Liberal Forum

Misty » 13 Jun 2017 11:18 am » wrote: It's all about the money with this bunch.
Always follow the money.

Misty » 13 Jun 2017 11:18 am » wrote:It's all about the money with this bunch.
Always follow the money.

Even the reliably liberal Chris Matthews of MSNBC said: “The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers, you might say, is that somewhere along the line in the last year the president had something to do with colluding with the Russians … to affect the election in some way. And yet what came apart this morning was that theory.”

....The major media....are in bed with his Democratic critics, while dismissing the lies of Democrats past and present.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... ves-liars/

Misty » 13 Jun 2017 11:18 am » wrote:It's all about the money with this bunch.
Always follow the money.

BREAKING – Comey’s SECOND Meeting With Loretta Lynch Reveals He Confronted Her About Political Interference
Cristina Laila

Fired FBI Director, James Comey had a SECOND meeting with former Attorney General Loretta Lynch where he confronted her about her election interference.
According to the report, when confronted,

Loretta Lynch stared at Comey with a ‘steely silence that lasted for some time’ before she asked him to leave her office.

Circa News with exclusive scoop:

Ex-FBI Director James Comey has privately told members of Congress that he had a frosty exchange with Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch last year when he confronted her about possible political interference in the Hillary Clinton email investigation after showing Lynch a sensitive document she was unaware the FBI possessed, according to sources who were directly briefed on the matter.

In multiple private sessions over the last few months, Comey has told lawmakers about a second, later confrontation with Lynch shortly before the email probe was shut down.
Comey told lawmakers in the close door session that he raised his concern with the attorney general that she had created a conflict of interest by meeting with Clinton’s husband, the former President Bill Clinton, on an airport tarmac while the investigation was ongoing.

During the conversation, Comey told lawmakers he confronted Lynch with a highly sensitive piece of evidence, a communication between two political figures that suggested Lynch had agreed to put the kibosh on any prosecution of Clinton.

Comey said “the attorney general looked at the document then looked up with a steely silence that lasted for some time, then asked him if he had any other business with her and if not that he should leave her office,” said one source who was briefed.

As TGP previously reported, in an explosive revelation, former FBI Director James Comey has admitted that former Attorney General Loretta Lynch attempted to suppress/reframe the investigation into former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s illegal private email server.

AG Lynch purportedly directed Comey to immediately stop referring to the Hillary probe as an “investigation” or a “probe” and, instead, refer to it as a much more gentle “matter”.

TGP also reported that ultra liberal Dem Senator Dianne Feinstein is even calling for an investigation
into whether or not Loretta Lynch tried to help Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election:

“I think we need to know more about that,”

Feinstein told host Brianna Keilar on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
“And there’s only way to know about it, and that’s to have the Judiciary Committee take a look at that,” Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/06 ... erference/

Misty » 09 Jun 2017 2:17 pm » wrote:Once again 45 throws one of his own people under the bus.

One of the striking moments in the Senate hearing was Comey’s account of his odd response to former Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s request that he speak of the Department of Justice’s investigation of the Clinton corruption charges as a “matter,” and not an “investigation.” In this instance, Comey himself was at risk, so he did not let the matter lie silent. He flat out asked her whether her request was an order and only made the requested statement when he was assured that it was. His own explanation was that “this isn’t a hill worth dying” for.

Comey’s conduct was more damning than his flip remark lets on. Lynch ordered Comey to make a false statement about a matter of intense public interest and concern. Lynch’s foolish request “endeavored,” to use the statutory term, to tamp down the FBI investigation in order to create some political breathing room for the Clinton campaign. Comey should have told Lynch that he was not going to participate in a transparent ruse, period. Perhaps both he and Lynch were guilty of obstruction of justice.

