|
Post by atl1979 on Dec 18, 2018 17:21:37 GMT -6
Let's be honest. It has been exposed. It's all out there. And if the media was honest and doing their job it would have been out there and there probably wouldn't have been a SC. I honestly believe this is the biggest political scandal in our history and no one is paying attention. Once the left yakes over the House these investigations will end. Just like the Clintons. It's obvious what they were doing with their foundation as well as how it tied in to her time as SOS as well as how it would have to her being president. Crickets. But let's scream about FB bots and porn stars. Read the books by Dan Bongino and Gregg Jarrett. They are both excellent road maps for this mess. Exactly. The left doesnt give two shits that the government overreached it powers, and they dont give two shits if that overreach was illegal. They only care that the target was Donald Trump. I mean, dont hate the game, hate the player, right? Heard one of Bongino's podcasts recently. He talked about the possibility of a "soft-secession". I think that was his term. Described how states may come to completely ignore the Fed on issues such as illegal immigration and other Fed regulations. I was kind of tracking with him, but I don't think he is seeing the big picture. There are enough idiots in a bunch of these states that they just put Pelosi back in power. Sure I understand the county vote map/breakdown. But there are a "large" bunch of these idiots concentrated in the major cities in every state. Bongino seems to want to believe that we have a way back from the brink of the abyss. I guess you have to put me in the glass half full camp. I have thought that we are basically screwed for some time. Getting some RINO's and Pub globalists out (Ryan, McCain, Flake, etc), but are losing somewhat credible ones like Gowdy. We don't seem to be getting the type of replacements that are needed to implement the good agenda for the country that Trump has put forward. Pubs retained power based on the mandate to control illegal immigration. They have totally failed. I will be open to changing my perspective, but as of now I feel we are screwed. Unelected bureaucrats have weaponized the FBI and intel agencies in a coup to throw an election and then remove a duly elected President from power and no one gives a damn. Trump can't even appoint replacements in these agencies that give a damn about equal justice or the rule of law. I'm just not seeing much of any indication that we can pull back from the abyss. The Pubs have equal if not more responsibility for where we are at right now. But I am somewhat of a glass half-full type.
|
|
|
Post by kingswitz on Dec 18, 2018 17:56:06 GMT -6
Because discovery would open up all the stuff “they” don’t want the public to see. The setup would ALL be exposed and the SC deemed a fraud. This has been apparent for awhile. Let's be honest. It has been exposed. It's all out there. And if the media was honest and doing their job it would have been out there and there probably wouldn't have been a SC. I honestly believe this is the biggest political scandal in our history and no one is paying attention. Once the left yakes over the House these investigations will end. Just like the Clintons. It's obvious what they were doing with their foundation as well as how it tied in to her time as SOS as well as how it would have to her being president. Crickets. But let's scream about FB bots and porn stars. Read the books by Dan Bongino and Gregg Jarrett. They are both excellent road maps for this mess. I am well aware of what went down. Just answering the question of why Page was never charged. He’s where it all started and if his defense was given discovery access, the whole plot would be exposed. I agree it’s been known for a long time, the press ignores it, and over half of the US is still in the dark. I read Bongino and Jarrett on twitter daily. Good stuff. Just wished others were informed of how massive and dirty this all was like we are.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Dec 18, 2018 18:20:31 GMT -6
Exactly. The left doesnt give two shits that the government overreached it powers, and they dont give two shits if that overreach was illegal. They only care that the target was Donald Trump. I mean, dont hate the game, hate the player, right? Heard one of Bongino's podcasts recently. He talked about the possibility of a "soft-secession". I think that was his term. Described how states may come to completely ignore the Fed on issues such as illegal immigration and other Fed regulations. I was kind of tracking with him, but I don't think he is seeing the big picture. There are enough idiots in a bunch of these states that they just put Pelosi back in power. Sure I understand the county vote map/breakdown. But there are a "large" bunch of these idiots concentrated in the major cities in every state. Bongino seems to want to believe that we have a way back from the brink of the abyss. I guess