The president thinks the distinction between justice and politics is for suckers


If he is not careful, the spectacle of an unhinged, unprincipled president treating the DOJ as his personal law firm may yet persuade voters, or even members of Congress, that Trump does not belong in the White House.


BS on a shingle. Do you “honestly” think that the DOJ is serving the public interest by the shenanigans we KNOW it’s engaged in during the Obama years and since the election in 2016? If you do, then you’re not worth a bucket of spit…or my time.


Mueller’s counsel is “special,” but that doesn’t mean “above reproach.” Why must we assume he’s honest, not politically motivated and working for America’s best interests? What does he have to show for a year’s work at great expense? If he found anything, it surely would have leaked.

And what was Mueller’s mandate? What was he tasked with investigating? There seems to be some difficulty in rounding up the document tha’s supposed to state it. By law, he MUST have s specific charge to investigate. Was that fraudulent Democrat dossier used to obtain FISA warrants? Is his investigation politically motivated?

And if the Democrats deem it acceptable for the Obama FBI to have secretly placed spies in the Republican party campaign, is it OK for the Trump FBI to secretly place spies in Democrat party campaigns? Hmm?


Here’s a link to Chuck Grassley’s letter to Rod Rosenstein, essentially asking the same question.

The law providing for the appointment of a “Special Prosecutor” specifies (in Mr. Grassley’s words) “a criminal predicate” and " that investigation or prosecution by a U.S. Attorney’s office or litigating unit of DOJ would present a conflict of interest or other extraordinary circumstance. "

No crimes (to my knowledge) are specified in the appointment order; it is predicated on a counterintelligence investigation based on a made up dossier carefully fed to a complicit media through multiple channels to make it seem as if it came from more than one source.

Mueller’s mandate, in my opinion, is pretty simple: bring down Trump by hook or by crook, by any means, fair or foul. High ranking members of the intelligence community, FBI and DOJ all participated in an illegal operation to smear Trump as compromised by the Russians, and felt totally safe to do so since Hillary was the ‘inevitable winner’ of the election and they would be in her good graces. Now they have no choice except to bring down the duly elected president or be called to account for their corruption.


I think you guys are being partisan hacks. Let’s say you’re the FBI and you’re looking at the 2016 election. You know Putin is actively trying to interfere with the election to help Trump. You look at the Trump campaign and see them bringing in just about every shady character with slimy Kremlin ties they can get their hands on. Trump gets elected, and then fires the FBI director over “that Russia thing” and because Comey wouldn’t agree to let one of Trump’s shady Kremlin contacts off the hook for criminal activity. Now you’re the DOJ looking at all of this…of course the objective move here is to investigate. If this were Obama or Clinton you guys would be screaming bloody murder about all of this, let’s get real. Trump is dirty, and not looking into all of this shady activity would be a violation of their oath to defend the country.


That’s just 2 quick examples of the investigating authority and the research firm that compiled the fake dossier that started the investigation being “shady characters with slimy Kremlin ties”. Imagine that…

Not that you’re objective about this, but what crime is being investigated? Ken Starr’s investigation at least began with an actual criminal predicate: real estate fraud. Best I can tell, no criminal conduct is identified in Mueller’s appointment order, as is required by law.


I don’t understand your point about the dossier. It’s just a fact that Trump was surrounding himself with shady characters with sketchy Kremlin ties.


Let’s say that you’re looking at the 2016 election from the perspective of a highly partisan FBI “leadership.” The FBI has NEVER “known” that Putin was “actively trying to interfere in our election,” at least not more actively than the Russians have ALWAYS done so…and CERTAINLY not to protect the opponent of their good friend and business partner, Hillary Rodham Clinton.


What “shady characters with sketchy Kremlin ties” are those, J. Anderson? International businessmen have ALL done business in Russia and dozens of other countries. After all, until very recently, Russia was the principal supplier of natural gas to virtually ALL of Eastern Europe.


It was made up bs contracted by Fusion GPS (whose owner has slimy Kremlin ties) while that company was working for the Clinton campaign.

I think J.J. Sefton summed it up nicely this morning: “It all boils down to our national law enforcement and intelligence leadership, with the help of an unknown number of underlings, used their power under the cover of national security, to infiltrate the campaign of a presidential candidate with the express purpose of sabotaging it. And I will add, more than likely at the behest or minimally with the approval of both the outgoing President of the United States and the opposition candidate.”


The corruption of the Obama administration and Clinton campaign is a shock to no one. I still don’t see what any of that has to do with the brute fact that Trump was surrounding himself with shady characters with slimy Kremlin ties, or the point that it’s understandable to be concerned about these facts in an election where we know (again, for a fact) that Putin was attempting to influence the election in Trump’s favor. This was not just all fake made up stories…they’re accepted bi-partisan facts. The FBI would have to be crazy not to look into that.


