Quote:Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called the new Weissmann document an “astonishing and disturbing find.”

“Andrew Weisman, a key prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team, praised Obama DOJ holdover Sally Yates after she lawlessly thwarted President Trump,” he said in a statement. “How much more evidence do we need that the Mueller operation has been irredeemably compromised by anti-Trump partisans?”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/...proud.html

The tears of losers tastes so sweet.

(12-05-2017 02:55 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  The tears of losers tastes so sweet.

Your team lost though.

(12-05-2017 02:55 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  The tears of losers tastes so sweet.

Explains why you keep licking your face

(12-05-2017 02:55 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  The tears of losers tastes so sweet.

lol @ the irony.

merge with the WSJ thread I started on Mueller credibility?

(12-05-2017 02:57 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 02:55 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  The tears of losers tastes so sweet.

Your team lost though.

It's not a team sport.

(12-05-2017 02:47 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

Quote:Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called the new Weissmann document an “astonishing and disturbing find.”

“Andrew Weisman, a key prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team, praised Obama DOJ holdover Sally Yates after she lawlessly thwarted President Trump,” he said in a statement. “How much more evidence do we need that the Mueller operation has been irredeemably compromised by anti-Trump partisans?”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/...proud.html

So now simply praising anyone who disagrees with Trump means you're "irredeemably compromised"?

Jesus Christ, this is downright scary that you guys aren't seeing this for what it transparently is; a concerted effort to discredit any investigation into Trump by labeling anyone but the most transparent sycophants "compromised". Everyone here, including those of you who support Trump, have almost assuredly have made comments criticizing something he's done. Simply sending texts saying you disagree with the guy or agree with someone who's opposed to him isn't evidence of a falsification of evidence or proof the entire investigation is a partisan hackjob. Mueller is a lifelong republican, a f*cking veteran, and has spent his life serving our nation with integrity, but Trump complains about him and instantly none of that matters because he's compromised?

(12-05-2017 03:45 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 02:47 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

Quote:Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called the new Weissmann document an “astonishing and disturbing find.”

“Andrew Weisman, a key prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team, praised Obama DOJ holdover Sally Yates after she lawlessly thwarted President Trump,” he said in a statement. “How much more evidence do we need that the Mueller operation has been irredeemably compromised by anti-Trump partisans?”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/...proud.html

So now simply praising anyone who disagrees with Trump means you're "irredeemably compromised"?

Jesus Christ, this is downright scary that you guys aren't seeing this for what it transparently is; a concerted effort to discredit any investigation into Trump by labeling anyone but the most transparent sycophants "compromised". Everyone here, including those of you who support Trump, have almost assuredly have made comments criticizing something he's done. Simply sending texts saying you disagree with the guy or agree with someone who's opposed to him isn't evidence of a falsification of evidence or proof the entire investigation is a partisan hackjob. Mueller is a lifelong republican, a f*cking veteran, and has spent his life serving our nation with integrity, but Trump complains about him and instantly none of that matters because he's compromised?

Vast Left wing conspiracy

(12-05-2017 04:00 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 03:45 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 02:47 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

Quote:Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called the new Weissmann document an “astonishing and disturbing find.”

“Andrew Weisman, a key prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team, praised Obama DOJ holdover Sally Yates after she lawlessly thwarted President Trump,” he said in a statement. “How much more evidence do we need that the Mueller operation has been irredeemably compromised by anti-Trump partisans?”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/...proud.html

So now simply praising anyone who disagrees with Trump means you're "irredeemably compromised"?

Jesus Christ, this is downright scary that you guys aren't seeing this for what it transparently is; a concerted effort to discredit any investigation into Trump by labeling anyone but the most transparent sycophants "compromised". Everyone here, including those of you who support Trump, have almost assuredly have made comments criticizing something he's done. Simply sending texts saying you disagree with the guy or agree with someone who's opposed to him isn't evidence of a falsification of evidence or proof the entire investigation is a partisan hackjob. Mueller is a lifelong republican, a f*cking veteran, and has spent his life serving our nation with integrity, but Trump complains about him and instantly none of that matters because he's compromised?

