(04-11-2018 07:56 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 06:02 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 04:03 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  With all the corruption you guys see from Hillary and Barry, why hasn't a repub prez, a repub AG, a repub congress started some kind of investigation?
Any chance this is all delusional, paranoid thinking on your part?

Because pubs are generally puzzies. They actually believe that if they treat their opponents with respect, they'll respond in kind.
Trump's not a puzzy. Hence the get him at all costs "investigation".

Now why would you make such a self serving, erroneous statement? I was paying attention when a REPUBLICAN yelled out LIAR as the president of the country gave the state of the union address. Did you forget??

SOB was lying. Deserved to get called out.

(04-11-2018 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 10:00 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Also do you not realize what a terrible precedent is being set??

Special counsel for presidents will now be the norm. Only the Clinton types are going to run which would be awful for our country

No, they won't. It's a high bar to convene a Special Counsel on a president. Keep in mind that again, the Special Counsel here was not convened to go after trump.

A high bar in terms of the accusation, but not in terms of the evidence or support

(04-11-2018 07:56 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 06:02 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 04:03 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  With all the corruption you guys see from Hillary and Barry, why hasn't a repub prez, a repub AG, a repub congress started some kind of investigation?

Any chance this is all delusional, paranoid thinking on your part?

Because pubs are generally puzzies. They actually believe that if they treat their opponents with respect, they'll respond in kind.

Trump's not a puzzy. Hence the get him at all costs "investigation".

Now why would you make such a self serving, erroneous statement? I was paying attention when a REPUBLICAN yelled out LIAR as the president of the country gave the state of the union address. Did you forget??

Please note the word, GENERALLY, in the previous sentence.

I'll try to write more slowly in the future so you can keep up.

(04-11-2018 05:02 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 04:26 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 04:03 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  With all the corruption you guys see from Hillary and Barry, why hasn't a repub prez, a repub AG, a repub congress started some kind of investigation?

Any chance this is all delusional, paranoid thinking on your part?

It is long standing tradition in our Country for an incoming administration to not investigate the previous, so that we don't appear to be a complete banana republic.

Well, Trump has already taken care of the banana republic part, and I thought you guys elected Trump precisely because he goes against "tradition".

Who is "you guys?"

Nice, pointless response.

(04-10-2018 09:36 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Lawyers aren't special. They don't get a free pass the rest of us don't enjoy. If there's cause to investigate one, investigate.

This I agree with completely, but I do question how much cause there is here. I also just think this entire saga from the Russia nonsense to the Stormy Daniels junk is a complete waste of time to just distract people. Instead of focusing on real issues and needed policy changes we are debating did Trump collude with Russia to leak true information about how big a piece of trash Hillary is and about Trump being a philanderer (something that’s been pubic knowledge since the 80s). The Dems actions over the last few years have pushed me to the point that I’m probably only voting Libertarian from now on.

(04-11-2018 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 10:00 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Also do you not realize what a terrible precedent is being set??

Special counsel for presidents will now be the norm. Only the Clinton types are going to run which would be awful for our country

No, they won't. It's a high bar to convene a Special Counsel on a president. Keep in mind that again, the Special Counsel here was not convened to go after trump.

I sincerely hope you don't actually believe that.

The whole point of the special counsel was to get Trump. If we cannot agree on that, then I don't know what we can agree on

(04-12-2018 07:10 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 10:00 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Also do you not realize what a terrible precedent is being set??

Special counsel for presidents will now be the norm. Only the Clinton types are going to run which would be awful for our country

No, they won't. It's a high bar to convene a Special Counsel on a president. Keep in mind that again, the Special Counsel here was not convened to go after trump.

I sincerely hope you don't actually believe that.

The whole point of the special counsel was to get Trump. If we cannot agree on that, then I don't know what we can agree on

Russia interfered in our election. It needed investigated. That was the point of the counsel, and it was necessary.

