President Trump Issues a Blunt Assessment of our U.S. Department of Justice.

a reply to: Sheye

That’s an opinion and not a fact.

Reality is not a matter of opinion. Facts are facts. How you react to them is where opinion arises.

We are both entitled to our opinions. Let’s agree to disagree.

Donald Trump has always been a con artist. His presidency is his crowning grift. You are being played.

As far as I see, he hasn’t damaged the country.... all this witch hunt aside.

On the contrary, he has done his best to undermine the institutions that have made this country great. He has also alienated our allies and encouraged our enemies.

The ecomomy is booming.. low unemployment... negotiating better trade deals for the country.

The economy is continuing the recovery begun under the Obama administration. Trump has thrown gasoline on that fire, which means that when the business cycle turns, it will turn precipitously. Trump walked away from trade agreements that took years to negotiate in our favor. He will not be able to make any further agreements because no-one trusts him.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Sheye

No the correct word is harassed. Eleven investigations with nothing to show does not equate with government protection. It's the very definition of harassment They just couldn't find any crimes. Because there are none.
Here's a dose of reality... Trump still hasn't assigned that special prosecutor to put Hillary in jail. Why oh why has he not? Huh? Huh? Why? Because he can't? Yes that's correct... Because he cant. Because she hasn't done anything.

*applause*

originally posted by: Sheye
a reply to: angeldoll

She has literally been harassed by the United States Government, and still is.

You actually mean protected by the US gov. The bogus harassment was just a cover, so they could appear that they are justly doing their jobs. No.. harrassed is not a word I would use... more a bogus display of misplaced justice.

lol. When I want you to define what I mean, and when the day comes that I wish to use the words you use, you'll be the first to know okay?

a reply to: randomtangentsrme

Here's the deal on Clinton. He was impeached in the House on two counts, one of perjury, and one of obstruction of Justice. On February 12, 1999, the five-week impeachment trial of Bill Clinton came to an end ... with the Senate voting to acquit the president on both articles of impeachment: ... so charged in the House, acquitted in the Senate.

Ever wonder why if he was "impeached' he remained in the WH, and remained President?

This is why. In the end, he was acquitted.

This has to concern every sane American!

It wasn't a few wayward top-level people going "off the rails" to keep Donald Trump from becoming President. There was an actual program/initiative, activated from the very top.

Another Revelation from the Trump Admin: twitter.com...

originally posted by: carewemust

This has to concern every sane American!

It wasn't a few wayward top-level people going "off the rails" to keep Donald Trump from becoming President. There was an actual program/initiative, activated from the very top.

Another Revelation from the Trump Admin: twitter.com...

Evidence, please.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

You are not following the logic....

....the evidence that proves if there was a hack (vs an "inside job") was handed over to someone other than the FBI. Chain of custody is destroyed. The analysis that was provided has had holes shot in it, suggesting that CrowdStrike made stuff up and created an evidence trail. None of that would apply had the FBI not abrogated their responsibility in investigating interference in our election WHILE IT WAS HAPPENING. Instead, they let some 3rd party destroy evidence.

So, with the evidence destroyed, there is no way to say who did what, or what was actually done. Anyone saying such is just taking the official narrative (which at this point cannot be proven) at face value.

I don't know better than the president, that is why i won't say if it was a hack or not. THere, now you follow? If not, im giving up.

BTW, FOS means "full of #".

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

huh, in my world of nutrition science FOS means fructo-oligo sacharride😉

Im afraid its no use, Silly continues to say its law that Sessions recused himself from all things Russian, yet its not, nor has she provided a single citation this entire thread.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

You are not following the logic....

Nope. Not your logic, anyways.

....the evidence that proves if there was a hack (vs an "inside job") was handed over to someone other than the FBI. Chain of custody is destroyed.

That's not true. Crowd Strike was an agreed upon 3rd party to do the forensic study on the DNC server. The FBI works with and uses 3rd party contractors all the time. Chain of evidence isn't an issue with Crowd Strike, that's all your imagination. www.crowdstrike.com...

