It sure looks like there was collusion between the Trump operation and Russia

[BBthrives]

https://cdn.drawception.com/images/panels/2012/4-20/5aXpg294Bf-2.png

^^^^^https://www.midlifebachelor.com/images/articleimages/crazywoman.jpg

 

[BBthrives]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DNan08CUMAA5OZB.jpg

 

[daimoniotica]

Its all bullshit till it goes to court

The biggest obstacle to that is the legal question of whether Mueller has any power at all to seek indictment(s) against the Tool:

Nearly two decades ago, then-independent counsel Kenneth Starr asked me to evaluate whether a federal grand jury could indict a sitting president — in that case, Bill Clinton. My answer — that such an action would be permissible — was recently unearthed in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from the New York Times, and it may have relevance for a new special counsel and the current president.

My fundamental conclusion remains intact: Nothing in the Constitution would bar a federal grand jury from returning charges against a sitting president for committing a serious felony. But — and this is a big but — differences between the Clinton situation then and the investigation of President Trump now mean that where Starr had the authority to indict Clinton if he chose, Mueller most likely does not possess the same power.

Ronald Rotunda is a professor at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law.

The president can be indicted — just not by Mueller
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...eb7d3a2d304_story.html?utm_term=.f00680e4d060

 

[Wats_butthole]

I hope they lock up crooked trump too. The snowball has begun!

 

[Hypoxia]

The biggest obstacle to that is the legal question of whether Mueller has any power at all to seek indictment(s) against the Tool:

The president can be indicted — just not by Mueller
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...eb7d3a2d304_story.html?utm_term=.f00680e4d060

I see the opinion as speculative, and it omits possible charges by state prosecutors, which a president cannot pardon their way out of. Mueller *might* be preparing indictments against Tromp himself, or *might* be (among other things) listing impeachable offenses for Congress to consider.

Let's think nasty. Mueller knows he can't indict a sitting president on federal charges. He probably knows this Congress isn't likely to impeach. How else to proceed? Bring coordinated state and federal charges against Tromp's family. Would Jared flip on DJT to avoid wasting the rest of his wasted life in prison? Would Ivanka turn on Daddy to stay free?

 

[BotanyBoy]

OMG "collusion" to not support HRC and shit on the DNC...how dare they!!

LOL

I love how (D)'s are all bent when suddenly, after fucking Putin over repeatedly, he backs the other side, like it's some kind of travesty and violation of our national sanctity and sovereignty!!!

Yes that the same sanctity and sovereignty that the globalist shits hate in the first place.

Jesus christ in a bucket...can the hypocrisy and bullshit get deeper? You better believe it folks.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Posted elsewhere but worth repeating here:

Lawyer Exposes “Single Most Important Fact” in Mueller’s Investigation That No One is Talking About 'Collusion' is not a legal term here. 'Conspiracy' and "aiding and abetting" are the keys.

Exactly correct, which is why it is highly unlikely Abramson's "aiding and abetting" theory will fly. Here are the first two reasons.

U.S. Attorneys » Resources » U.S. Attorneys' Manual » Criminal Resource Manual » CRM 2000 - 2500 » Criminal Resource Manual 2401-2499

