Maybe there’s hope for Trump in the fact that the Senate has previously been disinclined to remove a president from office on charges related entirely to his efforts to cover up sexual misconduct with a lie under oath In Clinton’s case, nothing else remained by the time the Senate took the matter up.
@Greg:
It requires a 2/3 vote to impeach in the Senate. Naturally, ALL Democrats voted against impeachment (see comment earlier about how Democrats treat Democrats breaking the law).
No, he didn’t “promptly resign”. Republican leaders went to the White House and TOLD him to resign. The end was inevitable and they convinced him to not put the nation through the ordeal. Democrats, on the other hand (as we currently see) simply don’t give a damn.
There’s hope for Trump because, after over three years of illegal surveillance, spying, Congressional and special investigations, there has yet to be a shred of evidence of wrongdoing uncovered. Nothing. That’s also hope for the nation, because what HAS been found is lying, illegal surveillance, collusion and obstruction by Democrats, which may very well be brought to justice.
Except, perhaps, what Mueller may have discovered after a year of focused investigation. None of that has yet been shared. It’s the only investigation that will ultimately matter. Maybe there will be nothing. Maybe there will be revelations that will leave a smoking crater where the Trump administration once was. I wouldn’t want to bet on the outcome.
@Greg: Everything that seems suspicious has been leaked and those leaks have been disproven. The whole thing is a joke, a witch hunt, a political assassination attempt. More, it is all a FAILURE in its purpose to unseat Trump. You’ve only made him stronger and revealed the criminal activities of the Democrats. Sweet.
No one outside the Mueller team knows all that they’ve uncovered. Virtually nothing has been leaked. Almost everything people think they know has been a result of deduction, rumor, or speculation.
At some point, we will know.
@Greg: What about what is already revealed like the Russian indictments?