Club Dynasty
Toronto Escorts

David Brooks (N Y Times) - There is little evidence Trump committed any crime

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
46,713
7,990
113
Toronto
New York Times columnist David Brooks says it's entirely possible that Trump's tweet about "zero proof" of any collusion with Russia will prove to be true.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/20/...n=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection

As the anti-Trump crowd pivots to the "obstruction" claim, it's becoming more obvious that they'll pursue anything -- no matter how dubious -- in their zeal to get Trump.
Is he part of Mueller's team or have they given him access to all of their information?

If it is neither, then his opinion is meaningless.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
Is he part of Mueller's team or have they given him access to all of their information?

If it is neither, then his opinion is meaningless.
So meaningless as he opines that Whitewater investigation was far more consequential and serious than the investigations of Russian interference and intervention in the 2016 Election which just by mere happenstance has entangled Trump and his entourage in it's web.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
New York Times columnist David Brooks says it's entirely possible that Trump's tweet about "zero proof" of any collusion with Russia will prove to be true.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/20/...n=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection

As the anti-Trump crowd pivots to the "obstruction" claim, it's becoming more obvious that they'll pursue anything -- no matter how dubious -- in their zeal to get Trump.
Are u claiming that Mueller is rabidly anti-Trump? You must be, because he is investigating Donald Trump for obstruction of justice.

The Republican led, Senate Intel. Committee also appears to be pivoting towards an obstruction of justice investigation. Are they also foaming at the mouth anti-Trumpies too?
 
Last edited:

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,714
3,410
113
Are u claiming that Mueller is rabidly anti-Trump? You must be, because he is investigated Donald Trump for obstruction of justice.

The Republican led, Senate Intel. Committee also appears to be pivoting towards an obstruction of justice investigation. Are they also foaming at the mouth anti-Trumpies too?
Some of them like Lindsey Graham certainly do.

And I would bet some of Mueller's team harbor ill will as well.

Whether they can remain professional remains to be seen. So far they have been so. But some of them are desperate to remove Trump as well.

He is delaying that we'll planned regime change in Syria at the moment.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,714
3,410
113
So meaningless as he opines that Whitewater investigation was far more consequential and serious than the investigations of Russian interference and intervention in the 2016 Election which just by mere happenstance has entangled Trump and his entourage in it's web.
So now the NYT is meaningless? How quickly the partisans will turn on their allies for basing to go against the doctrine.
 

SuperCharge

Banned
Jun 11, 2011
2,523
1
0
One of the best of all Mueller's hires has to be Jeannie Rhee, also worked as a lawyer for the Clinton Foundation. It's so ludicrous it's almost laughable.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
Some of them like Lindsey Graham certainly do.

And I would bet some of Mueller's team harbor ill will as well.

Whether they can remain professional remains to be seen. So far they have been so. But some of them are desperate to remove Trump as well.

He is delaying that we'll planned regime change in Syria at the moment.
Please provide evidence that Senator Graham has been unjustifiably critical of Trump without cause.

Please provide evidence that some members of Mueller's team harbor ill will towards Trump and their desperation to remove Trump.

I am sure that you can ..... so let's get at it.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,714
3,410
113
Please provide evidence that Senator Graham has been unjustifiably critical of Trump without cause.

Please provide evidence that some members of Mueller's team harbor ill will towards Trump and their desperation to remove Trump.

I am sure that you can ..... so let's get at it.
I didn't say without cause. But that takes nothing away from his actual hate. He said on Jon Stewart during the primaries that choosing between Trump and Cruz is like choosing between being poisoned and being shot.

And McCain hates his guts for his loser comments on the campaign trail as well. Remember his mocking of McCain's time as a prisoner of war? That doesn't get set aside easily.

And those two have been thick as thieves in the criticism when ever they thought they could get away with it without filing up their own base.

And no doubt(speculative on my part) quietly undermining him in the Senate and perhaps even with some leaks.

As for Mueller's team their political contributions and one having worked as a laywer for the Clinton Foundation are nice proof for you. Is there anyone who voted for, let alone directly related to the Clinton's who isn't bitter about Trump?

Be realistic now. Washington is a partisan town.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
So now the NYT is meaningless? How quickly the partisans will turn on their allies for basing to go against the doctrine.
David Brooks is a Conservative columnist who writes HIS Conservative opinion columns, which are one of many varying columns and columnists, for the NYT. Diversity of opinion yes, factually inaccurate yes.

Hardly a partisan ally to any but Conservatives.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
One of the best of all Mueller's hires has to be Jeannie Rhee, also worked as a lawyer for the Clinton Foundation. It's so ludicrous it's almost laughable.
Have you have obtained and are in possession of some explosive evidence that Jeannie Rhee will subvert the investigation to disfavor Trump?
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,714
3,410
113
Any you have obtained and are in possession of some explosive evidence that Jeannie Rhee will subvert the investigation to disfavor Trump?
I think having worked for the false front money laundering organization known as the Clinton Foundation is proof enough.