I find it stunning that even after President Trump admits the evidence points to Russia hacking the DNC server, people like you stick to your delusional hoax theory.


Mueller Indicts 12 Russian Officers for Hacking Dems in 2016 www.thedailybeast.com...

The officers, members of the Russian foreign-intelligence agency GRU, were all named as having hacked the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Democratic National Committee, and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Report: Dutch spies caught Russian hackers on tape[/exx] www.apnews.com...:-Dutch-spies-caught-Russian-hackers-on-tape

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Right...the server that the DNC wouldnt let their own FBI look at, after the supposed hack? Wonder why, I also wonder what connection Crowd Strike has with either attorneys for, or otherwise Clinton related interests?

a reply to: BlueJacket


As far as cyber security goes, I believe that the DNC felt they were in better hands with Crowd Strike than the FBI. At that time, they didn't know that Russia was doing the hacking. They didn't know WIKILEAKS was about to release a trove of their documents.

I'm fairly certain that victims of crime are not obligated to turn over their sensitive and private documents to the FBI.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I want to remain civil, but it raises my hackles when in one thread you folks totally support the FBI, particularly when it is potentially injurious to the present administration, yet when it comes to protecting your own...by no means should the FBI be privy to our private material.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yet you see no possible issue with turning the evidence over to a private organization versus the FBI, when its covering something as important as potential interference in a National Election?


Are you and the DNC really going to try and maintain that Crowd Strike had better resources than the FBI?

a reply to: BlueJacket


One the other hand, James Comey did throw Hillary under the bus just days before the election. "You folks" can be called equally hypocritical, claiming Deep State corruption in the entire INTEL community, including the FBI. And now Trump is even saying Director Wray is corrupt!

a reply to: Irishhaf


The federal government had contracted Crowd Strike before the DNC hack.

CrowdStrike, The DNC’s Security Firm, Was Under Contract With The FBI medium.com...

TYT can report that at the same time CrowdStrike was working on behalf of the DNC, the company was also under contract with the FBI for unspecified technical services. According to a US federal government spending database, CrowdStrike’s “period of performance” on behalf of the FBI was between July 2015 and July 2016. CrowdStrike’s findings regarding the DNC server breach — which continue to this day to be cited as authoritative by everyone from former FBI Director James Comey, to NBC anchor Megyn Kelly — were issued in June 2016, when the contract was still active.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Comey was just trying to cover his own ass. He should of thrown the book at Hillary, any honest person knows this.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: BlueJacket


One the other hand, James Comey did throw Hillary under the bus just days before the election. "You folks" can be called equally hypocritical, claiming Deep State corruption in the entire INTEL community, including the FBI. And now Trump is even saying Director Wray is corrupt!

Anybody who crosses him is 'corrupt". It's downright scary. The FBI, CIA, DOJ, the press, Cohen, you name 'em. Either corrupt or mentally deficient so says he.
We better watch out Sookie, if we weren't such small potatoes we might be next!

wooooo

I was thinking earlier about him saying how awesome Kim is, that he was able to step into a leadership position at such a young age. But the truth is, a five year old could be in that position as long as he was permitted to kill anybody that crossed him. Sorta Trump, sans murder.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

and lol, cyber security and the DNC? I mean talk about an oxymoron.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

So you are saying the FBI does not have its own cyber division?

When it comes to something that could possibly effect a national election ( I would say that falls under National Security) it should NEVER Be handled by contractors, for reasons of national security.

IF the DNC had handed it to the FBI directly and they handed it to crowd strike then the bleatings of the leftist would make more sense, instead the DNC chose to hand it to a contractor rather than FBI agents.

a reply to: angeldoll

Trump respects the hardline dictators, he loves little Kim, Putin and the Chinese leader whatever his name is, he would love to follow in their footsteps, abolish the system and implement his own brand of never ending leadership. It's concerning that his base would think that is winning if he were to do so... Strange times we live in...