you have to put me in the glass half full camp. I have thought that we are basically screwed for some time. Getting some RINO's and Pub globalists out (Ryan, McCain, Flake, etc), but are losing somewhat credible ones like Gowdy. We don't seem to be getting the type of replacements that are needed to implement the good agenda for the country that Trump has put forward. Pubs retained power based on the mandate to control illegal immigration. They have totally failed. I will be open to changing my perspective, but as of now I feel we are screwed. Unelected bureaucrats have weaponized the FBI and intel agencies in a coup to throw an election and then remove a duly elected President from power and no one gives a damn. Trump can't even appoint replacements in these agencies that give a damn about equal justice or the rule of law. I'm just not seeing much of any indication that we can pull back from the abyss. The Pubs have equal if not more responsibility for where we are at right now. But I am somewhat of a glass half-full type. I haven’t listened to those guys at all, but my opinion is that the republic is lost, at least as it was envisioned by the founding fathers. The elite have used the media and the government to control a willing populace, and with how successful they are at it, there is no coming back from it. They just have to pick one of the two sides they’ve conveniently lined up, make the other out to be the enemy, and half the population supports any measure they desire. They don’t even need overt control...though that’s where it always ends up. And since I don’t like to present a problem without a proposed solution:
|
|
|
Post by kingswitz on Dec 18, 2018 18:20:33 GMT -6
Let's be honest. It has been exposed. It's all out there. And if the media was honest and doing their job it would have been out there and there probably wouldn't have been a SC. I honestly believe this is the biggest political scandal in our history and no one is paying attention. Once the left yakes over the House these investigations will end. Just like the Clintons. It's obvious what they were doing with their foundation as well as how it tied in to her time as SOS as well as how it would have to her being president. Crickets. But let's scream about FB bots and porn stars. Read the books by Dan Bongino and Gregg Jarrett. They are both excellent road maps for this mess. I am well aware of what went down. Just answering the question of why Page was never charged. He’s where it all started and if his defense was given discovery access, the whole plot would be exposed. I agree it’s been known for a long time, the press ignores it, and over half of the US is still in the dark. I read Bongino and Jarrett on twitter daily. Good stuff. Just wished others were informed of how massive and dirty this all was like we are. Adding to this: if Carter Page were charged, discovery would expose the deep state’s plot to a judge and jury. The press is never going to report it.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Dec 18, 2018 18:29:00 GMT -6
I am well aware of what went down. Just answering the question of why Page was never charged. He’s where it all started and if his defense was given discovery access, the whole plot would be exposed. I agree it’s been known for a long time, the press ignores it, and over half of the US is still in the dark. I read Bongino and Jarrett on twitter daily. Good stuff. Just wished others were informed of how massive and dirty this all was like we are. Adding to this: if Carter Page were charged, discovery would expose the deep state’s plot to a judge and jury. The press is never going to report it. It all comes down to one of two things. Either Mueller has irrefutable proof that Donald Trump conspired with Russians to win the election, and maybe he’s hiding the indictment of Page until he reveals it, or he doesn’t have shit, this entire investigation was a scam, and no matter what else they’ve shown others to have done, it pales in comparison to the infringement upon the right of the People to be protected from their government. It really is that simple. Most don’t see it that way, I realize that. But, imo, it really is that simple. And we’ll know either way pretty soon.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Dec 18, 2018 22:51:03 GMT -6
Just hpw much of this would have come to light had Hillary won? The insurance policy would not have been necessary. How much of the goings ons would have been disclosed? The dossier? The FBI ignoring Hillary's wrongdoings while fabricating those against Trump? How much of the corruption at the DOJ and the WH would have been revealed? And, as many think, there would have been no need for the Sc to cover up what was done at the FBI, DOJ, WH, and by others. JMO.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Dec 18, 2018 22:54:28 GMT -6