2474. Elements Of Aiding And Abetting
The elements necessary to convict under aiding and abetting theory are

1. That the accused had specific intent to facilitate the commission of a crime by another;

2. That the accused had the requisite intent of the underlying substantive offense;

3. That the accused assisted or participated in the commission of the underlying substantive offense; and

4. That someone committed the underlying offense.

United States v. DePace, 120 F.3d 233 (11th Cir. 1997); United States v. Chavez, 119 F.3d 342 (5th Cir. 1997); United States v. Powell, 113 F.3d 464 (3d Cir. 1997); United States v. Sayetsitty, 107 F.3d 1405 (9th Cir. 1997); United States v. Leos-Quijada, 107 F.3d 786 (10th Cir. 1997); United States v. Stands, 105 F.3d 1565 (8th Cir.), cert. denied (October 6, 1997) (No. 96-9541); United States v. Pipola, 83 F.3d 556 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, __ U.S. __, 117 S.Ct. 183, 136 L.Ed.2d 122 (1996); United States v. Chin, 83 F.3d 83 (4th Cir. 1996); United States v. Lucas, 67 F.3d 956, 959 (D.C. Cir. 1995); United States v. Spinney, 65 F.3d 231 (1st Cir. 1995); United States v. Spears, 49 F.3d 1136 (6th Cir. 1995).
To convict as a principal of aiding and abetting the commission of a crime, a jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly and intentionally aided and abetted the principal(s) in each essential element of the crime. United States v. Bancalari, 110 F.3d 1425, 1429 (9th Cir. 1997). The government must prove that the defendant associated with the criminal venture, purposefully participated in the criminal activity, and sought by his actions to make the venture successful.

https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-2474-elements-aiding-and-abetting

And....

2476. 18 U.S.C. 2 Is Not An Independent Offense
While aiding and abetting might commonly be thought of as an offense in itself, it is not an independent crime under 18 U.S.C. § 2. That statute provides no penalty, and only abolishes the distinction between common law notions of "principal" and "accessory." United States v. Kegler, 724 F.2d 190, 200 (D.C. Cir. 1983). Under it, the acts of the perpetrator become the acts of the aider and abettor and the latter can be charged with having done the acts himself. Id. at 200-01. An individual may be indicted as a principal for commission of a substantive crime and convicted by proof showing him to be an aider and abettor. Id. The indictment need not specifically charge a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2. Id. An aiding and abetting instruction may be given in a case where the indictment does not allege violation of the aiding and abetting statute. Id. An aider and abettor of a crime may be tried and convicted even though the principal is not tried, convicted or identified.

More specifically since what we're talking about here is "aiding and abetting" the "commission of a crime," it is incumbent to ask what the crime WAS and WHO committed it.

The obvious answers are "ESPIONAGE" and "RUSSIA." Except for prosecutable criminal purposes, countries don't commit espionage. For prosecutable criminal purposes, AGENTS acting at the direction of those countries and with full knowledge of their illegal acts commit espionage. And they must either be arrested and convicted (for those without diplomatic immunity), or (in the case of those with diplomatic immunity) the same facts could be used to substantiate a criminal case against any non-immunized "co-defendant" conspiring with the immunized suspect. The point is, the crime of espionage deals with individuals and those individuals must at the very least be identified and shown to have the necessary mental intent and physical preparation and acts necessary to have at least conspired to or attempted the crime.

This gets particularly sticky wherein a foreign agent is doing something illegal (working to defeat a political opponent at the specific direction of a foreign government) as opposed to an isolated Russian national NOT working at the direction of the Russian government merely providing dirt on a candidate of such a general nature that passing the information along does not violate any laws. Not to mention that members of the Trump campaign working to defeat Hillary Clinton cannot be held criminally liable for legally doing the same thing that the Russian government might illegally be trying to do (through individual agents, of course).

Whether specific Trump campaign associates "should have known" or "been suspicious of" an illegal connection between THOSE HYPOTHETICAL foreign nationals and the Russian government is a reasonable debate. Legitimately assigning criminal liability to those campaign associates based on federal aiding and abetting laws coupled with whatever criminal activity the DOJ would like to accuse specific foreign agents of is, however, a whole other matter of remotely questionable probability.

This is criminal law, folks, and there is a whole shit load more to it than Abramson's 30-point checklist suggests. In fact, if you read it carefully it points directly to some of that "shit load" that still waits to be substantively established.

 

[DrDelirium]

So, I think it would be really great if Trump gets jailed, even though the Russia business is a crock, because, well, he's an asshole bilionaire and I don't like asshole billionaires. And I really don't mind if it sets a precedent for jailing asshole billionaires just because they're asshole billionaires. Or just because they're billionaires, if 'asshole' is too vague a notion to have legal weight. However, the cloud that comes with this bit of silver lining is that Pence would then be president. If the Dems and liberals out there think that Pence is even a tad bit less dangerous than Trump they are really, seriously, not paying attention. He has better manners and he knows when to keep his mouth shut, but he is everything that liberals want to believe Trump is, and more: he's also a Dominionist Christo-fascist. So be careful what you wish for.

