Donald Trump & 2016 Election

[PermissionToLand]

This president proves time and time again he just doesn't know how to take a win (or do his job).

Dems are ready to compromise on infrastructure.  Something everyone wants (and that I gave Trump credit for working with dems over a few pages ago). A big win for Trump, nice signing ceremony, and him delivering on a campaign promise

Trump decides to throw a tantrum, and torpedo it all. And then IN FRONT OF THE PRESS basically says "I won't do my job until they stop investigating me".  He basically takes infrastructure hostage to try to blackmail the dems to stop doing their constitutionally mandated JOBS.

Unreal.  And not a great look.  Just like taking credit for the shutdown, he's now given the Dems an infrastructure sound bite they can play for the next 18 months.

Also "I don't do cover ups" (unless it's about paying a porn star to cover up an affair, or I'm in negotiations with Russians for a Moscow Trump Tower, or my campaign misappropriates funds, or my charity foundation misuses money it raised or......)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/_fADDt6YJJYe-dTnIVqPA9i8Kbg=/1205x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/D2KDWVD4X4I6TMPTWIZ74WAR54.jpg

Oof, I guess we'll have to add Blackmail to the list of crimes that also includes housing discrimination and spying on underage girls. What happened to the "law and order candidate"? We should start calling him "Racist Pedophile Thug Trump".

LOCK HIM UP! 

[tim_m]

You guys LOVE to tear down any conservative response on here

It's called a discussion.

Never claimed I was right or acting "high and mighty". More of the usual "poor me" from people who feel the media is against them because they're not right enough for their liking...

Wow. Biden just cant learn, or just doesnt care. On stage in philly, and a female had to grab his hands and remove them from her waist. You’d think he’d be embarrassed. It looks so bad.

Is it true that the female you're referring to was his wife? Yes/No?

YES. Why would you ask something that is so easily provable? Who else would he have been kissing on the lips? No opinion or anything.

Question: Does it creep you out when you see Biden molest little girls? Yes/No

Question: Will you support someone that has had several women accuse him of inappropriate touching? Yes/No

Is that your idea of fun now?

A: I haven't seen him molest little girls. But anyone molesting any children isn't just creepy, it's disgusting.

A: Will I totally disregard a candidate because he hugged someone who didn't want to be hugged? No. And I'm sure you won't either considering your president that you support has done way more than just inappropriate touching.... And no, I'm not talking about him touching his ex model wife.


Q: Do you think it's creepy for a father to say he might date his own daughter if they weren't related?


If this is the criteria you base who you vote for, good luck! Suddenly inappropriate touching is a big thing when the current president has done way more than that.... Wow!


Thanks for the chuckles!




/jarmo

Fyi, Biden has never, ever, ever been (credibly) acused of molesting a child. Ever. Thats fake news of epic proportions. Not in any actual credible definition of molesting or by any credible accuser. Its a right wing bit of fiction.

There are some pics/vids out there...mostly from one innauguration ceremony....of him being incredibly physically close (and jovial and familiar) to a few preteen kids. In every case, that i am aware of, the patents have said there was nothing inappropriate going on, the kids did not complain, even after being asked about it when the pics came to light, and that in most cases they are just unfortunately framed pictures.

Example:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2906359/Senator-father-13-year-old-girl-says-Joe-Biden-not-creepy-awkward-swearing-photo.html

If there are other, different, cases out there involving kids.....i havent seen them. If someone finds em, post em!

He does seem to have an issue with invading peoples personal space....and its something he for sure needs to be more aware of (though not when hugging his wife or his kids).  I'm not sure how anyone who voted for Trump could find it creepy, given trumps actions in the past, though. Hell, Trumps own wife accused him of RAPE and didnt relent til her divorce payday was made contingent on it. Serial infidelity, multiple acusations of sexual misconduct and assault, peepin in on teenagers when they are changing at the miss universe pageant, grab em by the pussy comments etc, etc, etc.  its all just an excuse by the right when it comes to Joe....and more bits of obvious hypocrisy. They are really just parroting trumps twitter and the propaganda network, really. They cant think too much about it because then they start to remember Trumps done way worse.....and it all comes crashing down around their ears.

