Quote:Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted foreign citizens for trying to influence the American public about an election because those citizens did not register as a foreign agent nor record their financial expenditures to the Federal Elections Commission. By that theory, when will Mueller indict Christopher Steele, FusionGPS, PerkinsCoie, the DNC and the Clinton Campaign? Mueller’s indictment against 13 Russian trolls claimed their social media political activity was criminal because: they were foreign citizens; they tried to influence an election; and they neither registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act nor reported their funding to the Federal Elections Commission.

First, if Mueller’s theory is correct, three things make Steele a criminal: first, he is a foreign citizen; second, he tried to influence an election, which he received payments to do (including from the FBI itself); and third, he neither registered as a foreign agent nor listed his receipts and expenditures to the Federal Election Commission. Also, according to the FBI, along the way, Steele lied…a lot, while the dossier he disseminated contained its own lies based on bought-and-paid for smears from foreign sources reliant on rumors and innuendo.

Second, if Mueller’s theory is correct, three things make FusionGPS a criminal co-conspirator: it knew Steele was a foreign citizen; it knew, and paid, Steele to influence an election; and it knew, and facilitated, Steele neither registering as a foreign agent nor reporting his funding from the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign to the Federal Election Commission.

Third, if Mueller’s theory is correct, then three things make PerkinsCoie a potential target: it knew Steele was a foreign citizen; it knew, and paid, Steele to influence an election; and it knew, and facilitated, Steele neither registering as a foreign agent nor reporting his funding from the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign to the Federal Election Commission, by disguising its receipt of payments from the Clinton campaign as a “legal expense.”

Keep reading:

https://lawandcrime.com/opinion/does-mue...is-steele/

We know there's a lot of culpability by the Demons but I still haven't seen any action on bringing them up for charges. I want bling for these people in the form of bright, shiny handcuffs...which I haven't seen...and doubt we will see.

As delicious as that would be, unfortunately I believe it's a far reach.

I don't see it either, of course. Heck, if they can't bring themselves to indict Hillary after she committed a federal offense with her basement server, they're not going to go after any of them for this.

But, the story still drives home the point of all of this. As is usual for hypocrite leftists, whatever they accuse the right of doing, they themselves have probably already been doing.

They can't help themselves. It's who they are.

Wait, if we are Globalist isn’t Russian tactics just “free speech”?

What is all this “Protectionism”?

Well it is a republican DOJ, a republican FBI with a republican Prez. Why isn't he screaming louder and louder about Hillary? So why wouldn't they go after all those bad, bad people?

Maybe it's because they all know what they did was dirty politics, but not illegal. Is there a chance? Maybe they are afraid if they look to hard they'll uncover some dirt on Trump?

It is interesting though. You all seem to have enough evidence to bring an indictment. Can't understand why no one else sees it.

(02-17-2018 02:04 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Wait, if we are Globalist isn’t Russian tactics just “free speech”?

What is all this “Protectionism”?

Tom said Obama exercised his free speak in the last Israeli election. And used US tax money.

(02-17-2018 04:20 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Well it is a republican DOJ, a republican FBI with a republican Prez. Why isn't he screaming louder and louder about Hillary? So why wouldn't they go after all those bad, bad people?

Maybe it's because they all know what they did was dirty politics, but not illegal. Is there a chance? Maybe they are afraid if they look to hard they'll uncover some dirt on Trump?

It is interesting though. You all seem to have enough evidence to bring an indictment. Can't understand why no one else sees it.

Well the same could be from the impeachment crew.

(02-17-2018 04:29 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(02-17-2018 04:20 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Well it is a republican DOJ, a republican FBI with a republican Prez. Why isn't he screaming louder and louder about Hillary? So why wouldn't they go after all those bad, bad people?

Maybe it's because they all know what they did was dirty politics, but not illegal. Is there a chance? Maybe they are afraid if they look to hard they'll uncover some dirt on Trump?

It is interesting though. You all seem to have enough evidence to bring an indictment. Can't understand why no one else sees it.

Well the same could be from the impeachment crew.

Ah yes. The famous tit for tat rebuttal. Impressive.