Vast Left wing conspiracy

Which includes whatever GOP members, lifelong Republican public servants, and administration appointments he needs to belittle at any given point.

(12-05-2017 03:45 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 02:47 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

Quote:Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called the new Weissmann document an “astonishing and disturbing find.”

“Andrew Weisman, a key prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team, praised Obama DOJ holdover Sally Yates after she lawlessly thwarted President Trump,” he said in a statement. “How much more evidence do we need that the Mueller operation has been irredeemably compromised by anti-Trump partisans?”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/...proud.html

So now simply praising anyone who disagrees with Trump means you're "irredeemably compromised"?

Jesus Christ, this is downright scary that you guys aren't seeing this for what it transparently is; a concerted effort to discredit any investigation into Trump by labeling anyone but the most transparent sycophants "compromised". Everyone here, including those of you who support Trump, have almost assuredly have made comments criticizing something he's done. Simply sending texts saying you disagree with the guy or agree with someone who's opposed to him isn't evidence of a falsification of evidence or proof the entire investigation is a partisan hackjob. Mueller is a lifelong republican, a f*cking veteran, and has spent his life serving our nation with integrity, but Trump complains about him and instantly none of that matters because he's compromised?

How many of his staff have been revealed to be Trump cheerleaders?

(12-05-2017 03:36 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 02:57 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 02:55 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  The tears of losers tastes so sweet.

Your team lost though.

It's not a team sport.

Someone forgot to tell that to the Demoncrappy Party, aka, Pelooser's gang.

(12-05-2017 03:45 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Mueller is a lifelong republican

Why do you think that's important?

Close to 70% of the country pretty much hates the guy...what do you expect?

(12-05-2017 04:07 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 03:45 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 02:47 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

Quote:Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called the new Weissmann document an “astonishing and disturbing find.”

“Andrew Weisman, a key prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team, praised Obama DOJ holdover Sally Yates after she lawlessly thwarted President Trump,” he said in a statement. “How much more evidence do we need that the Mueller operation has been irredeemably compromised by anti-Trump partisans?”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/...proud.html

So now simply praising anyone who disagrees with Trump means you're "irredeemably compromised"?

Jesus Christ, this is downright scary that you guys aren't seeing this for what it transparently is; a concerted effort to discredit any investigation into Trump by labeling anyone but the most transparent sycophants "compromised". Everyone here, including those of you who support Trump, have almost assuredly have made comments criticizing something he's done. Simply sending texts saying you disagree with the guy or agree with someone who's opposed to him isn't evidence of a falsification of evidence or proof the entire investigation is a partisan hackjob. Mueller is a lifelong republican, a f*cking veteran, and has spent his life serving our nation with integrity, but Trump complains about him and instantly none of that matters because he's compromised?

How many of his staff have been revealed to be Trump cheerleaders?

No idea, but it shouldn't matter on either end. The facts will rest on their merits, and unless you find that evidence was falsified or laws broken, you can't design an investigatory team based on their loyalty to the accused. I find it hard to believe I'm having to explain this to other Americans, but, here we are.

Quote:The Washington Post and the New York Times reported Saturday that a lead FBI investigator on the Mueller probe, Peter Strzok, was demoted this summer after it was discovered he’d sent anti- Trump texts to a mistress. As troubling, Mr. Mueller and the Justice Department kept this information from House investigators, despite Intelligence Committee subpoenas that would have exposed those texts. They also refused to answer questions about Mr. Strzok’s dismissal and refused to make him available for an interview.

There is no justification for withholding all of this from Congress, which is also investigating Russian influence and has constitutional oversight authority. Justice and the FBI have continued to defy legal subpoenas for documents pertaining to both surveillance warrants and the infamous Steele dossier that was financed by the Clinton campaign and relied on anonymous Russian sources.