The closest thing I've come across is with that same girl in the picture you posted in a video, wherein he does try to give her a kiss on the cheek, then he leans to his left to talk to the guy next to him and his arm and hand do brush the girls chest. He is however not even looking at her or where his arm is. It moved because he moved in that direction. As soon as he leans back to the right so does his arm.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

I dont agree how he handled the infrastructure meeting yesterday, we now have a whole new level of gridlock.  He just built a wall around his agenda.

Yes, Id be pissed off too if someone I was about to work with on a big deal accused me of covering things up hours before good faith negotiations. But only way to get anything done is to work with the Dems in the house when middle ground can be found.

You sometimes have to work with people you don't like if you want to do your job & get something accomplished.  This is something the freshman house dems among others dont understand either

Infrastructure would have been a win-win. But Trump creates a self inflicted wound...again.

[tim_m]

I dont agree how he handled the infrastructure meeting yesterday, we now have a whole new level of gridlock.  He just built a wall around his agenda.

Yes, Id be pissed off too if someone I was about to work with on a big deal accused me of covering things up hours before good faith negotiations. But only way to get anything done is to work with the Dems in the house when middle ground can be found.

You sometimes have to work with people you don't like if you want to do your job & get something accomplished.  This is something the freshman house dems among others dont understand either

Infrastructure would have been a win-win. But Trump creates a self inflicted wound...again.

Seems to be what he does best sabotage himself.

[pilferk]

The closest thing I've come across is with that same girl in the picture you posted in a video, wherein he does try to give her a kiss on the cheek, then he leans to his left to talk to the guy next to him and his arm and hand do brush the girls chest. He is however not even looking at her or where his arm is. It moved because he moved in that direction. As soon as he leans back to the right so does his arm.

Exactly.  Much of the content is incidental, or familiar.  And many of the parents have made comments on it (after the fact), saying it was innocent, that Joe's a lifelong friend, has known their kids forever, and that affection is commonplace and accepted.  You can argue that that sort of familiarity and PDA is not appropriate for the setting (an inauguration ceremony) but....we have family friends and family family who often hug and kiss my kids.  My kids might roll their eyes (because they are petulant teens) but they don't actually mind. They just don't want their friends to think they're uncool. Trust me, I've had those conversations.

The youtube videos posted by the Trumpers are hilarious. You see some of it in that article I posted. They're so obvious in their intent, it's laughable.  Trying to pass any of that off as "molestation" is just plain nuts. And the fact that its all, essentially, documented in one setting, where he's supposed to be the "celebrity host" of sorts (meeting and greeting, taking pictures, etc), is even more laughable.  He's glad handing. Kissing babies, so to speak.  And I get it....maybe in 2019 thats a bad look....where in 1989 it was pretty much accepted.  And it's definitely something he needs to be wary of.  But accusing him of molestation is just wrong. Like almost slanderous levels of wrong.  It borders on fabrication/lying to me, too, but....maybe that's just me.

[pilferk]

I dont agree how he handled the infrastructure meeting yesterday, we now have a whole new level of gridlock.  He just built a wall around his agenda.

Yes, Id be pissed off too if someone I was about to work with on a big deal accused me of covering things up hours before good faith negotiations. But only way to get anything done is to work with the Dems in the house when middle ground can be found.

You sometimes have to work with people you don't like if you want to do your job & get something accomplished.  This is something the freshman house dems among others dont understand either

Infrastructure would have been a win-win. But Trump creates a self inflicted wound...again.

Honestly, the man can not get out of his own way.  75%, I'd guess, of his wounds are self inflicted.

It's a bad look for him in a string of bad looks.  Fighting all the information requests and subpeonas (and losing, so far) in court isn't a good look for him, either.

[sandman]

"Stop using my insults!" 

What, you don't like being treated the way you treat others? I love how you suddenly find your own statements unfair when used against you. See, an adult would take that as a moment to reflect on his arguments and treatment of others...

Trump admitted it. He said he grabs women by the pussy, has been accused by 23 women of assault and we know he peeped on nude underage beauty pageant members. If you call touching shoulders worse than that, you must be a molester yourself, using false equivalencies to make yourself look better.

