Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 114

Thread: Mueller enpannels grand jury

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Sapidus View Post
    Wow. The delusion, desperation and blame shifting is very strong with this one.
    How many lobotomies have you had? There is no discussing anything with you. If someone doesn't agree with you, you write them off, as insane, delusional, illiterate, lacking in comprehension, etc.. Do yourself a favor, and just listen/read. You might have an awakening. I have said many times on this forum...be careful what you wish for. You're welcome.
    ​​Like I said. JMO, yo! - Roman
    If you ignore the trolls, they starve. - Wishbone

  2. #22
    Registered User
    Member Since
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    22,279
    Quote Originally Posted by vraiblonde View Post
    AND I'll tell you something else:

    If you consume any news other than progbot brainwasher crap, you know that the dominoes are falling on Hillary Clinton and she doesn't get immunity just because she's a loser. All sorts of corruption and collusion is coming out and pretty much anyone she's every "done business with" is sweating hard.
    There is no reason for anyone involved with Hillary to sweat hard. She IS immune.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Hijinx View Post
    There is no reason for anyone involved with Hillary to sweat hard. She IS immune.
    That is the truth. Hill will never be nabbed. But, I think all the people that will be called to testify in the "Trump investigation' should be able to take the 5th, too. All's well that ends well, or something like that.
    ​​Like I said. JMO, yo! - Roman
    If you ignore the trolls, they starve. - Wishbone

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Hijinx View Post
    There is no reason for anyone involved with Hillary to sweat hard. She IS immune.


    Ugh... Hillary and sweat in the same sentence.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Sapidus View Post
    Seems it's widening every day instead Of winding down as some people thought. I would think this means they are discovering more to investigate.
    In fairness to Trump, I don't think it means there are necessarily finding more evidence of collusion as much as it means the investigation is broadening its scope. This is what Bill Clinton complained bitterly of during his term and lead to his impeachment. An independent investigator was appointed to look into his land dealings in Arkansas. In the end after a 5 year investigation, the investigation did not really come up with anything on the land transactions. There was some gray areas, but no smoking gun. However, the investigation resulted in his impeachment when Linda Tripp went to the investigator Kenneth Starr told and told him about an affair Clinton had with an intern--which while very shady is not illegal. The investigator then told worked with Paula Jones attorneys to set up Clinton. Since he was being sued by Paula Jones he had to answer some questions under oath for that case and they threw in a question about Monica Lewinsky to set him up. Depositions are public records so if he admits the allegations they have a scandal and if denies they have him for perjury. So they basically set him up for action that while shady was legal.

    I dislike Trump, but I do think he has a point about the widening scope of the investigation. I didn't think it was fair exactly how the Whitewater investigation expanded on Clinton and I don't think its necessarily fair to Trump if the Russia Collusion investigation broadens.

  6. #26
    I guess to clarify, I am not talking about the subpoenas issued in regards to the meeting with the attorney with Russian links as much as the investigation of Trump's business dealings when I talk about the investigation widening its scope beyond its original objectives.

  7. #27
    Registered User
    Member Since
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    22,279
    Quote Originally Posted by philibusters View Post
    In fairness to Trump, I don't think it means there are necessarily finding more evidence of collusion as much as it means the investigation is broadening its scope. This is what Bill Clinton complained bitterly of during his term and lead to his impeachment. An independent investigator was appointed to look into his land dealings in Arkansas. In the end after a 5 year investigation, the investigation did not really come up with anything on the land transactions. There was some gray areas, but no smoking gun. However, the investigation resulted in his impeachment when Linda Tripp went to the investigator Kenneth Starr told and told him about an affair Clinton had with an intern--which while very shady is not illegal. The investigator then told worked with Paula Jones attorneys to set up Clinton. Since he was being sued by Paula Jones he had to answer some questions under oath for that case and they threw in a question about Monica Lewinsky to set him up. Depositions are public records so if he admits the allegations they have a scandal and if denies they have him for perjury. So they basically set him up for action that while shady was legal.

    I dislike Trump, but I do think he has a point about the widening scope of the investigation. I didn't think it was fair exactly how the Whitewater investigation expanded on Clinton and I don't think its necessarily fair to Trump if the Russia Collusion investigation broadens.
    Pretty sure Fairness never entered Muellers mind.

  8. #28
    Registered User Midnightrider's Avatar
    Member Since
    Aug 2004
    Location
    NU
    Posts
    11,089
    Quote Originally Posted by philibusters View Post
    I guess to clarify, I am not talking about the subpoenas issued in regards to the meeting with the attorney with Russian links as much as the investigation of Trump's business dealings when I talk about the investigation widening its scope beyond its original objectives.
    exactly, any subpoenas issued regarding DJs meeting with the Russians is with in the scope of Muellers appointment.
    "once in a while you can get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right"-TGD

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Midnightrider View Post
    Do you need a bib?
    "Never let the old man in." - Clint Eastwood quoting an old friend

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Midnightrider View Post
    It means he has found evidence of at least one crime and is going to present it to determine if charges should be brought.
    Given we have no details, have you considered it could be they found something on Hillary or Obama, et al...........?
    "Never let the old man in." - Clint Eastwood quoting an old friend

Members who have read this thread: 59

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search:     Advanced Search
Search HELP

| Home | Help | Contact Us | About somd.com | Privacy | Advertising | Sponsors | Newsletter |

| What's New | What's Cool | Top Rated | Add A Link | Mod a Link |

| Announcements | Bookstore | Cafe | Calendar | Classifieds | Community |
| Culture | Dating | Dining | Education | Employment | Entertainment |
| Forums | Free E-Mail | Games | Gear! | Government | Guestbook | Health | Marketplace | Mortgage | News |
| Organizations | Photos | Real Estate | Relocation | Sports | Survey | Travel | Wiki | Weather | Worship |