Originally posted by @no1marauder
A-B aren't worth responding to; you essentially conceded my point.

C is just another example of your rabid right wing sites tearing an innocent remark out of all context.https://www.lawfareblog.com/peter-strzoks-insurance-policy

D) It's really hard; except the Nunes' memo says directly that the counterintelligence probe started because of the "The ...[text shortened]... " and much of it has been verified.

F) Just verifies what I said; "possible" is not evidence.

Originally posted by @whodey
So let me get this straight, e-mails were released from Hillary's server but it was not hacked?

Did she release them then?

Originally posted by @whodey
But the GOP rallied to stop Trump. They hate him as much as the Dims.

The article pointed out that FISA warrants are easy to obtain and easy to continue, with next to no probable cause needed. It also points out that these warrants are to go after suspected foreign agents, and not the President of the United States.

The vitriol against Trump within t ...[text shortened]... n powers hacked into Hillary's private server and made them public the evidence Trump is guilty?

Here's an interesting detail from the Steele dossier regarding Carter Page's alleged meeting with Igor Sechin, Putin's right hand man, in Moscow, July 7 or 8, 2016:

According to an “associate,” Sechin was so keen to lift personal and corporate Western sanctions that he offered Page an unusual bribe. This was “the brokerage of up to a 19 per cent (privatized) stake in Rosneft in return.” In other words, a chunk of Rosneft was being sold off.

No sums were mentioned. But a privatization on this scale would be the biggest in Russia for years. Any brokerage fee would be substantial, in the region of tens and possibly hundreds of millions of dollars. Page “expressed interest” and confirmed that were Trump to become US president, “then sanctions on Russia would be lifted,” Steele wrote.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/03/carter-page-nunes-memo-216934

Page has denied meeting with Sechin, but a funny thing happened in December more than 4 months after this entry in the dossier was made:

Steele’s Rosneft source was right. In early December—less than a month after Trump won the White House—Rosneft announced it was selling 19.5 percent of its stock. This was one of the biggest privatizations since the 1990s and, on the face of it, a vote of confidence in the Russian economy.

Steele’s mole had known about the plan months before Rosneft’s management board was informed. The board only discovered the deal on December 7, hours after Sechin had already recorded his TV meeting with Putin revealing it. Even the Russian cabinet had been kept in the dark. “Sechin did it all on his own—the government did not take part in this,” one source told Reuters.

In the weeks to come, US and other Western intelligence agencies would examine this deal closely. Where did the money go? Russian journalists were sceptical that it had ended up with Trump; it was more probable, they reasoned, that it would have travelled to Putin and Sechin. There was no proof of this, and neither the Kremlin nor other parties would offer comment.


A day after the Rosneft deal was unveiled, Page flew back to Moscow.



HMMM

Originally posted by @mott-the-hoople
I was just wanting your take. You see, previously you argued Trump couldn't fire Meuller.😉

Originally posted by @moonbus
He's certainly not going to be nominated for 'Mr. Congeniality' when it comes time to renew the lease.

Originally posted by @no1marauder
He can't, at least not directly which is what I said.

Originally posted by @mott-the-hoople
Here is the complete post...I will put in bold your statement.

"Originally posted by @mott-the-hoople
LOL...so Trump can demand Meuller turn over all files of his investigation?
That's an interesting question. I think the answer is "yes" though it would be politically suicidal.

Theoretically,

[b]Trump could invoke Article II to bypass ...[text shortened]... edy for when he abuses such powers is impeachment."


[b]You are whistling out both ends.[/b]

Let me put it this way; as the law exists now, Trump cannot directly fire Mueller. He could try to change the regulations and do so, but that would raise serious Constitutional issues (as well as statutory ones concerning the process by which regulations are promulgated and/or discontinued).

Originally posted by @no1marauder
Let me put it this way; as the law exists now, Trump cannot directly fire Mueller. He could try to change the regulations and do so, but that would raise serious Constitutional issues (as well as statutory ones concerning the process by which regulations are promulgated and/or discontinued).

Originally posted by @mott-the-hoople
Quit digging.

Originally posted by @mott-the-hoople
He wasn't elected to be "Mr. Congeniality"...you people still don't get it.

Originally posted by @moonbus
Read the post again, with comprehension this time: "... when the lease comes up for renewal" implies that he won't get nominated for the next presidential campaign.

Several top Republicans have already stated that they wouldn't have supported him the first time if they'd known then what they know now.

Originally posted by @no1marauder
What does that even mean?

The only e-mails that were released from her server were by the State Department in response to a FOIA request. https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/

Originally posted by @whodey
So let me get this straight, e-mails were released from Hillary's server but it was not hacked?

Did she release them then?