Hint: touching somebody's shoulder is not molestation. Are you mentally impaired? 

But yeah, watching Trump molest those kids is fucking sick.

If you aren't a liar, then respond to Pilferk's post, point by point, refuting his arguments.

You won't because you are a liar and you know it as well as everyone else on here does. A liar and a coward on top of that because you act like his post doesn't exist and repeating things he already debunked conclusively.

the Taxman has been ignoring me for months. why would you bring up his posts?

let's dumb it down for the kid in the room....

1) Was Obama worthless in stopping Russian interference? [hint: the answer is "yes"]

2) Should Obama have done ALOT more to stop Russian interference? [hint: the answer is "yes"]

3) Does Obama (and his supporters) look like a pussy for blaming Mitch McConnell and the Republicans? [hint: the answer is "yes"]

4) Did Obama have more tools at his disposal to try to stop Russian interference? [hint: the answer is "yes"]

5) Should Trump be very aggressive in preventing any interference in all elections? [I know you don't need my help with this one]

Uhh, because an adult arguing in good faith addresses counter arguments regardless of where they come from? Because an adult doesn't plug his ears and act like counter evidence doesn't exist?

None of those are addressing his points at all. You're just repeating your previous points which ignore his completely.

Apparently you need to go back to grade school to learn how our government works because Obama could not do anything legislative without McConnell. My 12 year old nephew knows that! 

We are all still waiting, little coward...

[I thought the Taxman has been ignoring me for months, but apparently he has been addressing my posts passive-aggressively without actually replying to them with my quotes, and referring to me repeatedly in his posts. He said he was going to ignore me....maybe he is a LIAR??? But as I said several months ago, I knew he couldn't ignore me.  .]

Aww, widdle baby is butthurt he's had his advances spurned! Look at the jilted lover impotently yelling at the wind! Yeah, you're right, he's a liar and ugly and GODDAMMIT WHY WON'T HE TAKE YOU BACK?!

It's clear from your replying to him when he is not talking to you, that you are in fact obsessed with him.

Time to move on.

And I’m waiting as well.   

You guys LOVE to tear down any conservative response on here and act all high and mighty when you think you have the upper hand on a particular issue.  Love to say things like “I’m waiting” or use words like “hypocrisy” or “troll”, or ”Trumpers”...but yet, when things are pointed out on the other side, you guys do the same shit.  This thread really does go nowhere with so many “stubborn” people on it.  Some of us have admitted to things on here, even if it’s goes against our party.  Others, just can’t bring themselves to it.  They make excuses, come up with some extreme or far fetched response, or don’t reply at all.  So instead of sitting high on your horses and waiting for a response on one particular topic, you guys might wanna check yourselves on so many others that you have failed to respond to, simply because it’s not in your best interest.   

Oh look, another perpetual victim conservative!

Have you not seen Sandman's mindless repetition of "no collusion"? How is that not acting high and mighty when you think you have the upper hand?

If you people refuse to address our arguments, what else are we to say but "I am still waiting"? Should we let you keep diverting until kingdom come? That is not how adult debate works. If you keep making diversions, it becomes clear that you are not operating in good faith, and are therefore a troll. You have no one to blame but yourself for engaging in these disingenuous tactics repeatedly. Where is the personal responsibility?

Point out where we have "done the same shit". What have we failed to respond to? Let's see receipts.

I read your post very carefully, and i just have 2 questions:

1) how did you do in Fortnite today?

2) how many red bulls did u down?

I read your post very carefully and I have just two questions:

1. Why are you such a coward?

2. I'm still waiting, little boy...

Just look at how long my post is compared to yours and it's obvious you're terrified of me because I can methodically tear you apart, piece by piece. So you just don't respond to anything like the weak little snowflake you are. Can't engage anything outside your sheltered little bubble.

It's an awfully pathetic way to concede every point I made by dodging them, but I'll accept this as your concession. No need to be butthurt and make insults because you lost now, cupcake. Buck up, this isn't a safe space.

"just look at how long my post is compared to yours"

that is the funniest thing I've ever read in here. that really gave me a good laugh.