His unwillingness to do so casts a harsher light on Comey’s effort to go slow on, and then abort, the Clinton e-mail investigation, when her destruction of government emails received on her unauthorized server constituted a textbook form of obstruction. Comey’s own July 5, 2016 statement, however, butchered a law that imposed criminal responsibility for the unauthorized use of a server, either intentionally or with gross negligence. His response was that while “we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws
governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”


But the intention to violate the law is no part of the government’s case:
all that matters was that she knew that she used an unauthorized server, a point beyond dispute. And there is no distinction between “gross negligence” on the one hand and “extreme carelessness” on the other
. Comey insisted at that time that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.” Indeed, any claim that the evidence against Clinton was weak on intent is only credible because of Comey's legal errors. In fact, the requisite mens rea in the Clinton case was indisputable. But, more to the point, why would any reasonable prosecutor then choose to turn Trump’s one remark into a criminal case of obstruction where the intent evidence is, to say the least, subject to multiple interpretations?


Ironically, a possible case for obstruction of justice might be brought against Comey himself.
http://www.hoover.org/research/cagey-mr-comey

Misty » 09 Jun 2017 2:17 pm » wrote:Once again 45 throws one of his own people under the bus.

The Sessions hearing shows who’s really colluding with Russia
By Marc A. Thiessen June 14 at 10:34 AM
According to the U.S. intelligence community, Russia’s objectives in meddling in the 2016 election included not only hurting Hillary Clinton’s chances but also undermining “public faith in the U.S. democratic process,” “impugning the fairness of the election” and calling into question “the U.S.-led liberal democratic order.” If the spectacle of the past few months is any indication, Russian leader Vladi­mir Putin is certainly succeeding in these latter goals.

And here is the great irony: Those who are falsely claiming that Trump was under FBI investigation for collusion with Moscow are, in fact, the ones inadvertently colluding with Putin to undermine American democracy.

Case in point is the campaign of McCarthyite character assassination on display in the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing Tuesday. No doubt Putin was smiling as Attorney General Jeff Sessions was forced to rebut what he correctly called “appalling and detestable” accusations that he colluded with the Russians and lied to the Senate.

For months, Democrats (a.k.a. “The Resistance”) have been spinning the false narrative that President Trump was under FBI investigation to call into question the validity of his presidency. In March, Democrats used it as a pretext to argue that Trump did not have the legitimacy to fill a Supreme Court vacancy. Senate Democratic leader Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) declared in a floor speech that the Senate should not vote on Neil Gorsuch’s nomination because Republicans “stopped a president who wasn’t under investigation” from filling the seat. Two days later, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said the same thing, declaring, “The FBI has revealed that the sitting president of the United States is under investigation. And it raises a really, I think, important question and that is whether or not a president who is under investigation by the FBI ought to be ramming through a Supreme Court nominee that would have a lifetime appointment.”

The media gleefully echoed these false claims. The day before Comey testified, CNN blared: “In testimony, Comey will dispute President Trump’s blanket claim that he was told he wasn’t under investigation.” In fact, Comey said precisely the opposite. When Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho) asked, “While you were director, the president of the United States was not under investigation. Is that a fair statement?” Comey replied: “That’s correct.” Even then, CNN was not willing to concede its error, declaring in a so-called “correction” that “Comey does not directly dispute that Trump was told multiple times he was not under investigation” (emphasis added).

No, Comey did not fail to “directly dispute” it, he directly confirmed it. The CNN story — and its non-correction correction — was “fake news.”

...Not only that, Comey also testified that Trump never tried to get him to stop the probe into Russia’s election meddling, which Comey explained was a separate matter from the FBI’s investigation of disgraced former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Not only did Trump not ask Comey to stop the probe, the former FBI director told Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), “He went farther than that. He said, and if some of my satellites did something wrong, it’d be good to find that out.” Rubio pressed Comey, asking whether he was testifying that Trump effectively said, “Do the Russia investigation. I hope it all comes out. I have nothing to do with anything Russia. It’d be great if it all came out, people around me were doing things that were wrong.” Comey replied, “That was the sentiment he was expressing. Yes, sir.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... 47cb8f993c

Termin8tor » 09 Jun 2017 5:04 pm » wrote:Secret meeting. Reporters not allowed.
FBI keeping people away.
To talk about his grandchildren!
She and Clinton were obstructing justice, like Clinton did when he was president.
Lynch was a corrupt political hack, and so is Comey.