(02-17-2018 04:20 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Well it is a republican DOJ, a republican FBI with a republican Prez. Why isn't he screaming louder and louder about Hillary? So why wouldn't they go after all those bad, bad people?

Maybe it's because they all know what they did was dirty politics, but not illegal. Is there a chance? Maybe they are afraid if they look to hard they'll uncover some dirt on Trump?

It is interesting though. You all seem to have enough evidence to bring an indictment. Can't understand why no one else sees it.

You really don't have a clue, do you?

Sorry thought you wanted to have an adult discussion. Silly me.

(02-17-2018 04:20 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Well it is a republican DOJ, a republican FBI with a republican Prez. Why isn't he screaming louder and louder about Hillary? So why wouldn't they go after all those bad, bad people?

Maybe it's because they all know what they did was dirty politics, but not illegal. Is there a chance? Maybe they are afraid if they look to hard they'll uncover some dirt on Trump?

It is interesting though. You all seem to have enough evidence to bring an indictment. Can't understand why no one else sees it.

What, exactly, was dirty politics from GOP Party or Trump campaign?

Anything that dares compare to that of the DNC, VFNN, clintoon camp cabal? Collaborating, colluding with foreign agents, passing off debate questions in advance, fixing the primaries against the Bern, etc.

(02-17-2018 04:38 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-17-2018 04:20 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Well it is a republican DOJ, a republican FBI with a republican Prez. Why isn't he screaming louder and louder about Hillary? So why wouldn't they go after all those bad, bad people?

Maybe it's because they all know what they did was dirty politics, but not illegal. Is there a chance? Maybe they are afraid if they look to hard they'll uncover some dirt on Trump?

It is interesting though. You all seem to have enough evidence to bring an indictment. Can't understand why no one else sees it.

What, exactly, was dirty politics from GOP Party or Trump campaign?

Anything that dares compare to that of the DNC, VFNN, clintoon camp cabal? Collaborating, colluding with foreign agents, passing off debate questions in advance, fixing the primaries against the Bern, etc.

I'm not sure if you really aren't following me or are just being obnoxious.
I am in no way defending Hillary. I do not like her, I do not think she is a very moral person. Having said that, my question remains. If she crossed the line during the campaign, why is a heavily republican leaning Government not investigating. Yes, she is guilty of dirty tricks, but did she cross a line?
Now, please don't be so disingenuous to suggest Trump's campaign did not engage in similar tactics.

(02-17-2018 06:38 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  

(02-17-2018 04:38 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-17-2018 04:20 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Well it is a republican DOJ, a republican FBI with a republican Prez. Why isn't he screaming louder and louder about Hillary? So why wouldn't they go after all those bad, bad people?

Maybe it's because they all know what they did was dirty politics, but not illegal. Is there a chance? Maybe they are afraid if they look to hard they'll uncover some dirt on Trump?

It is interesting though. You all seem to have enough evidence to bring an indictment. Can't understand why no one else sees it.

What, exactly, was dirty politics from GOP Party or Trump campaign?

Anything that dares compare to that of the DNC, VFNN, clintoon camp cabal? Collaborating, colluding with foreign agents, passing off debate questions in advance, fixing the primaries against the Bern, etc.

I'm not sure if you really aren't following me or are just being obnoxious.
I am in no way defending Hillary. I do not like her, I do not think she is a very moral person. Having said that, my question remains. If she crossed the line during the campaign, why is a heavily republican leaning Government not investigating. Yes, she is guilty of dirty tricks, but did she cross a line?
Now, please don't be so disingenuous to suggest Trump's campaign did not engage in similar tactics.

You keep repeating that as though this entire last year has been about donks versus pubs. IT HAS NOT BEEN THAT AT ALL.

It's been about inside-the-beltway career politicians versus Trump....donks and pubs alike versus Trump. Try to understand that.

And if by "a heavily republican leaning government" you mean the FBI and DOJ (as you alluded to earlier) you're wrong there too. Yes the FBI and DOJ have new heads, but everyone directly beneath them when they took over were for the most part Obama-era appointees or again, those who had a vested interest in seeing DC stay exactly the way it was. The FBI, DOJ, and State Departments are still chock-a-block full of people who leaned heavily to the left. How do we know that? It's being revealed to us each and every day.

