AAG Rod Rosenstein Threatened Members of Congress in January and again Today.

a reply to: Xcathdra

If there is specific evidence Trump "colluded" with Russia to interfere in our elections then produce the required evidence to lawfully justify the investigation into him and name the potential crimes in the authorization letter as required by law.

Last I heard Trump is not the target of any investigation.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xcathdra

If there is specific evidence Trump "colluded" with Russia to interfere in our elections then produce the required evidence to lawfully justify the investigation into him and name the potential crimes in the authorization letter as required by law.

Last I heard Trump is not the subject of any investigation.

Then why is he used as the basis for the SC?
Why does the SC want to interview Trump?
Why do Democrats keep claiming smoking gun evidence of Trump colluding with Russia?

You seem to be overlooking what Comey started prior to his termination that the authorization memo mentions in section B.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Then why is he used as the basis for the SC?

I guess you'll have to show me where he is, because I missed that part.

Why does the SC want to interview Trump?

Why did the SC interview anyone? Because he may be able to provide information of relevance to the investigation. Were all of the witnesses who have testified targets of the investigation?

Why do Democrats keep claiming smoking gun evidence of Trump colluding with Russia?

Because they don't like Trump? Why did Trump keep claiming that Obama was not a US citizen? Neither opinion matters much, does it?

a reply to: Xcathdra

I am guessing that RR trip up to Canada was and is to figure a way out of this mess with other five eyes . They have really dug a deep hole and are only inches away from solid bed rock ...tick tock

Phage, do you own a vehicle? Vehicles are known to speed, and to be driven under the influence of drugs and or alcohol. So, ergo you are guilty of speeding and drunk driving, because you have a vehicle. This legal, right. So now everyone may call you a drunk driver. There is evidence that this is true, you cannot refute it.


(for those not of Phages intellect, because a crime may or may not have been committed does not mean everyone is guilty)

a reply to: Xcathdra

See that hostile intentions part?
Yeah. That...

a reply to: Xcathdra

Law Enforcement can't just wake up one morning and randomly pick a person out of the phone book and launch an investigation into that person in hopes of finding a crime.

Let us know when the above happens will ya chief?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xcathdra

If there is specific evidence Trump "colluded" with Russia to interfere in our elections then produce the required evidence to lawfully justify the investigation into him and name the potential crimes in the authorization letter as required by law.

Last I heard Trump is not the target of any investigation.

That is accurate, until hes the target of the investigation.

a reply to: Sillyolme

here ya go


People that were not guilty of any crime


the name is apt

a reply to: Xcathdra

Write your congressman then. I'm sure they will be able to tell you that the letter of the law is being followed.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

See that hostile intentions part?
Yeah. That...

and in this case there was a hostile intent to gain info on Trump to use against him / other officials.

so yeah...

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

Law Enforcement can't just wake up one morning and randomly pick a person out of the phone book and launch an investigation into that person in hopes of finding a crime.

Let us know when the above happens will ya chief?

What part of my post confused you? Nothing you posted even remotely relates to my post.

The ball is back in your court Ms. lost and confused.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

Write your congressman then. I'm sure they will be able to tell you that the letter of the law is being followed.

Actually my Congressman doesnt support the Mueller witch hunt so there is nothing I need to write him about..

Better luck next time.

a reply to: Xcathdra

(Xcathdra) You raised that irrelevant point and I responded to it. 

(Phage) Yes, you did. And you seemed to understand the context at the time

Does this context clear this statement up?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

(Xcathdra) You raised that irrelevant point and I responded to it. 

(Phage) Yes, you did. And you seemed to understand the context at the time

Does this context clear this statement up?

Try again and explain exactly what it is you are trying to point out. If you read the entire exchange you would see why your comment makes no sense.

a reply to: thedigirati

OMG
I think I lost IQ points just reading this.

a reply to: thedigirati

See above.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Because the Russians hacked the DNC then made friends with everyone on the trump team. Should we just ignore that because of #ing trumps feelings?
And there has been plenty of evidence of THAT!

a reply to: Sillyolme

so, you're in negative numbers now?

a reply to: Xcathdra


I don't get confused .

Your understanding is highly suspect though.