 

[nowisthetime]

He's just another typical thug Repug politician. Surprise, surprise. Stevie Wonder could have saw that coming.

https://ametia.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/executive-branch-criminal-activities-by-presidential-administration.jpg?w=640&h=434

https://images.dailykos.com/images/348556/large/Crimes_by_Admin.png?1484100297

https://images.dailykos.com/images/349120/large/Crimes_by_Admin_Party_comp.png?1484243322

So tell me, why is it that Repugs (like the ones on here) preach to being holier than thou, calling an innocent urban kid with a hoodie a thug, but accept the highest form of thuggery from a President because HE has an R in front of his name?

Why are Repugs such hypocrites of the highest order?

These bigots spent the last eight years dragging a fine president who is Saint Theresa compared to the current despot in office.

Perhaps it's their projection?

 

[Hypoxia]

Why are Repugs such hypocrites of the highest order?

Born that way.

CONSERVATIVES

•"A CONSERVATIVE is a man who is too cowardly to fight and too fat to run." --Elbert Hubbard
•"A CONSERVATIVE is one who admires RADICALS a century after they're dead." --Leo C. Rosten
•"CONSERVATIVES say government doesn't work, and then get elected and prove it." --P.J. O'Rourke
•"All CONSERVATISM is based upon the idea that if you leave things alone you leave them as they are. But you do not. If you leave a thing alone, you leave it to a torrent of change." --G.K. Chesterton
•"CONSERVATIVE: a statesman who is enamoured of existing evils, as distinguished from the LIBERAL, who wishes to replace them with others." --Ambrose Bierce
•"Reform is affirmative, CONSERVATISM negative; CONSERVATISM goes for comfort, reform for truth." --Ralph Waldo Emerson
•"The CONSERVATIVE is a businessman's candidate, hovering around the status quo like a sick kitten around a hot brick." --William A. White
•"A CONSERVATIVE is one who believes that nothing should be done for the first time." --Alfred E. Wiggam
•"CONSERVATIVES are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are CONSERVATIVES." --John Stuart Mill
•"We CONSERVATIVES do not believe it necessary, and even if it were, we should oppose it." --Quentin Hogg
•"A CONSERVATIVE is someone who makes no changes and consults his grandmother when in doubt." --Woodrow Wilson
•"Suppose you were a heartless bastard, and suppose you were a CONSERVATIVE, but, .....I repeat myself." --Mark Twain
•"A CONSERVATIVE is a man who will not look at the new moon out of respect for that ancient institution, the old one." --Douglas Jerrold
•"A shiver ran through the CONSERVATIVES, frantically looking for a spine to run up." --Oliver Brown

ULTRA-CONSERVATIVES

•"A FASCIST is someone who kills because he can't argue." --Anon.
•"FASCISM is Capitalism plus murder." --Upton Sinclair
•"FASCISM is corporatism." --Benito Mussolini
•"FASCISM means war." --John Strachey
•"The ANARCHIST is responsible only to himself; the FASCIST is responsible only to the state." --Anon.
•"FASCISM is a religion; the twentieth century will be known in history as the century of FASCISM." --Benito Mussolini
•"A FASCIST is any person whose politics elevates the importance of one's nation, or Fatherland, above all humanist values such as television and Spring Break." --Anon.

 

[doowdniw]

I can't imagine Papadopoulis didn't run his mouth. It would be... highly unlikely.

He would have to in order to get the plea deal. The real question is who else did he get to run theirs?

 

[Hypoxia]

He would have to in order to get the plea deal. The real question is who else did he get to run theirs?

"Welcome, General Flynn. Please have a seat. Comfortable? Good. See this picture?"

[waves photo of muscular, tattooed, nonwhite guy]

"His name is Jabar and he'll be your cell mate for the next forty years. Or maybe your son's cell mate. They say his penis is quite large."

[leaves photo on desk]

"Now, have you anything you'd like to tell us, anything to expand on what Mr Papadopoulis told us?"

