(12-18-2017 11:30 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 11:29 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 11:28 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 11:26 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/12/18/ju...ion-emails


Fox News disagrees.

If it werent improper, then the Muehller team wouldnt have any problem saying how they legally obtained them.

Tell that to the Judge.

Dont need to. The law is the law. And the judge didnt touch on that.

The Judge says no laws were broken. Didn't you watch the news clip?

(12-18-2017 12:04 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 11:30 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 11:29 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 11:28 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 11:26 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/12/18/ju...ion-emails


Fox News disagrees.

If it werent improper, then the Muehller team wouldnt have any problem saying how they legally obtained them.

Tell that to the Judge.

Dont need to. The law is the law. And the judge didnt touch on that.

The Judge says no laws were broken. Didn't you watch the news clip?

Muehllers team hasnt stated how they received the records. How would he know if no laws were broken?

grasping at straws in an attempt to discredit

(12-18-2017 12:12 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  grasping at straws in an attempt to discredit

grasping at straws in a desperate attempt to create a crime where none existed.

To have a crime you must have

an act
which breaks a law
committed while in a criminal state of mind

What is the act? What law did it break? What evidence do we have of such act?

(12-16-2017 06:20 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/...spartanntp

"...It asked for Congress to act immediately "to protect future presidential transitions from having their private records misappropriated by government agencies, particularly in the context of sensitive investigations intersecting with political motives."
The letter said Mueller's office obtained the emails despite the fact that it was aware the GSA did not own or control the records. It said the special counsel's office has "extensively used the materials in question, including portions that are susceptible to claims of privilege" without notifying the Trump for America team...."

You left out a key detail from your title, "Trump allies say..."

D'oh!

(12-16-2017 11:09 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  

So this is the man investigating our President? What a joke.

"Trump transition lawyer charges..."

NEXT!

(12-18-2017 12:12 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  grasping at straws in an attempt to discredit

That perfectly describes the last 13 months of the left and their propaganda wing, the MSM.

The boy who cried wolf, is crying again.

(12-18-2017 12:31 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  To have a crime you must have

an act
which breaks a law
committed while in a criminal state of mind

What is the act? What law did it break? What evidence do we have of such act?

Stealing people's private property-their e-mails? Lock Mueller up!!!!

(12-18-2017 12:04 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  The Judge says no laws were broken. Didn't you watch the news clip?

Unless he's the deciding vote on the Supreme court, his opinion isn't the final say.

Judge's decisions get overturned all the time, often by a panel who don't all agree.

Alan Dershowitz Says Mueller 'Playing Into Trump's Hands,' Should Have Obtained Warrant for Emails

Alan Dershowitz said Special Counsel Robert Mueller was "really foolish" not to seek warrants for the tens of thousands of emails he obtained from the Trump transition team.

"Why not seek the warrant?" Dershowitz said on "America's Newsroom" on Monday. "Getting warrants is like getting candy at Christmas. It's very easy to get. And not getting a warrant gives the defense an opportunity to challenge it in court."

Dershowitz, a Harvard Law professor emeritus and lifelong Democrat, said Mueller has been conducting a "sloppy investigation" and he now has a credibility problem, which "plays into Trump's hands."

He said Mueller should have been more careful about which investigators he brought on his team, he should have immediately disclosed that FBI counterintelligence officer Peter Strzok was removed from the Russia probe over his anti-Trump text messages and he should reveal if the infamous Trump dossier was used to obtain clearance for surveillance on Trump associates.

"When you're going after the president, you have to be Caesar's wife, you have to be above reproach. You can't give the other side any ammunition, and he has given the other side plenty of ammunition," Dershowitz said.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/12/18/de...ant-emails

(12-16-2017 08:05 PM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(12-16-2017 08:02 PM)solohawks Wrote:  It's amazing after all this investigation with many shaddy actions by the investigators they have nothing

Oh, but now they do have something. Illegally obtained "evidence" that still doesn't help their case.

Not only is it inadmissible as evidence but it could result in charges for those involved in the illegalities.

(12-18-2017 03:57 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(12-16-2017 08:05 PM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(12-16-2017 08:02 PM)solohawks Wrote:  It's amazing after all this investigation with many shaddy actions by the investigators they have nothing

Oh, but now they do have something. Illegally obtained "evidence" that still doesn't help their case.

Not only is it inadmissible as evidence but it could result in charges for those involved in the illegalities.

Fruit of the poisonous tree would apply. If I were Flynn if be PO'd that all of this is coming out after I made my plee and see what, if anything, could be done to give me a fair shake

Why did FBI allow HRC to choose which emails to delete but didn’t afford the Trump transition team the same opportunity?

Even the .gov emails.

Ohrgy!

(12-18-2017 06:14 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Why did FBI allow HRC to choose which emails to delete but didn’t afford the Trump transition team the same opportunity?

One investigation was about e-mails. The other involves a traitor working with a foreign government to enrich themselves. I'd have to guess the two would get different colors on the terror alert scale.

(12-18-2017 07:53 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 06:14 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Why did FBI allow HRC to choose which emails to delete but didn’t afford the Trump transition team the same opportunity?

One investigation was about e-mails. The other involves a traitor working with a foreign government to enrich themselves. I'd have to guess the two would get different colors on the terror alert scale.

Your verb is incorrect. Bill and Hillary had already enriched themselves.

(12-18-2017 07:53 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 06:14 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Why did FBI allow HRC to choose which emails to delete but didn’t afford the Trump transition team the same opportunity?

One investigation was about e-mails. The other involves a traitor working with a foreign government to enrich themselves. I'd have to guess the two would get different colors on the terror alert scale.

Oh You mean Obama paying Iran with wheel barrows full of unmarked cash to let Them continue Their Nuke program while letting Hezbola deal narcotics to America ?

(12-18-2017 10:32 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 07:53 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 06:14 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Why did FBI allow HRC to choose which emails to delete but didn’t afford the Trump transition team the same opportunity?

One investigation was about e-mails. The other involves a traitor working with a foreign government to enrich themselves. I'd have to guess the two would get different colors on the terror alert scale.

Oh You mean Obama paying Iran with wheel barrows full of unmarked cash to let Them continue Their Nuke program while letting Hezbola deal narcotics to America ?

I thought he was referencing the Clinton Foundation.