I was being sarcastic when I said "stop using my insults." you take things way too seriously. and the irony of YOU preaching about how to treat others on this forum. remember when I told you about self-awareness? you clearly ignored my advice.

you've called me a child molester, fascist, coward, mentally impaired and countless other things. All in the last day. (which is actually pretty funny.) plenty more in the last few weeks, all after Jarmo warned you about it. such a lack of respect for the person running this thing. and you wonder why I don't take your posts seriously?

see here's the problem with many die-hards on both sides...you take arguing politics too seriously. this is the shit you people talk about at bars, when most people are just out having a good time. you treat online arguments like a sport where you are trying to win something.

then on top of that, many liberals on this message board feel the need to demonize people with different views. you're so desperate to make the other side seem evil, and of bad character. it's been going on in these threads for years. and the hatred and anger always seems to be coming from one direction. I don't remember Jarmo ever having to warn any of the resident "conservatives".  

I always assumed this was due to die-hards falling victim to the politicians desire to divide us. it goes back decades but I really saw a coordinated effort in the 2000's to label Bush and his supporters as Nazis. like I said, the far right does this as well, but this thread is the extent of my online political arguments, and all I see in here are some liberals throwing a ton of hatred towards conservatives.

clearly there is something deeper going on. maybe something missing in your life that you feel the need to be "better" than random posters. maybe you weren't good at sports so you have to come here and try to "win" and tear people apart "piece by piece." maybe you are all wound up tight cause your wives and girlfriends are on a sex strike. maybe you come here and talk about the length of your posts to make up for some other shortcomings in your life.    

whatever it is, you seem unhinged. reading your last few posts, you appear in insane. i'm worried you're going to go shoot up a school or something. i'm seriously concerned for your well being. I would highly recommend you smoke a peace pipe or something. chill out. relax. and stop making shit so personal.

[sandman]

You guys LOVE to tear down any conservative response on here

It's called a discussion.

Never claimed I was right or acting "high and mighty". More of the usual "poor me" from people who feel the media is against them because they're not right enough for their liking...

Wow. Biden just cant learn, or just doesnt care. On stage in philly, and a female had to grab his hands and remove them from her waist. You’d think he’d be embarrassed. It looks so bad.

Is it true that the female you're referring to was his wife? Yes/No?

YES. Why would you ask something that is so easily provable? Who else would he have been kissing on the lips? No opinion or anything.

Question: Does it creep you out when you see Biden molest little girls? Yes/No

Question: Will you support someone that has had several women accuse him of inappropriate touching? Yes/No

Is that your idea of fun now?

A: I haven't seen him molest little girls. But anyone molesting any children isn't just creepy, it's disgusting.

A: Will I totally disregard a candidate because he hugged someone who didn't want to be hugged? No. And I'm sure you won't either considering your president that you support has done way more than just inappropriate touching.... And no, I'm not talking about him touching his ex model wife.


Q: Do you think it's creepy for a father to say he might date his own daughter if they weren't related?


If this is the criteria you base who you vote for, good luck! Suddenly inappropriate touching is a big thing when the current president has done way more than that.... Wow!


Thanks for the chuckles!




/jarmo

Fyi, Biden has never, ever, ever been (credibly) acused of molesting a child. Ever. Thats fake news of epic proportions. Not in any actual credible definition of molesting or by any credible accuser. Its a right wing bit of fiction.

There are some pics/vids out there...mostly from one innauguration ceremony....of him being incredibly physically close (and jovial and familiar) to a few preteen kids. In every case, that i am aware of, the patents have said there was nothing inappropriate going on, the kids did not complain, even after being asked about it when the pics came to light, and that in most cases they are just unfortunately framed pictures.

Example:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2906359/Senator-father-13-year-old-girl-says-Joe-Biden-not-creepy-awkward-swearing-photo.html

If there are other, different, cases out there involving kids.....i havent seen them. If someone finds em, post em!