(02-17-2018 07:01 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(02-17-2018 06:38 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  

(02-17-2018 04:38 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-17-2018 04:20 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Well it is a republican DOJ, a republican FBI with a republican Prez. Why isn't he screaming louder and louder about Hillary? So why wouldn't they go after all those bad, bad people?

Maybe it's because they all know what they did was dirty politics, but not illegal. Is there a chance? Maybe they are afraid if they look to hard they'll uncover some dirt on Trump?

It is interesting though. You all seem to have enough evidence to bring an indictment. Can't understand why no one else sees it.

What, exactly, was dirty politics from GOP Party or Trump campaign?

Anything that dares compare to that of the DNC, VFNN, clintoon camp cabal? Collaborating, colluding with foreign agents, passing off debate questions in advance, fixing the primaries against the Bern, etc.

I'm not sure if you really aren't following me or are just being obnoxious.
I am in no way defending Hillary. I do not like her, I do not think she is a very moral person. Having said that, my question remains. If she crossed the line during the campaign, why is a heavily republican leaning Government not investigating. Yes, she is guilty of dirty tricks, but did she cross a line?
Now, please don't be so disingenuous to suggest Trump's campaign did not engage in similar tactics.

You keep repeating that as though this entire last year has been about donks versus pubs. IT HAS NOT BEEN THAT AT ALL.

It's been about inside-the-beltway career politicians versus Trump....donks and pubs alike versus Trump. Try to understand that.

I do understand that. But what I see are beltway repubs saying how much they detest Trump, then towing the line. All of his legislative accomplishments came from Repub support. The belt way repubs carry his water and many of his "drain the swamp" nominees are as bad as or worse than what just left. How does this recently passed budget happen without full Repub support? A debt nightmare and it seems only Paul had the balls to vote against.
Show me how anything is different in Washington. How do the beltway professionals really fight Trump? I don't see it.

And if by "a heavily republican leaning government" you mean the FBI and DOJ (as you alluded to earlier) you're wrong there too. Yes the FBI and DOJ have new heads, but everyone directly beneath them when they took over were for the most part Obama-era appointees or again, those who had a vested interest in seeing DC stay exactly the way it was. The FBI, DOJ, and State Departments are still chock-a-block full of people who leaned heavily to the left. How do we know that? It's being revealed to us each and every day.

Quote:I do understand that. But what I see are beltway repubs saying how much they detest Trump, then towing the line. All of his legislative accomplishments came from Repub support. The belt way repubs carry his water and many of his "drain the swamp" nominees are as bad as or worse than what just left. How does this recently passed budget happen without full Repub support? A debt nightmare and it seems only Paul had the balls to vote against.
Show me how anything is different in Washington. How do the beltway professionals really fight Trump? I don't see it.

The last 6 months have been dramatically different than his first 6 months in case you hadn't noticed. I think many are today toeing the line as you say because he's making believers out of them slowly but surely. As well, they're looking at the polls back home showing their supporters want them to support this president. Having said that, I'm betting any sign of weakness and they'll be on him like a pack a wolves on a wounded alpha male.

For Trump's part, he's learning that governing will require some give and take on his part. I hope he can maintain his focus without the swamp swallwing him as it has so many over the years. He's surpassed my wildest dreams with what he's accomplished. I was concerned that the left's claim that he would govern as a liberal and so far that has proved horribly off the mark. His Supreme court appointment alone was enough to keep me happy for years. I hope there are others to come.

Don't assume that because he got some pub support at the end of year 1 that they'll be on board from here on out. As long as he's winning, yes, things take a turn for the worse and I guarantee you see the real DC once again.

I don't have any problem with this. I agree. I even get that as long as he's promoting an agenda you guys support you'll overlook his personal shortcomings.

Think I'll step back from the ledge and just watch for a while.

Thanks for a real explanation.

(02-17-2018 08:45 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  I don't have any problem with this. I agree. I even get that as long as he's promoting an agenda you guys support you'll overlook his personal shortcomings.

Think I'll step back from the ledge and just watch for a while.

Thanks for a real explanation.