(04-12-2018 08:02 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 07:10 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 10:00 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Also do you not realize what a terrible precedent is being set??

Special counsel for presidents will now be the norm. Only the Clinton types are going to run which would be awful for our country

No, they won't. It's a high bar to convene a Special Counsel on a president. Keep in mind that again, the Special Counsel here was not convened to go after trump.

I sincerely hope you don't actually believe that.

The whole point of the special counsel was to get Trump. If we cannot agree on that, then I don't know what we can agree on

Russia interfered in our election. It needed investigated. That was the point of the counsel, and it was necessary.

Why was a special counsel needed instead of the Congressional and other Federal level inquiries already underway?

(04-12-2018 08:02 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 07:10 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 10:00 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Also do you not realize what a terrible precedent is being set??

Special counsel for presidents will now be the norm. Only the Clinton types are going to run which would be awful for our country

No, they won't. It's a high bar to convene a Special Counsel on a president. Keep in mind that again, the Special Counsel here was not convened to go after trump.

I sincerely hope you don't actually believe that.

The whole point of the special counsel was to get Trump. If we cannot agree on that, then I don't know what we can agree on

Russia interfered in our election. It needed investigated. That was the point of the counsel, and it was necessary.

(04-12-2018 08:29 AM)appst89 Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 08:02 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 07:10 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 10:00 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Also do you not realize what a terrible precedent is being set??

Special counsel for presidents will now be the norm. Only the Clinton types are going to run which would be awful for our country

No, they won't. It's a high bar to convene a Special Counsel on a president. Keep in mind that again, the Special Counsel here was not convened to go after trump.

I sincerely hope you don't actually believe that.

The whole point of the special counsel was to get Trump. If we cannot agree on that, then I don't know what we can agree on

Russia interfered in our election. It needed investigated. That was the point of the counsel, and it was necessary.

Can you explain why we did not need to find out exactly what Russia did? If you don't think they did anything or that we should not try to determine what they did and how to prevent it in the future, I would have to sincerely question your respect for our electoral process.

(04-12-2018 09:22 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 08:29 AM)appst89 Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 08:02 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 07:10 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  No, they won't. It's a high bar to convene a Special Counsel on a president. Keep in mind that again, the Special Counsel here was not convened to go after trump.

I sincerely hope you don't actually believe that.

The whole point of the special counsel was to get Trump. If we cannot agree on that, then I don't know what we can agree on

Russia interfered in our election. It needed investigated. That was the point of the counsel, and it was necessary.

Can you explain why we did not need to find out exactly what Russia did? If you don't think they did anything or that we should not try to determine what they did and how to prevent it in the future, I would have to sincerely question your respect for our electoral process.

Okay, so we found out what Russia did. What's next, investigate lawyer Cohen from ******* to appetite and charge his wife with a crime she committed in 2004? Where does it end?

Okay, that was rhetorical. I know where it ends.......which was the goal from the very beginning.

(04-12-2018 09:22 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 08:29 AM)appst89 Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 08:02 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 07:10 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  No, they won't. It's a high bar to convene a Special Counsel on a president. Keep in mind that again, the Special Counsel here was not convened to go after trump.

I sincerely hope you don't actually believe that.

The whole point of the special counsel was to get Trump. If we cannot agree on that, then I don't know what we can agree on

Russia interfered in our election. It needed investigated. That was the point of the counsel, and it was necessary.

Can you explain why we did not need to find out exactly what Russia did? If you don't think they did anything or that we should not try to determine what they did and how to prevent it in the future, I would have to sincerely question your respect for our electoral process.

Because the whole Russia story was a fabrication by Killary and Co. as an excuse for why she lost, and the so-called investigation is a witch hunt. I do not think they did anything that had any effect on this election. I really don't care what you question.

(04-12-2018 09:22 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Can you explain why we did not need to find out exactly what Russia did? If you don't think they did anything or that we should not try to determine what they did and how to prevent it in the future, I would have to sincerely question your respect for our electoral process.