Are you going to tell me if Mueller had stocked the team with Former Trump hired Lawyers you would be good with it?
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
I didn't say without cause. But that takes nothing away from his actual hate. He said on Jon Stewart during the primaries that choosing between Trump and Cruz is like choosing between being poisoned and being shot.

And McCain hates his guts for his loser comments on the campaign trail as well. Remember his mocking of McCain's time as a prisoner of war? That doesn't get set aside easily.

And those two have been thick as thieves in the criticism when ever they thought they could get away with it without filing up their own base.

And no doubt(speculative on my part) quietly undermining him in the Senate and perhaps even with some leaks.

As for Mueller's team their political contributions and one having worked as a laywer for the Clinton Foundation are nice proof for you. Is there anyone who voted for, let alone directly related to the Clinton's who isn't bitter about Trump?

Be realistic now. Washington is a partisan town.
So you are stating that your perceptions of Graham and McCain's hatred of Trump has and will poison their decisions regarding Trump. If so, please provide examples of how their poisoned decisions have affected Trump.

Trump engaged in a dishonorable and despicable pre-campaign, primary campaign and election campaign. The end always justified the means to him. Winning at any cost. Well the chicken Trump has come to roost and the means he engaged in to become the Chief Chicken will be his de-feathering and downfall. He is reaping what he has sown.

In regards to Mueller's team, you are stating that Mueller chose a partisan filled team with the explicit intent to take down Trump by any means, both lawful and unlawful, as he and they deem necessary.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,714
3,410
113
So you are stating that your perceptions of Graham and McCain's hatred of Trump has and will poison their decisions regarding Trump. If so, please provide examples of how their poisoned decisions have affected Trump.

Trump engaged in a dishonorable and despicable pre-campaign, primary campaign and election campaign. The end always justified the means to him. Winning at any cost. Well the chicken Trump has come to roost and the means he engaged in to become the Chief Chicken will be his de-feathering and downfall. He is reaping what he has sown.

In regards to Mueller's team, you are stating that Mueller chose a partisan filled team with the explicit intent to take down Trump by any means, both lawful and unlawful, as he and they deem necessary.
Make up your mind. First you say Graham and McCain didn't do anything then you say his campaigning "has come home to roost" implying payback is happening.

So which is it?

As for the other........

I'm of two minds on this. One is if no evidence of wrongdoing is found then even yourself will have to mea culpa to it due to the make up of the team. Are you prepared to do that?

As to the other side....

I was hopeful for an optically independent team. A mix of Independent(if any Lawyers in the USA are) GoP and Dem investigators so at least there could be no doubt the evidence was looked at with all eyes. But the old axiom of politics is perception is alive and rampant. And this will end up in a partisan dogfight all over again.

And so no real conclusion will come of it. Which may actually be the goal here. Better questionable taint then actual conclusion to many. Because in the end this isn't about justice, but about the 2018 midterms and the 2020 general election.

And that is the real problem of the Washington bubble.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,088
2,738
113
There isn't a need to, it's called a 'conflict of interest'
I'm sure Robert Mueller has a better understanding of conflict of interest than you do.
 

Bud Plug

Sexual Appliance
Aug 17, 2001
5,069
0
0
There isn't a need to, it's called a 'conflict of interest'
I tend to believe Mueller, at a minimum, knows what he's doing. He knows how his appointments "look". Assuming he's as competent as I think he is, I think he's putting together a team that the Dems will not be able to challenge so that he can deliver what he expects will be bad news for the Dems. He knows the FBI has been looking at this for a year and has not found any evidence implicating Trump or his campaign. I'm not worried that his appointments foreshadow a negative result for Trump. If that's what happens (and that would become self-evident from the totality of the investigation), the attack on the process would be relentless. The cries for impeachment would go nowhere.
 

SuperCharge

Banned
Jun 11, 2011
2,523
1
0
I tend to believe Mueller, at a minimum, knows what he's doing. He knows how his appointments "look". Assuming he's as competent as I think he is, I think he's putting together a team that the Dems will not be able to challenge so that he can deliver what he expects will be bad news for the Dems. I'm not worried that his appointments foreshadow a negative result for Trump. If that's what happens (and that would become self-evident from the totality of the investigation), the attack on the process would be relentless. The cries for impeachment would go nowhere.
Let's hope. I think you may be correct., good point with your last 2 sentences.
 

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,978
6,111
113
New York Times columnist David Brooks says it's entirely possible that Trump's tweet about "zero proof" of any collusion with Russia will prove to be true.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/20/...n=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection

As the anti-Trump crowd pivots to the "obstruction" claim, it's becoming more obvious that they'll pursue anything -- no matter how dubious -- in their zeal to get Trump.
Of course it is entirely possible. And it is entirely possible that something will be found. You may have missed that he said "so far". It is really quite funny when partisans on either side simply take what is know from the press of Fox or CNN or wherever and assume that they know what the outcome will be notwithstanding tnat the investigation is nowhere near complete. And it appears that Flynn may be cooperating with the FBI so who know what he is saying.
 
Toronto Escorts