Rosenstein is no longer overseeing the Mueller probe per the DOJ

a reply to: Sillyolme

Saw it too, seems like the press who were cracked.

It was like 20+ Sperm trying to get in the egg just bashing away. But the Trump is left unfertilized.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: CharlesT

Not without cause. Thems the rules.

Citation required! Nothing stopping them from an armed escort everywhere he goes.

originally posted by: CharlesT

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: CharlesT

Not without cause. Thems the rules.

Citation required!

Nothing stopping them from an armed escort everywhere he goes.

There is no citation needed because it is false. Mueller is not a full time federal employee and as the Federal judge dealing with Manaforts case in the DC circuit stated Muller can be fired / removed at anytime by the AG / DAG without cause. Mueller serves at the direction of the DAG / AG.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: CharlesT

Not without cause. Thems the rules.

As you were wrong before so many times, ie the Presidential War Powers Act, you are wrong yet again.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Willtell

Did you see that presser today?
Not going to.... he has cracked.

If Trump had stepped down and jerked a knot in Acosta's tie, as he should have done, I'd say you were right.

originally posted by: Willtell

Now @JudgeNap making the case on @FoxNews for the Acting Attorney General to recuse himself from oversight of the Mueller investigation.

twitter.com...

Its clear whoever is running this anumal farm scenerio, the elction has heated up the war.


Someone some where is having, as they say

A REALLY BIG SHOW

Trump I hnestly believe is going to bug out and really do the crazy

Laughable, you are now so desperate that you quote Fox and the never Trumper Nap? Thanks for the belly laugh.

a reply to: BlackJackal

I think it’s safe to say that no one here arguing against you ever cared about law and order or ethics, it was just lip service. They care about power for their team. At any cost. America be damned.

The same people who threw a fit over the alleged conflict of interest by FBI agents investigating Trump have no problem with the obvious conflict of interest that Whitaker is. Hypocrite is too light of a word in this case.

At any rate, there are positives to this latest assault on democracy. It’s now obvious to everyone exactly who Trump followers are. No longer can the right wing act like stewards of law and order in this country, they are publicly and loudly trying to subvert it. In front of everyone. I don’t even think they realize the hole they are digging for themselves by arguing that a president should be above the law.

Just give it time. The thing about these subjective, invented realities they inhabit is that they always come crashing to the ground when actual reality intervenes.

That you can be assured of.

a reply to: underwerks

Why didnt you throw a fit with Rosensteins conflict of interest? He signed off on terminating Comey (the obstruction bull#) and he signed off on the FISA warrant.

You should not be lecturing anyone on conflict of interest.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: underwerks

Why didnt you throw a fit with Rosensteins conflict of interest? He signed off on terminating Comey (the obstruction bull#) and he signed off on the FISA warrant.

You should not be lecturing anyone on conflict of interest.

I’ve never lectured anyone on conflict of interest involving anything, that was you guys with every one of the hundred threads about Page and Strzok.

But I guess conflict of interest doesn’t matter to you as long as you think it benefits your team, right?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: underwerks

Why didnt you throw a fit with Rosensteins conflict of interest? He signed off on terminating Comey (the obstruction bull#) and he signed off on the FISA warrant.

You should not be lecturing anyone on conflict of interest.

Yes and he has the nerve to claim no trump supporters care about rule of law

When many of us have been consistent if trump broke the law he should be held accountable

Meanwhile they say someone having an opinion on mueller not having unlimited power being in charge is against the law

But had no problem at all with the conflicts of interest if lynch or Rosenstein

But trust him, it’s us who don’t care about the law!

originally posted by: Willtell
According to the FOX news, on-site legal expert Judge Napolitano, Trump is again nearing obstruction of Justice with this act since the acting AG has clearly stated a negative opinion on the Mueller probe.

This is a bad move...Trump is likely going to crack-up under pressure.

So they MUST appoint someone who has as much of a Trump/Russia boner as Mueller?

Why?

And how would they even assess that?

I think Trump has found a legit and legal solution to this ongoing witch hunt and the dems simply dont like it.

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: BlackJackal

I think it’s safe to say that no one here arguing against you ever cared about law and order or ethics, it was just lip service. They care about power for their team. At any cost. America be damned.

The same people who threw a fit over the alleged conflict of interest by FBI agents investigating Trump have no problem with the obvious conflict of interest that Whitaker is. Hypocrite is too light of a word in this case.

At any rate, there are positives to this latest assault on democracy. It’s now obvious to everyone exactly who Trump followers are. No longer can the right wing act like stewards of law and order in this country, they are publicly and loudly trying to subvert it. In front of everyone. I don’t even think they realize the hole they are digging for themselves by arguing that a president should be above the law.

Just give it time. The thing about these subjective, invented realities they inhabit is that they always come crashing to the ground when actual reality intervenes.