Who is it who’s “accept[ing] bi-partisan ‘facts’?” Where is the EVIDENCE that Putin attempted to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump? We’ve seen NOTHING except left-wing accusations that this even happened…let alone with the help of anyone IN the Trump campaign. The DNC CLAIMS that their servers were hacked by Russians, but wouldn’t allow the FBI to EXAMINE their servers–and the FBI never bothered to INSIST.

Try to remember: It wasn’t Trump who was friendly towards the Russians. HE didn’t approve the sale of 20% of our uranium to Russian interests. HE didn’t get $145 million in donations to HIS phony “foundation” from the Russians. HIS spouse didn’t receive half a million dollars for a 35-minute speech in Moscow, followed by a private meeting with Putin. To believe that Putin favored Trump over Hillary is counterintuitive in the extreme.


Wasn’t Comey fired upon recommendation from both Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein?

I have never understood this. If Putin could have voted in our 2016 election, is there any chance he would have wanted Trump, the America-first candidate, to win?

He already had a working relationship with Hillary from the uranium deal, he knew she could be bought by donating to her fraudulent charity, and he knew she was extremely lax with security, so he could have access to many top secret documents. What more could a Russian leader want in an American President? She’s arguably a Communist soul-mate.

However, there is a theory that says Putin would want to help Trump because he “knew” there was no chance he could win, but he wanted the election close so there would be more rancor. But even if that’s true, why would he tip his hand by telling Trump about his efforts?


Nobody in Russia had any effect on the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election.

The Democrats corrupted their own Primary to insure that the most corrupt and morally bankrupt candidate in US history to win a major Party nomination was selected as their horse.

This morally bankrupt, corrupt candidate had no charisma, no agenda and no broad appeal with the American people; the Democrats were convinced that she could win based solely on political spending and voter fraud.

She got beat by a political novice who was opposed by both major Parties, the news media and the entertainment industry in spite of spending a small fraction of money on his campaign effort as his opponent.

Since Trumps nomination and sequential election victory there has been millions spent worldwide trying to find evidence that he commits crimes, abuses women, cheats on his taxes, acts in a Racist manner or at this point they would settle for a video of him J-walking across the street; the result of this rabid effort with millions spent and the best investigative journalists in the world working tirelessly for over 2 years is… Not a damned thing.

They can’t even get a porn actress who takes money to be immoral to keep her story straight.

Trump is clean, the Democrats are corrupt and the only organization who helped Trump to victory was the Democrat National Party.

Now they can only spew lies through their Leftist tears while trying to blame anyone or anything but themselves for the fruit of their own labors.


Where in the heck are you getting this “fact”?

I generally don’t like links, because they lead to endless and pointless “link wars” . . . i.e. my link is better than your link. But in this case, I’d like to see your basis.


Haven’t seen J here in a while. Licking his wounds from his last foray into the land of the sane? J doesn’t post many links other than obscure bloggers and worn out philosophers but his talking point all seem to come from CNN, NYT, WP or MSNBC.


In May I asked why Putin would want to support Trump in the 2016 elections. Nobody was able to come up with an adequate explanation. Today (OK, yesterday) our President castigated Germany for brokering a multi-billion-dollar deal with Russia to supply them with gas and oil and it was Russia against whom NATO was originally designed to protect Germany and other European NATO members. If he were successful in killing that deal, Putin’s Russian economy will collapse, so Putin WANTED President Trump to win that election??? Only in someone’s fever dreams.


Yes, because he’s supporting other right-wing ____-first candidates in Europe for the same reason:
to undermine Atlanticism consensus. Make them too embroiled to act against him.

Disrupt sanctions by the EU, disrupt the ability for NATO to coordinate against Russian encroachments. Give his own country wiggle room, either through funding patsies like in Bulgaria, or just people who will stir up trouble within the alliance, so that Russia can make further Socio-political gains in its backyard in peace.

I’m not saying Trump has done that, but that is Putin’s overall strategy. Back people who have what even sounds like isolationist, Euro-skeptic attitudes.


You’re filling in details on the rancor I mentioned. Though “embroiled” and “disrupt” are good words too.

But the pertinent rhetorical question for Muller remains.


Putin said he wanted Trump to win because it would send the media in our country to crazy town, which it did; why would any serious leader not take advantage of our wholly incompetent and juvenile media?

If I was Putin I would throw more logs on the fire every time I saw it starting to dim, these idiots are hilarious to watch and to a foreign observer it would look like it could hinder the Trump agenda; it won’t but in the past our politicians have been complete cowards toward the media so I assume foreign leaders still think the media has some influence here.