He does seem to have an issue with invading peoples personal space....and its something he for sure needs to be more aware of (though not when hugging his wife or his kids).  I'm not sure how anyone who voted for Trump could find it creepy, given trumps actions in the past, though. Hell, Trumps own wife accused him of RAPE and didnt relent til her divorce payday was made contingent on it. Serial infidelity, multiple acusations of sexual misconduct and assault, peepin in on teenagers when they are changing at the miss universe pageant, grab em by the pussy comments etc, etc, etc.  its all just an excuse by the right when it comes to Joe....and more bits of obvious hypocrisy. They are really just parroting trumps twitter and the propaganda network, really. They cant think too much about it because then they start to remember Trumps done way worse.....and it all comes crashing down around their ears.

The closest thing I've come across is with that same girl in the picture you posted in a video, wherein he does try to give her a kiss on the cheek, then he leans to his left to talk to the guy next to him and his arm and hand do brush the girls chest. He is however not even looking at her or where his arm is. It moved because he moved in that direction. As soon as he leans back to the right so does his arm.

so now we are defending inappropriate touching of little girls in this thread? WOW! a whole new low.

in any situation involving children, it is on the adult. there's no such thing as accidentally touching a child inappropriately. you make sure that doesn't happen!!

I can't fucking believe this has to be made clear on this board. you keep your hands off of children. what a new fucking low we have reached.

and as for some defending the Creeper because the father (a Democrat) said that his daughter was ok with it? guess what, that is extremely common when it comes to abusing/molesting children. think about priests, Michael Jackson, that Netflix movie.....in most of those cases, the parents were friends with the molester, and they were a trusted and highly respected person. in those situations, that is one key reason why kids don't speak up.

sickening.   

[Dr. Blutarsky]

I dont agree how he handled the infrastructure meeting yesterday, we now have a whole new level of gridlock.  He just built a wall around his agenda.

Yes, Id be pissed off too if someone I was about to work with on a big deal accused me of covering things up hours before good faith negotiations. But only way to get anything done is to work with the Dems in the house when middle ground can be found.

You sometimes have to work with people you don't like if you want to do your job & get something accomplished.  This is something the freshman house dems among others dont understand either

Infrastructure would have been a win-win. But Trump creates a self inflicted wound...again.

Honestly, the man can not get out of his own way.  75%, I'd guess, of his wounds are self inflicted.

It's a bad look for him in a string of bad looks.  Fighting all the information requests and subpeonas (and losing, so far) in court isn't a good look for him, either.

I dont blame Trump for fighting the subpoenas, Mueller took two years to investigate him and did not find that any crime was committed. Now the house dems want to re do the investigation.    Seems more like politically motivated  harassment to me.

[pilferk]

I dont blame Trump for fighting the subpoenas, Mueller took two years to investigate him and did not find that any crime was committed. Now the house dems want to re do the investigation.    Seems more like politically motivated  harassment to me.

Yes, we know what Trumps twitter feed and Fox news have said.

The truth is: Congress has a constitutional mandate to provide oversight of the executive branch. It's right there in the Constitution. The Mueller Report clearly states that any remediation of the Obstruction allegations/charges/whatever have to go through congress, since he can't indict a sitting president.  He clearly says that he can not clear the president of wrong doing when it comes to Obstruction. And the report lays out what seems to be a pretty clear case that Obstruction occurred (and NOT both sides, as Barr insinuated in his letter).

So, Mueller thinks Trump probably committed a crime.  He can't indict a sitting president. So Congress has to pick up where the report left off.

So...wouldn't that mean the Mueller report is telling Congress to investigate Obstruction and act?  They can't just act.  That's unconstitutional. They have to investigate (yes, using the Mueller report as basis) and verify the information thats been presented to them. That requires interviewing witnesses and reviewing evidence...as any good prosecutor would tell you...and not just plowing forward with their heads down. They are literally doing their due diligence.

Its not a "do over", it's a "still doing".

Serious question: Have you read the full report?  I understand you keep getting told "NO COLLUSION! NO OBSTRUCTION!" but...the report doesn't actually say EITHER of those two things.  You should read it, if you haven't.

But none of that really matters.  He can not like it all he wants. It's their right (as a co-equal branch of government) to do it.  To refuse to do his job because the other branch is doing theirs is a dereliction of duty and a violation of his oath of office. Plain and simple.