Misty » 07 Jun 2017 5:22 pm » wrote:Never, not once, you filthy liar.
I said his campaign was under investigation.
If you don't post the quote where I said that HE was under investigation, that will be an admission that you are a degenerate liar.

Special counsel is investigating Trump for possible obstruction of justice, officials say.

The special counsel overseeing the investigation into Russia’s role in the 2016 election is interviewing senior intelligence officials as part of a widening probe that now includes an examination of whether President Trump attempted to obstruct justice, officials said.

The move by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III to investigate Trump’s conduct marks a major turning point in the nearly year-old FBI investigation, which until recently focused on Russian meddling during the presidential campaign and on whether there was any coordination between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

Investigators have also been looking for any evidence of possible financial crimes among Trump associates, officials said.

Trump had received private assurances from then-FBI Director James B. Comey starting in January that he was not personally under investigation.

Officials say that changed shortly after Comey’s firing.

Termin8tor » 12 Jun 2017 1:20 pm » wrote: Liar.

Misty » 12 Jun 2017 1:48 pm » wrote: Republicans might have been horrified, but he was impeached on two counts, which were perjury and obstruction of justice regarding the Paula Jones case.
There were no other charges included in the articles of impeachment.
That's just a fact.

Misty » 14 Jun 2017 6:46 pm » wrote: Were there reporters present when 45 threw everyone out of the room so he could talk to Comey all alone?

Hey guess what Puss?
Now I CAN and WILL say that 45 himself is under investigation and if you don't like it, you can blow it out your ***.

Misty » 14 Jun 2017 6:46 pm » wrote:Hey guess what Puss?
Now I CAN and WILL say that 45 himself is under investigation and if you don't like it, you can blow it out your ***.

that for months lied that Trump is under investigation?

Misty » 14 Jun 2017 6:46 pm » wrote:Hey guess what Puss?
Now I CAN and WILL say that 45 himself is under investigation and if you don't like it, you can blow it out your ***.

Misty » 14 Jun 2017 6:46 pm » wrote:Hey guess what Puss?
Now I CAN and WILL say that 45 himself is under investigation and if you don't like it, you can blow it out your ***.

Misty » 14 Jun 2017 6:46 pm » wrote:Hey guess what Puss?
Now I CAN and WILL say that 45 himself is under investigation and if you don't like it, you can blow it out your ***.

Termin8tor » 13 Jun 2017 12:16 pm » wrote:Do you have one single shred of evidence of wrongdoing by Trump or his associates?
I'll wait.

Termin8tor » 13 Jun 2017 12:16 pm » wrote:And if money is so evil, why didn't you write one single word about the 10's of millions of dollars the Clinton's and their corrupt cronies got from Russia?

Termin8tor » 15 Jun 2017 6:54 am » wrote:Given that he was never under investigation, what is he obstructing?
Can you cite one single shred of evidence that he obstructed anything?
No, just lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie.....

Mueller Seeks to Talk to Intelligence Officials, Hinting at Inquiry of Trump

WASHINGTON — Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel examining Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election, has requested interviews with three high-ranking current or former intelligence officials, the latest indication that he will investigate whether President Trump obstructed justice, a person briefed on the investigation said on Wednesday.

Mr. Mueller wants to question Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence; Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the head of the National Security Agency; and Richard Ledgett, the former N.S.A. deputy director.

Misty » 15 Jun 2017 1:56 pm » wrote: Haven't you been paying attention?
Looks like he was trying to obstruct the investigation into Michael Flynn.

Misty » 15 Jun 2017 1:56 pm » wrote:Mueller Seeks to Talk to Intelligence Officials, Hinting at Inquiry of Trump

Misty » 15 Jun 2017 1:47 pm » wrote: When it comes to money, the Clintons were pikers compared to this bunch.