lol TSA inside job theory shot to .
Pootin says he didn't do nuttin.
BFF Trash says he got no help.
Trash's so-called Presidency is illegit, and he knows it.
You are such a gullible .
TSA has no thoughts on the subject. An actual confession to the court. Jesus.
It's a bull confession, and you fell for it.
got your dumbass triggered
moving the goalposts to a "bull confession"
Stupid cuck
The only thing you got me to do was read more than just the single tweet you posted. I see you have no comment on the rest of the conversation.
This narrative should have sailed after the you made this claim about her last time and she ended being vindicated.
Of course you have no honor, integrity, or intellectual honesty.
Sadly, Leftist Chris can't be bothered to read a box score correctly.
the Marshal of the Supreme Court
Susan Rice still a free woman.
So is Hillary.
Pizzagate still not a thing.
She’s bat
You have proven time and again, to be a really poor judge of sources and claims.
Do you still need me to explain Congressional overrides of presidential vetoes? You seemed to be having trouble with that earlier.
You still can't name one thing you have been right about?
If Flynn lied about his Russia contacts because they were deemed politically damaging, then Trump associates — and maybe the president himself — could get caught in a cover-up, even if what they're trying to hide isn't itself criminal.
If the facts bear that out, that could mean an obstruction of justice case. For months, news outlets have reported that Mueller is looking into whether Trump obstructed justice, which would amount to attempting to influence or subvert an ongoing investigation.
https://www.npr.org/2017/12/10/56892...in-to-take-shaObstruction could remain a possible endgame charge in a second scenario as well: If Flynn lied to shield a broader network of contacts between Trump associates, Russians and some nefarious actions they engaged in together.
Mueller's mandate from the Justice Department calls for him to investigate "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government" and the Trump campaign. In the popular parlance, that is often called the question of "collusion."
But even though "collusion" is a word that has been frequently bandied about, there is no such criminal charge. There is another C-word that could come into play — conspiracy.
One potential charge might be conspiracy to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, says Barak Cohen, a partner and litigation lead at Perkins Coie in Washington, D.C. Mueller's team could reach for that if there is evidence that Trump associates worked with Russia on the hacking of the Democratic National Committee or the emails of Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta.
"I think the special counsel would like to be able to charge them as co-conspirators to the hack or accessories after the fact," Cohen said. "It's the most credible and well-established legal theory."
If Trump associates weren't directly involved in the hacks but, say, knew about them and kept them hidden, then they could be charged as accessories after that fact, Cohen said.
Another theory proffered by John Norris and Carolyn Kenney for the liberal Center for American Progress is that Mueller might try to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
"More dominoes seem almost inevitable to fall given the special counsel's efforts to secure cooperating witnesses, and RICO statutes give him a powerful card to play if he wishes to do so," they wrote.
Or a more general conspiracy charge — to defraud the United States — could come into play, according to Eliason. Conspiracy of this sort means interfering with a lawful government function by deceit or dishonest means. In this case, prosecutors might try to prove the Trump camp had helped pervert the election.
"Of course, it depends on what the facts show," Eliason said, "but if one worked with the Russians to leak information and create false social media accounts and other such stuff, that could be conspiracy to defraud the U.S."
There is the money laundering thing. Probably the easiest to prove, but politically hard to justify.A third possible endgame is some sort of financial crime such as money laundering.
"My guess is this is all going to center around money — Russian money," Moore said.
Questions swirl around Trump's finances, partly because he has been opaque about his tax payments and partly because of charges by opponents that his businesses are the terminus of a money laundering scheme.
This aspect of the story got a boost after reports that Deutsche Bank had received a subpoena from Mueller's team for information on accounts held by people or en ies connected to Trump.
A lawyer for Trump, Jay Sekulow, denied those reports. The bank itself has made no comment. A Deutsche Bank spokesman told a German business newspaper that it cooperates with official inquiries but does not comment on individual cases.
Probing possible financial crimes dating back to before Trump took office and unrelated to Russia could be perilous politically. Trump's aides and Republicans have already argued that such a move would be a step too far for Mueller.
I generally agree Russia's efforts had little overall effect, but it wasn't for a lack of trying. The question is, whether we should put up with active efforts of an intelligence agency of a foreign government to attack the very idea of democracy itself. Western liberal democracy is under threat from authoritarian regimes. That is important.
There is also the matter that the sitting president appears to be actively compromised by that same government.
But then, predicting what Trump will, or won't do is sort of a mugs game. He never fails to do the stupidest possible, just when you think he can't be dumber.
The thing about a good theory though, it that it both explains facts, and you can make testable predictions.
Fact 1:
Russia attempted to hack our electoral process through a multi-pronged attack.
Fact 2:
Donald "look how big my inauguration crowd was" Trump has done nothing but deny this even happened, and has gone so far as to take the extraordinary effort to delegitimize his own intelligence services when they something did happen. He has shown no willingness whatsoever to hold Russia to account for anything.
Fact 3:
Donald Trump has a pattern of criticizing anyone, and everyone at the drop of a hat. Allies, enemies, courts, free press, nothing has escaped his remarks and twitter feed, except for ONE/(two) thing(s), and that is Russia/Putin
Fact 4:
Russian efforts appeared designed to support Trump
Fact 5:
Trump directly called on Russia publicly to support his efforts to get elected.
Fact 6:
Donald Trump has gone out of his way to meet and talk with Putin privately in person, with no American witnesses. This is the only leader with which he has acted in this manner.
Fact 7:
Donald Trump, when forced to sign a bipartisan sanctions bill passed with a veto-proof majority of both houses of Congress, issued a signing statement saying most of it was uncons utional, and that his administration would enforce it as little as possible.
Fact 8:
when Russia retaliated against sanctions by forcing the US embassy to cut staff, Trump thanked Putin for the action, making him look weak, something he has said one should never do, and is inconsistent with his past behavior in any other regard.
Theory:
Donald Trump has been compromised in some way. Either he directly owes them money, or they have evidence of some kind of him breaking the law or doing something he does not want others to know about.
This theory explains those facts, and is fully consistent with observed reality.
Prediction:
Donald Trump will take no action personally, nor will he criticize Russia or Putin in any way in regards to the Russian attack on our elections. He may allow his underlings to do some minor, inconsequential stuff, and if forced to do anything by Congress will drag his feet, if not outright attempt to veto any sanctions.
The way to falsify the theory:
1) Trump criticizes Putin/Russia (good)
2) Trump orders/takes action that materially harms Russian interests (definitive)
Bull conspiracy theories fail very often because either: they cannot be falsified, or they directly conflict with observed reality. This theory can be falsified, and does not conflict with what we know as fact.
Donald Trump is unpredictable except for Russia.
xylophone
RandomGay is the new Boutons
There are currently 10 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 10 guests)