Also Sara Carter, Andy McCarthy, Kimberly Strossel, Sharyl Attkisson, among others.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Dec 19, 2018 13:08:52 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Dec 19, 2018 15:40:48 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Dec 20, 2018 0:04:22 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Dec 20, 2018 7:59:07 GMT -6
Proof McCain was a bald faced liar. He swore up and down that he wasnt the Buzzfeed dossier source. Liar. He was "serving his country" by passing around false opposition research (in a two party system no less) to the media, and the highest levels of government, which precipitated that government spying on his political rival. Yeah, thats a true patriot right there. A man with integrity would have ensured the facts were true before clandestinely passing it around, to make sure he was doing the right thing. Instead, he was pissed (rightfully so), then used anything in his grasp to destroy his rival (not right, and no better than the man he was claiming was bad). Then, he lied about it, which makes him everything he claimed Trump was. That means he was actually in a power struggle with Trump, not some great patriot attempting to expose an american hitler as he and the media went out of their way to tell us. What a scam. Then theres the Obamacare vote he cost us over his power struggle. Such a waste....the never trumpers and neo cons have pissed away so much opportunity over the last two years that its sickening. Its exactly what the left wants though, which is why they keep stoking that fire... McCain associate shared unverified Steele dossier with Buzzfeed, court filing says
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Dec 20, 2018 9:48:23 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Dec 20, 2018 10:19:48 GMT -6
And now with no Russia found the counsel to investigate Russian collusion is investigating collusion with - the Middle East!!
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Dec 26, 2018 13:14:50 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Dec 27, 2018 14:34:28 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Feb 15, 2019 7:56:17 GMT -6
Lefty Legend Alan Dershowitz finally saying what we’ve been saying for two years: www.foxnews.com/politics/alan-dershowitz-ousting-trump-via-25th-amendment-is-clearly-an-attempt-at-a-coup-detatAlan Dershowitz: Ousting Trump via 25th Amendment is ‘clearly an attempt at a coup d’etat’ Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz on Thursday said the Department of Justice’s discussions to employ the 25th Amendment to oust President Trump-- if true-- amounted to an attempted coup. Dershowitz appeared on Fox News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” to give his take on former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s descriptions of Justice Department meetings where he said officials discussed ousting the president. “If [McCabe’s comments are] true, it is clearly an attempt at a coup d’état,” Dershowitz said. Evoking the 25th Amendment, Dershowitz added, would be a fundamental misuse of its original purpose. He said it was originally "about Woodrow Wilson having a stroke. It’s about a president being shot and not being able to perform his office." DOJ held meetings on how to oust President TrumpVideo Dershowitz said any justice official who discussed the 25th Amendment in the context of ousting the president "has committed a grievous offense against the Constitution." Dershowitz, who authored the book: "The Case Against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump," further argued that using the 25th Amendment to circumvent the impeachment process or an election, "is a despicable act of unconstitutional power grabbing." McCabe, who was fired from the bureau in March 2018 by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions after it was determined he lied to investigators about a leak, sent shock waves through Washington on Thursday for comments he made during an appearance on CBS News' "60 Minutes." The excerpts detail the eight days between the firing of former FBI Director James Comey and the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. After Comey’s firing, McCabe was acting director of the FBI. "These were the eight days from Comey's firing to the point that Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel," Scott Pelley, the '60 Minutes' host said. "And the highest levels of American law enforcement were trying to figure out what to do with the president." He said people involved were "counting noses" and considering who might agree to the idea. GET THE FOX NEWS APP “I was speaking to the man who had just run for the presidency and won the election for the presidency and who might have done so with the aid of the government of Russia, our most formidable adversary on the world stage. And that was something that troubled me greatly,” McCabe said in one excerpt, referring to a phone call he had with Trump on May 10, 2017. President Trump later fired off a round of tweets, two blasting McCabe and another that quoted Dershowitz's appearance on Fox News.