Mr. Mueller ran the bureau for 12 years and is fast friends with Mr. Comey, whose firing by Mr. Trump triggered his appointment as special counsel. The reluctance to cooperate with a congressional inquiry compounds doubts related to this clear conflict of interest.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mr. Mueller, is also playing an increasingly questionable role in resisting congressional oversight. Justice has floated multiple reasons for ignoring House subpoenas, none of them persuasive.

First it claimed cooperation would hurt the Mueller probe, but his prosecutions are proceeding apace. Then Justice claimed that providing House investigators with classified material could hurt security or sources. But House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes has as broad a security clearance as nearly anyone in government. Recently Justice said it can’t interfere with a probe by the Justice Department Inspector General—as if an IG trumps congressional oversight.

The latest news supports our view that Mr. Mueller is too conflicted to investigate the FBI and should step down in favor of someone more credible. The investigation would surely continue, though perhaps with someone who doesn’t think his job includes protecting the FBI and Mr. Comey from answering questions about their role in the 2016 election.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/muellers-cr...1512432318

Why does Mueller resist constitutional authority?

(12-05-2017 04:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 04:07 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 03:45 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 02:47 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

Quote:Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called the new Weissmann document an “astonishing and disturbing find.”

“Andrew Weisman, a key prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team, praised Obama DOJ holdover Sally Yates after she lawlessly thwarted President Trump,” he said in a statement. “How much more evidence do we need that the Mueller operation has been irredeemably compromised by anti-Trump partisans?”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/...proud.html

So now simply praising anyone who disagrees with Trump means you're "irredeemably compromised"?

Jesus Christ, this is downright scary that you guys aren't seeing this for what it transparently is; a concerted effort to discredit any investigation into Trump by labeling anyone but the most transparent sycophants "compromised". Everyone here, including those of you who support Trump, have almost assuredly have made comments criticizing something he's done. Simply sending texts saying you disagree with the guy or agree with someone who's opposed to him isn't evidence of a falsification of evidence or proof the entire investigation is a partisan hackjob. Mueller is a lifelong republican, a f*cking veteran, and has spent his life serving our nation with integrity, but Trump complains about him and instantly none of that matters because he's compromised?

How many of his staff have been revealed to be Trump cheerleaders?

No idea, but it shouldn't matter on either end. The facts will rest on their merits, and unless you find that evidence was falsified or laws broken, you can't design an investigatory team based on their loyalty to the accused. I find it hard to believe I'm having to explain this to other Americans, but, here we are.

After two terms, socialism has taken its toll in DC. That, and greed.

(12-05-2017 04:16 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Close to 70% of the country pretty much hates the guy...what do you expect?

I certainly trust the polls.

(12-05-2017 02:55 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  The tears of losers tastes so sweet.

(12-05-2017 04:24 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 04:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 04:07 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 03:45 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(12-05-2017 02:47 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

So now simply praising anyone who disagrees with Trump means you're "irredeemably compromised"?

Jesus Christ, this is downright scary that you guys aren't seeing this for what it transparently is; a concerted effort to discredit any investigation into Trump by labeling anyone but the most transparent sycophants "compromised". Everyone here, including those of you who support Trump, have almost assuredly have made comments criticizing something he's done. Simply sending texts saying you disagree with the guy or agree with someone who's opposed to him isn't evidence of a falsification of evidence or proof the entire investigation is a partisan hackjob. Mueller is a lifelong republican, a f*cking veteran, and has spent his life serving our nation with integrity, but Trump complains about him and instantly none of that matters because he's compromised?

How many of his staff have been revealed to be Trump cheerleaders?

No idea, but it shouldn't matter on either end. The facts will rest on their merits, and unless you find that evidence was falsified or laws broken, you can't design an investigatory team based on their loyalty to the accused. I find it hard to believe I'm having to explain this to other Americans, but, here we are.

After two terms, socialism has taken its toll in DC. That, and greed.

Hey, I remember a guy who used to claim all of his enemies were socialists.