As you're aware, all of us are flawed, politicians especially, though I don't consider Trump a typical politician as he certainly hasn't been a career politician. I've got no problem overlooking his personal shortcomings as I've got many of my own.

What has won me over to the man like no other president I've supported in the past is that he's actually worked hard at trying to honor his campaign promises. Again, his supreme court nomination was a 500 foot home run for me.

Now, having said that, I'm most disappointed that one of the big ones, he's let slide.....that specifically of revisiting the Hillary server scandal. I wanted to see him push congress and the DOJ to reinvestigate that affair since I'm convinced that you or I would be in jail had we done the same as she. What may happen is that once the IG's report comes out, he'll have the ammo he needs to make that happen. Time will tell.

If you're against Trump and what he's doing, that's fine. We're here to debate these issues. Just try to keep the facts sorted out from opinion. Everyone's entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

(02-17-2018 06:38 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  

(02-17-2018 04:38 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-17-2018 04:20 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  Well it is a republican DOJ, a republican FBI with a republican Prez. Why isn't he screaming louder and louder about Hillary? So why wouldn't they go after all those bad, bad people?

Maybe it's because they all know what they did was dirty politics, but not illegal. Is there a chance? Maybe they are afraid if they look to hard they'll uncover some dirt on Trump?

It is interesting though. You all seem to have enough evidence to bring an indictment. Can't understand why no one else sees it.

What, exactly, was dirty politics from GOP Party or Trump campaign?

Anything that dares compare to that of the DNC, VFNN, clintoon camp cabal? Collaborating, colluding with foreign agents, passing off debate questions in advance, fixing the primaries against the Bern, etc.

I'm not sure if you really aren't following me or are just being obnoxious.
I am in no way defending Hillary. I do not like her, I do not think she is a very moral person. Having said that, my question remains. If she crossed the line during the campaign, why is a heavily republican leaning Government not investigating. Yes, she is guilty of dirty tricks, but did she cross a line?
Now, please don't be so disingenuous to suggest Trump's campaign did not engage in similar tactics.

I guess not following you, though those that know me best likely call me obnoxious as well. But, that admission on a Sunday A.M. aside,

I'd be fascinated by these "similar tactics" engaged by the GOP or Trump campaign.

Best I could tell, near the entire GOP was/is anti-Trump almost as much as jorge soros himself.

Funny, the great unwashed masses saw things a bit different.

(02-17-2018 09:02 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(02-17-2018 08:45 PM)Old Dominion Wrote:  I don't have any problem with this. I agree. I even get that as long as he's promoting an agenda you guys support you'll overlook his personal shortcomings.

Think I'll step back from the ledge and just watch for a while.

Thanks for a real explanation.

As you're aware, all of us are flawed, politicians especially, though I don't consider Trump a typical politician as he certainly hasn't been a career politician. I've got no problem overlooking his personal shortcomings as I've got many of my own.

What has won me over to the man like no other president I've supported in the past is that he's actually worked hard at trying to honor his campaign promises. Again, his supreme court nomination was a 500 foot home run for me.

Now, having said that, I'm most disappointed that one of the big ones, he's let slide.....that specifically of revisiting the Hillary server scandal. I wanted to see him push congress and the DOJ to reinvestigate that affair since I'm convinced that you or I would be in jail had we done the same as she. What may happen is that once the IG's report comes out, he'll have the ammo he needs to make that happen. Time will tell.

If you're against Trump and what he's doing, that's fine. We're here to debate these issues. Just try to keep the facts sorted out from opinion. Everyone's entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

Ok as you all know I'm pretty new to this. I get very confused by posters (myself included) who intermingle opinions with facts, then throw in personal shots.
Another problem I see is most want people to back up claims that appear on the surface to be self evident. Case in point: I mentioned the repubs engaged in dirty politics during the campaign. Dunk then asks for specific evidence. Do I need to really take this seriously? Are we not all willing to acknowledge things that are self evident? Does anyone who s trying to be honest want to argue or suggest the repubs don't engage in dirty politics? This really frustrates me. I start thinking this is not a serious place of discussion, just a place where people go to score points. I then become as snarky as I can. I really do want to learn and understand the conservative point of view. I'm having a hard time getting past the vitriol.