|
|
|
Post by principledcon on Feb 16, 2019 8:34:59 GMT -6
Lefty Legend Alan Dershowitz finally saying what we’ve been saying for two years: www.foxnews.com/politics/alan-dershowitz-ousting-trump-via-25th-amendment-is-clearly-an-attempt-at-a-coup-detatAlan Dershowitz: Ousting Trump via 25th Amendment is ‘clearly an attempt at a coup d’etat’ Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz on Thursday said the Department of Justice’s discussions to employ the 25th Amendment to oust President Trump-- if true-- amounted to an attempted coup. Dershowitz appeared on Fox News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” to give his take on former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s descriptions of Justice Department meetings where he said officials discussed ousting the president. “If [McCabe’s comments are] true, it is clearly an attempt at a coup d’état,” Dershowitz said. Evoking the 25th Amendment, Dershowitz added, would be a fundamental misuse of its original purpose. He said it was originally "about Woodrow Wilson having a stroke. It’s about a president being shot and not being able to perform his office." DOJ held meetings on how to oust President TrumpVideo Dershowitz said any justice official who discussed the 25th Amendment in the context of ousting the president "has committed a grievous offense against the Constitution." Dershowitz, who authored the book: "The Case Against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump," further argued that using the 25th Amendment to circumvent the impeachment process or an election, "is a despicable act of unconstitutional power grabbing." McCabe, who was fired from the bureau in March 2018 by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions after it was determined he lied to investigators about a leak, sent shock waves through Washington on Thursday for comments he made during an appearance on CBS News' "60 Minutes." The excerpts detail the eight days between the firing of former FBI Director James Comey and the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. After Comey’s firing, McCabe was acting director of the FBI. "These were the eight days from Comey's firing to the point that Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel," Scott Pelley, the '60 Minutes' host said. "And the highest levels of American law enforcement were trying to figure out what to do with the president." He said people involved were "counting noses" and considering who might agree to the idea. GET THE FOX NEWS APP “I was speaking to the man who had just run for the presidency and won the election for the presidency and who might have done so with the aid of the government of Russia, our most formidable adversary on the world stage. And that was something that troubled me greatly,” McCabe said in one excerpt, referring to a phone call he had with Trump on May 10, 2017. President Trump later fired off a round of tweets, two blasting McCabe and another that quoted Dershowitz's appearance on Fox News. As much as I want something to happen to all those responsible...prison time certainly...nothing will ever happen...that's why there is no compromise on anything
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Feb 18, 2019 14:02:08 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by hermit on Feb 18, 2019 17:17:39 GMT -6
/\ this ..........
Victor Davis Hanson is the man.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Feb 18, 2019 18:52:37 GMT -6
We may need a separate McCabe thread. It's about to get juicy.
|
|
|
Post by hermit on Feb 18, 2019 21:08:01 GMT -6
What's really amazing McCabe is not even afraid of being prosecuted. Much less being tied to a pole with a blindfold on in front of a firing squad, which is what traitors got in WW II.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Feb 18, 2019 21:19:17 GMT -6
What's really amazing McCabe is not even afraid of being prosecuted. Much less being tied to a pole with a blindfold on in front of a firing squad, which is what traitors got in WW II. I was watching MSNBC and he was basically being lauded as a hero.
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Feb 18, 2019 21:42:08 GMT -6
He is Colbert's guest tomorrow night. He is the left's new rock star.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Feb 18, 2019 22:51:07 GMT -6
He is Colbert's guest tomorrow night. He is the left's new rock star. Expect tough questioning. Well, prolly not.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Feb 20, 2019 15:58:36 GMT -6
CNN claims the Mueller report will be issued next week. Given their knowledge of Stones arrest, maybe they know something here as well.
I figure Shiff knows also, and even knows there will be no collusion, hence his 50 new investigations...