 

[SpeareChucker]

Mueller is an idiot.
We gave him and open-ended mandate.
He picked a virtual mafia of left-wing lawyers.
We have given him virtual unlimited funds to get Trump.
And now all I see is Democrats proclaiming a great victory over weak applesauce.
This was a victory for the great orange orangutan in that none of the charges had anything to do with the fucking election. Mueller should be fired, not by Trump, but by leading Democrats who were just baited and switched.

 

[Richard_P_Feynman]

The wait for political theater is beginning to pay dividends.

But the most daunting disclosure for the Trump camp may be the comment by attorney Aaron Zelinsky on Mueller's team that the Papadopoulos question was part of a "road map" of a much larger case.

Linky.

 

[adrina]

From the article:

He also delivers a hint that he may not be done with Manafort -- including evidence showing that Papadopoulos emailed the campaign manager with the news that Russia wanted to meet with Trump.

He bolstered the case for collusion -- in contradiction of the White House claim that there is nothing to answer for -- by including an FBI statement saying that, as late as August 2016, a campaign superior told Papadopoulos to go ahead with a trip to Russia to meet officials.

 

[Richard_P_Feynman]

I find it amusing that even ahead of the political fallout from these latest revelations of Mueller's investigation, Trump's approval rating has hit new lows.

Trump's approval rating as measured by the daily Gallup poll has plummeted to 33%.

 

[adrina]

I find it amusing that even ahead of the political fallout from these latest revelations of Mueller's investigation, Trump's approval rating has hit new lows.

Trump's approval rating as measured by the daily Gallup poll has plummeted to 33%.

Saw that. I've been watching the Gallup numbers. The problem is, of course, that the republican base are still lockstep behind him pretty much. I understand why - they've been rewarded for it. But is there going to come a time when Trump becomes toxic? To the democrats and independents he already is, but the republicans are still at 90% support of everything he does. At least from what I've seen.

 

[Wats_butthole]

He's just another typical thug Repug politician. Surprise, surprise. Stevie Wonder could have saw that coming.

https://ametia.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/executive-branch-criminal-activities-by-presidential-administration.jpg?w=640&h=434

https://images.dailykos.com/images/348556/large/Crimes_by_Admin.png?1484100297

https://images.dailykos.com/images/349120/large/Crimes_by_Admin_Party_comp.png?1484243322

So tell me, why is it that Repugs (like the ones on here) preach to being holier than thou, calling an innocent urban kid with a hoodie a thug, but accept the highest form of thuggery from a President because HE has an R in front of his name?

Why are Repugs such hypocrites of the highest order?

These bigots spent the last eight years dragging a fine president who is Saint Theresa compared to the current despot in office.

Perhaps it's their projection?

Obama is the cleanest president ever. No wonder repuglicans hate him so much, he just wasn't corrupt enough.

 

[BBthrives]

^^^^^VoxCunt, Gallup is FAKE

They always show bad shit vs Repoz cause they are afraid of DUMZ

HO-BS sued em


SO THEY LIE n MAKE SHIT UP

https://www.google.com/search?q=gal...ome..69i57.13597j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8


Keep it up VoxCunt

 

[adrina]

I am very amused.

 

[AngusBridie]

I am very amused.

Kinda makes me feel uncomfortable, like the kinda guy that keeps a jar a peanut butter hidden under his pillow in case he can lure some puppies to his room

 

[adrina]

Kinda makes me feel uncomfortable, like the kinda guy that keeps a jar a peanut butter hidden under his pillow in case he can lure some puppies to his room

Me being amused or the RWCJ meltdown on display?

 

[AngusBridie]

Me being amused or the RWCJ meltdown on display?

Yeah I meant BB, which is what I thought you were referring too..I guess I shouldn't assume you dont have him on ignore..

EDIT: Of course, you could probably still apply my analogy to your RWCJ posts.. I didn't trademark it or anything so feel free to take it. its my gift.

 

[adrina]

Yeah I meant BB, which is what I thought you were referring too..I guess I shouldn't assume you dont have him on ignore..

I did mean him. And I do have him on ignore. But he's so predictable it's easy to guess the nature of his response without clicking show post.

I assumed he called me a voxcunt, pointed to the Democrats in some form and tried to discredit the story.

He's a bit of a Johnny One Note

 

[AngusBridie]

Gotcha.. I was right on target then..