AT: Are the Dems about to Step in a Big Steaming Pile of Covfefe?

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/04/are_the_dems_about_to_step_in_a_big_steaming_pile_of_covfefe.html

“Remember FISA goes both ways. Two hops from Carter Page covered most of the deep state, and media they might have been leaking to. Suppose the Trump FBI were now using FISA surveillance against the deep state tricksters and their media comrades?

“Rosenstein expanded Mueller’s scope in August 2017. We don’t know what the expansion was, based on the heavily redacted memo, but suppose it was for more than going after Trump and his team?”

7 thoughts on “AT: Are the Dems about to Step in a Big Steaming Pile of Covfefe?

  1. “Trump FBI”
    If there is such a thing our country is in serious trouble.

    “deep state tricksters”
    Amazing how any functioning adult could use such a term with serious intent. And, what part of FOREIGN Intelligence Surveillance Act is ignored with these daydreams? These “deep state tricksters” are treasonous Americans, right?

    Neither of us know the full and final scope of Mueller’s work but it is certainly spelled out in the full report which Trump is trying to suppress. But, as a reminder, the Starr investigation was supposed to be about Bill Clinton’s financial dealings before he became President and metastasized in every possible direction over its four years of leaky investigations. And, before Trump and his minions start their crying about “red lines” they should remember that the GOP launched the Starr investigation into Clinton’s personal financial dealings long before he became President. What goes around comes around and with Trump – and unlike Whitewater – there is almost certainly a there there.

    Like

  2. RE: “Neither of us know the full and final scope of Mueller’s work but it is certainly spelled out in the full report which Trump is trying to suppress.”

    How, exactly, is Trump trying to suppress the report?

    Like

    1. By having his AG release a watered down summary instead of the report.

      By having his AG pretend that it needs redacting before highly secure members of Congress can see what’s in it.

      By impugning the integrity and patriotism of Mueller and his team for over a year.

      By lying to the public about what is in it – it explicitly does not exonerate him.

      Like

        1. I answered your question and your response is to double down on delusional wishful thinking?

          And now it seems that members of the Mueller team are fed up with the cover-up and demanding that the ACTUAL findings of the report be shared with Congress and the public.

          For those who know history, the drip, drip, drip nature of this scandal is very reminiscent of the way Nixon’s downfall developed. How many time did HE also say “case closed” when it wasn’t.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. OK, then. Let’s look at each of your answers to reveal how foolish they are one by one:

          RE: “By having his AG release a watered down summary instead of the report.”

          The AG’s letter was never intended to summarize the report. It presented, as the AG promised it would, the “principle conclusions” of the Special Counsel investigation. But your statement is foolish for two reasons. First for misrepresenting the letter and second for assuming the president ordered it.

          RE: “By having his AG pretend that it needs redacting before highly secure members of Congress can see what’s in it.”

          No one is pretending the report needs redacting. The redactions are required by law (see Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) and 18 U.S.C. § 401(3), as well as the National Security Act).

          Congressional security clearances are irrelevant to the redaction requirements. Under the Special Counsel regulations, it is not assumed that Congress has a “need to know” the redacted material. In fact, any report the Special Counsel prepares must be delivered to the AG only in the form of a “confidential report.”

          It is foolish to conflate security clearances with the “need to know.” They are not the same. Having a security clearance does not mean you can automatically view information that is classified at the level you are cleared for.

          RE: “By impugning the integrity and patriotism of Mueller and his team for over a year.”

          The president has free speech. It is foolish to imagine his words and ideas are anything more than speech which he is entitled to make.

          RE: “By lying to the public about what is in it – it explicitly does not exonerate him.”

          There is no lie, and you have no basis for claiming there is. The AG has judged the president is not-guilty on both of the matters the investigation probed. This judgement is a fact, and it is foolish of you to pretend the judgement is in error when you have not seen the report itself.

          RE: “And now it seems that members of the Mueller team are fed up with the cover-up and demanding that the ACTUAL findings of the report be shared with Congress and the public.”

          So what? The story you cite is based on anonymous sources who make non-specific claims. It is foolish to give the story any weight.

          The bottom line in all of this is that no one has done anything wrong. Your foolish speculations are just that: foolish and speculations.

          Like

          1. One of us is “foolish” and thast would be the one who is repeatedly suckered by Trump.

            The AG’s letter was never intended to summarize the report. – False.

            The President has free speech and he has used it to attack the Mueller effort. EXACTLY as I said.

            Trump says the report completely exonerates him. Even Barr’s letter says the exact opposite. He has not been found “Not guilty” of ANYTHING. Sucker!

            Even as this last desperate effort at cover-up is backfiring – as very predictably it was going to – you still try to pooh pooh it. Now THAT is foolish.

            Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s