No doubt in my mind they’ll hit him with obstruction though. I’ve been saying that for years, and am more confident on it now than ever. “He obstructed, which is why we can’t prove what likely happened: that he colluded.” Its a fucking scam.
|
|
|
Post by atl1979 on Feb 20, 2019 16:12:46 GMT -6
One of the long term questions will be whether Mueller will ever be held accountable. Brought in specifically because he was tied up in the Uranium One deal and other things that needed to be covered up. His selection of and ties to Weisman and his past, etc. The Pubs who were backing Mueller from the beginning should be run out on a rail.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Feb 20, 2019 21:15:35 GMT -6
One of the long term questions will be whether Mueller will ever be held accountable. Brought in specifically because he was tied up in the Uranium One deal and other things that needed to be covered up. His selection of and ties to Weisman and his past, etc. The Pubs who were backing Mueller from the beginning should be run out on a rail. Weissman was in on it from day one. He’s one of the three Bruce Ohr took the fake Dossier to, against every FBI regulation in the book (because his wife, who supplied it, worked for an org funded by a political party - fusion GPS). Per his congressional testimony, the only person Ohr told that his wife worked there was Rosenstien, who also signed the third FISA, and who per the acting FBI Director, wanted to wear a wire against the sitting President of the United States. You’re damn right we need a Special Council to investigate Mueller, as he was the “insurance policy.” The entire thing is a Grade A scam, man.
|
|
|
Post by sooner98 on Feb 21, 2019 8:42:43 GMT -6
It will all be up to the new AG (Barr), and the Inspector General (Horowitz). Are they actually going to pursue JUSTICE (you know, the word that is literally in the name of the Department that they are in charge of) or are they going to sweep it all under the rug, with maybe a few slaps on the wrist, along with some "you naughty boys, now don't ever do this again!", and the swamp emerges victorious and unharmed? I hope Trump soon declassifies all of those FISA docs and 302's that we've been hearing about.
|
|
|
Post by oilsooner on Feb 22, 2019 11:44:43 GMT -6
The worm is turning, my friends: Rasmussen Poll: Most See Crime in Justice, FBI ‘Coup’ Against Trump, Want Special Prosecutor Most voters say top Justice Department and FBI officials are likely to have acted criminally when they secretly discussed removing President Trump from office and think a special prosecutor is needed to investigate. Fifty-six percent (56%) of Likely U.S. Voters believe senior federal law enforcement officials are likely to have broken the law in their discussions in May 2017 to oust Trump, with 37% who say it is Very Likely. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 36% consider that unlikely, with 19% who say it’s Not At All Likely that they broke the law. (To see survey question wording, click here.) Fifty-one percent (51%) think a special prosecutor should be named to investigate the discussions among senior Justice Department and FBI officials in May 2017 to remove the president from office. Thirty-eight percent (38%) disagree, but 11% are undecided. Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters said in April of last year that a special prosecutor should be named to investigate whether senior FBI officials handled the investigations of Trump and Hillary Clinton in a legal and unbiased fashion. Only 36% say no disciplinary action should be taken against the senior law enforcement officials who discussed removing the president from office. Twenty-one percent (21%) say they should be fired, while even more (25%) think they should be jailed. Twelve percent (12%) are calling for a formal reprimand of these officials. The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on February 17-18, 2019 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology. By a 50% to 40% margin, voters think it’s likely senior federal law enforcement officials broke the law in an effort to prevent Trump from winning the presidency. As in virtually all surveys related to Trump, however, there is a wide difference of opinion between Democrats and Republicans. For example, while 77% of Republicans - and 52% of voters not affiliated with either major party - think senior law enforcement officials are likely to have broken the law in their secret discussions to remove Trump from office, just 40% of Democrats agree. GOP voters feel much more strongly than the others that the officials in question should be fired or reprimanded. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of voters who Strongly Approve of the job Trump is doing say it’s Very Likely senior law enforcement officials broke the law in their discussions to remove the president from office. Among voters who Strongly Disapprove of Trump’s job performance, just 12% agree. Sixty percent (60%) of voters who think it’s Very Likely senior law enforcement officials broke the law say they should go to jail. The high-level discussions by Justice Department and FBI officials about removing Trump from office followed the president’s firing of FBI Director James Comey. But voters don’t rate Comey’s FBI performance too highly. Nearly two-out-of-three Republicans (65%) and a plurality (46%) of unaffiliated voters said Comey should be prosecuted for leaking to anti-Trump media while serving as FBI director. Just 29% of Democrats agreed. Fifty percent (50%) of voters still say it is likely that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to win the 2016 election, a matter that is the subject of investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, a former FBI director. But 51% think it’s unlikely that Mueller’s investigation will result in criminal charges against the president. Democrats are hopeful that they can impeach Trump if election collusion with the Russians is proven, but just 27% of Democrats - and 16% of all voters - think the new Congress should focus first on impeachment. The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on February 17-18, 2019 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology. m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/february_2019/most_see_crime_in_justice_fbi_coup_against_trump_want_special_prosecutor
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Feb 22, 2019 18:46:25 GMT -6
The worm is turning, my friends: Rasmussen Poll: Most See Crime in Justice, FBI ‘Coup’ Against Trump, Want Special Prosecutor Most voters say top Justice Department and FBI officials are likely to have acted criminally when they secretly discussed removing President Trump from office and think a special prosecutor is needed to investigate. Fifty-six percent (56%) of Likely U.S. Voters believe senior federal law enforcement officials are likely to have broken the law in their discussions in May 2017 to oust Trump, with 37% who say it is Very Likely. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 36% consider that unlikely, with 19% who say it’s Not At All Likely that they broke the law. (To see survey question wording, click here.) Fifty-one percent (51%) think a special prosecutor should be named to investigate the discussions among senior Justice Department and FBI officials in May 2017 to remove the president from office. Thirty-eight percent (38%) disagree, but 11% are undecided. Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters said in April of last year that a special prosecutor should be named to investigate whether senior FBI officials handled the investigations of Trump and Hillary Clinton in a legal and unbiased fashion. Only 36% say no disciplinary action should be taken against the senior law enforcement officials who discussed removing the president from office. Twenty-one percent (21%) say they should be fired, while even more (25%) think they should be jailed. Twelve percent (12%) are calling for a formal reprimand of these officials. The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on February 17-18, 2019 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology. By a 50% to 40% margin, voters think it’s likely senior federal law enforcement officials broke the law in an effort to prevent Trump from winning the presidency. As in virtually all surveys related to Trump, however, there is a wide difference of opinion between Democrats and Republicans. For example, while 77% of Republicans - and 52% of voters not affiliated with either major party - think senior law enforcement officials are likely to have broken the law in their secret discussions to remove Trump from office, just 40% of Democrats agree. GOP voters feel much more strongly than the others that the officials in question should be fired or reprimanded. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of voters who Strongly Approve of the job Trump is doing say it’s Very Likely senior law enforcement officials broke the law in their discussions to remove the president from office. Among voters who Strongly Disapprove of Trump’s job performance, just 12% agree. Sixty percent (60%) of voters who think it’s Very Likely senior law enforcement officials broke the law say they should go to jail. The high-level discussions by Justice Department and FBI officials about removing Trump from office followed the president’s firing of FBI Director James Comey. But voters don’t rate Comey’s FBI performance too highly. Nearly two-out-of-three Republicans (65%) and a plurality (46%) of unaffiliated voters said Comey should be prosecuted for leaking to anti-Trump media while serving as FBI director. Just 29% of Democrats agreed. Fifty percent (50%) of voters still say it is likely that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to win the 2016 election, a matter that is the subject of investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, a former FBI director. But 51% think it’s unlikely that Mueller’s investigation will result in criminal charges against the president. Democrats are hopeful that they can impeach Trump if election collusion with the Russians is proven, but just 27% of Democrats - and 16% of all voters - think the new Congress should focus first on impeachment. The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on February 17-18, 2019 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology. m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/february_2019/most_see_crime_in_justice_fbi_coup_against_trump_want_special_prosecutorExpect lawsuits, endless investigations by the House, breath holding, and kicking and screaming. Everything ends up in court with these people so let's get it on. If thid happens no one is safe. Watch when iy comes to Obama that we'll be told it doesn't matter.
|
|