Can you explain why we need a special counsel to find out exactly what Russia did?

(04-12-2018 10:02 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 09:22 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Can you explain why we did not need to find out exactly what Russia did? If you don't think they did anything or that we should not try to determine what they did and how to prevent it in the future, I would have to sincerely question your respect for our electoral process.

Can you explain why we need a special counsel to find out exactly what Russia did?

We know what they did. Very little.

(04-12-2018 10:06 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 10:02 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 09:22 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Can you explain why we did not need to find out exactly what Russia did? If you don't think they did anything or that we should not try to determine what they did and how to prevent it in the future, I would have to sincerely question your respect for our electoral process.

Can you explain why we need a special counsel to find out exactly what Russia did?

We know what they did. Very little.

Russia spent $700 in Wisconsin, which was $700 more than Hillary spent in Wisconsin. So there's that.

(04-12-2018 11:18 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 10:06 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 10:02 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 09:22 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Can you explain why we did not need to find out exactly what Russia did? If you don't think they did anything or that we should not try to determine what they did and how to prevent it in the future, I would have to sincerely question your respect for our electoral process.

Can you explain why we need a special counsel to find out exactly what Russia did?

We know what they did. Very little.

Russia spent $700 in Wisconsin, which was $700 more than Hillary spent in Wisconsin. So there's that.

Yeah, you got me. I'd forgotten that they'd made that major (and successful) effort to throw the election to Trump.

I'll just leave this here:

Quote:ACLU: The risks of wrongful privacy invasions are too great to leave to the prosecutors when the government seizes digital data. Such files should be reviewed in the first instance by a neutral party, or “special master,” appointed by and answerable to the court, to ensure that the prosecutors and investigators get the evidence they are authorized to look for. They should not be allowed to roam widely through digital files that may contain terrabytes of private information.

Who Should Review Michael Cohen’s Files Under the Fourth Amendment?

Your move Dersh.

(04-12-2018 09:22 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Can you explain why we did not need to find out exactly what Russia did? If you don't think they did anything or that we should not try to determine what they did and how to prevent it in the future, I would have to sincerely question your respect for our electoral process.

What Russia did was pay/support hackers to hack us. Can you point to anything 'new' we've learned (show me an article) that talks about any 'special' tactics that they used and that people should watch out for? How about some new (as in since the middle of 2017) software that the DNC or our elections groups have purchased to prevent future hacks? How about some new requirements/regulations regarding such things?

hell, has any state in the past year changed their voter registration software or policies related to the investigation?

What you're doing is conflating 'what happened' with 'what we're investigating'. If we were investigating 'what happened' there would be forensic evaluations of the hacked systems, which iirc, democrats declined 18 months ago.

(04-12-2018 09:22 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Can you explain why we did not need to find out exactly what Russia did? If you don't think they did anything or that we should not try to determine what they did and how to prevent it in the future, I would have to sincerely question your respect for our electoral process.

I thought that was the purpose of the special counsel investigation. I haven't seen any indication that they are pursuing that objective in months.

(04-12-2018 08:02 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 07:10 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 10:00 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Also do you not realize what a terrible precedent is being set??

Special counsel for presidents will now be the norm. Only the Clinton types are going to run which would be awful for our country

No, they won't. It's a high bar to convene a Special Counsel on a president. Keep in mind that again, the Special Counsel here was not convened to go after trump.

I sincerely hope you don't actually believe that.

The whole point of the special counsel was to get Trump. If we cannot agree on that, then I don't know what we can agree on

Russia interfered in our election. It needed investigated. That was the point of the counsel, and it was necessary.

So what do we have an FBI for? Are they competent enough to investigate if Russia meddled in our election?
Of course. Or sure should be.
This was a setup engineered by Comey with his little leak to the professor (who happens to be his lawyer now....thank you lawyer-client privilege.....think the FBI will raid his entire life?) This is more transparent than anything the Hussein administration ever did.