That you can be assured of.

It is safe to say, Give me a Break!

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Well we know how the last masacre worked out dont we?

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: underwerks

Why didnt you throw a fit with Rosensteins conflict of interest? He signed off on terminating Comey (the obstruction bull#) and he signed off on the FISA warrant.

You should not be lecturing anyone on conflict of interest.

I’ve never lectured anyone on conflict of interest involving anything, that was you guys with every one of the hundred threads about Page and Strzok.

But I guess conflict of interest doesn’t matter to you as long as you think it benefits your team, right?

You raised conflict of interest in the post I responded to. I pointed out that the left seems to ignore the conflict of interest that is Rosenstein and Mueller. As for my opinion I believe in Supremacy of law and the Constitution. I can say with certainty that the special counsel, his mandate and authority are based on an illegal act conducted by the Obama DOJ.

You have Mueller and Rosenstein both stating to the media that Trump is not under investigation.

So why is it so hard for Democrats to accept that fact or is Trump being lied to by RR and Mueller?

If a person is guilty then you investigate and prove your case. I do not accept shredding the Constitution simply because Democrats cant accept the fact Clinton was a shi**y candidate and lost the election.

If Democrats want to be credible then they need to get their politics out of our legal system and stop with this idiotic resistance bull#.

Based on your responses though I dont think you understand or care about our Constitution or laws since you seem wiling to throw them out the window based on your own political views instead off the law.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: underwerks

Why didnt you throw a fit with Rosensteins conflict of interest? He signed off on terminating Comey (the obstruction bull#) and he signed off on the FISA warrant.

You should not be lecturing anyone on conflict of interest.

I’ve never lectured anyone on conflict of interest involving anything, that was you guys with every one of the hundred threads about Page and Strzok.

But I guess conflict of interest doesn’t matter to you as long as you think it benefits your team, right?

How is it conflict of interest?

Whitaker saying mueller should be held to focusing I. Russia, which was what the public was told the investigation was about, is not a conflict of interest

A conflict would be if Whitaker is being looked at by mueller for a crime

If Whitaker was saying that trumo should not be held accountable for any crimes, that would be bad

If Whitaker said that mueller was the worst, he could smell mueller supporters at Walmart, and he needed an insurance policy in case the investigation didn’t go his way, that would be bad

He hasn’t done anything close

Meanwhile, seeing as how you think this is flaunting the law to have him there

I assume that if Pelosi or waters or Schiff or any of the Dems that clearly dislike trump in the house want an investigation of trumo, they must revise themselves because of a conflict of interests

And seeing as how they won’t, I am sure you will be on ats calling out every dem for not caring about the law

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Well we know how the last masacre worked out dont we?

Do share with us.

a reply to: carewemust

Yeah one where you put your queen and your bishops out front to guard the pawns. LOL

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: underwerks

Why didnt you throw a fit with Rosensteins conflict of interest? He signed off on terminating Comey (the obstruction bull#) and he signed off on the FISA warrant.

You should not be lecturing anyone on conflict of interest.

Yes and he has the nerve to claim no trump supporters care about rule of law

When many of us have been consistent if trump broke the law he should be held accountable

Meanwhile they say someone having an opinion on mueller not having unionized power being I charge is against the law

But had korbproblem at all with the conflicts of interest if lynch or Rosenstein

But trust him, it’s us who don’t care about the law!

That hypocrite street runs both ways.

If you don’t care about the ethics of Trump scuttling the investigation into himself you can’t claim to care about the ethics of the people who started that investigation.

It’s really that simple. Regardless of the mental gymnastics you do to try to make it into something else.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

Yeah one where you put your queen and your bishops out front to guard the pawns. LOL

The pawns are the first to get sacrificed to defend the King / Queen. Something we have seen first hand with Bill and Hillary's decades of crimes.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: underwerks

Why didnt you throw a fit with Rosensteins conflict of interest? He signed off on terminating Comey (the obstruction bull#) and he signed off on the FISA warrant.

You should not be lecturing anyone on conflict of interest.

Yes and he has the nerve to claim no trump supporters care about rule of law

When many of us have been consistent if trump broke the law he should be held accountable

Meanwhile they say someone having an opinion on mueller not having unionized power being I charge is against the law

But had korbproblem at all with the conflicts of interest if lynch or Rosenstein

But trust him, it’s us who don’t care about the law!

That hypocrite street runs both ways.

If you don’t care about the ethics of Trump scuttling the investigation into himself you can’t claim to care about the ethics of the people who started that investigation.

It’s really that simple. Regardless of the mental gymnastics you do to try to make it into something else.

Except for when that investigation is based on illegally obtained or manufactured evidence, as in this case. You seem to ignore the fact this crap was occurring back when Trump was a candidate and before he got the Republican nomination.