Reagan did it, Bush I did it, Clinton did it, Bush II did it, Obama  did it.  Trump can put his big boy panties on and do it too.  Or he can scream like a petulant child and violate his oath of office (and obstruct even more...while taking highly publicized losses in court every day or so).  That stance isn't going to do him ANY favors.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Mueller and his team was pretty exhaustive,  2,800 subpoenas, 500 search warrants &  interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.  You'd think that would be the end all be all for the situation. Not sure what the house dems need to continue, was the Mueller team not thorough enough?? Nadler wants to slay the great orange whale.

 

[pilferk]

Mueller and his team was pretty exhaustive,  2,800 subpoenas, 500 search warrants &  interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.  You'd think that would be the end all be all for the situation. Not sure what the house dems need to continue, was the Mueller team not thorough enough?? Nadler wants to slay the great orange whale.

 

I agree. And again, we know what Trumps handout says.

And the report says the remedy for what was found, in terms of obstruction, has to go through Congress.

You are essentially saying that law enforcement found a crime and the prosecutor shouldn't build their case for court. Yes, you take muellers findings. But you have to actually interview the witnesses again, just like any prosecutor would, while building a case.

And again during trial.

Thsts the way this process works, and has always worked. Its what the Repubs did with Clinton, too, when Starr was done with his investigation.


Once more: have you actually read the report?

[Dr. Blutarsky]

No I have not read the whole report. Ive skimmed a it here and there. But the 400 pages is a bit of a task. So I guess you could throw that back in my face if you choose to. I am not saying a crime was committed, what crime are you saying was committed?

Bad behavior on the part of Trump? Sure. We have an election next year where people can voice their opinion and hold judgement over him.  Dems on committee are  trying to damage him politically & beyond that some are still trying to find a way forward to impeach him last year well before any finding were released so I question their intentions and motivation.

[tim_m]

Instructing administration officials to interfere with an ongoing investigation 10 different times is more then bad behavior.

[pilferk]

No I have not read the whole report. Ive skimmed a it here and there. But the 40 pages is a bit of a task. So I guess you could throw that back in my face if you choose to. I am not saying a crime was committed, what crime are you saying was committed?

400 pages, you mean.  Yes, it is.  But it's worth reading because the conclusions are VERY different than what the president tweets and what Barr summarized in his letter.

I'm not throwing it back in your face.  But you say it right at the end.

You can't, honestly, say that if you haven't read the report.

Because the report (which is what you referenced as reason Congress shouldn't continue) clearly lays out the Mueller thinks there is a case to be made (and he basically makes it) for Obstruction of Justice.  And that's the point I'm making. You're saying that even though law enforcement (Mueller) found a crime (Obstruction) that the prosecutors (Congress) shouldn't build their case for court (impeachment). That's the only remedy Mueller thinks can be applied here, since he can't indict, directly, a sitting president.

The only reason he doesn't make the specific allegation (and he says this in the report...again, you should read it) is because he feels he can't indict a sitting president and to make the allegation, directly, without providing Trump a way to defend himself is incongruous with his duties as a member of the Department of Justice. But he does specifically say he CAN NOT EXONERATE the president.

He says that Congress needs to make that determination and act within their span of power to remedy the crime.

That's what they are doing. Again, not a redo. A STILL DOING.

On the collusion front....Collusion isn't a crime.  And Mueller, in the report, says that both the Russians and the Trump campaigns took actions that benefitted the other side.  That's not technically illegal.

What would be illegal is if they engaged in a coordinated conspiracy to do it.  And Mueller couldn't find enough direct evidence to allege conspiracy. He says, RIGHT IN THE REPORT, that one of the reasons for that MIGHT BE the specific obstruction of the investigation, and the prevention of him a) getting materials he requested both from the US government and abroad b) speaking to certain witnesses who were not made directly available to him and c)specific untruths that he knows to have been told to him by specific witnesses.  He says just because HE couldn't find it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

But that's not the stuff the president will tweet about or Fox will cover in their talking points on the report.  They continue to parrot that the report says "NO COLLUSION!! NO OBSTRUCTION!!"  It doesn't say either of those two things.

Bad behavior on the part of Trump? Sure. We have an election next year where people can voice their opinion and hold judgement over him.  Dems on committee are  trying to damage him politically & beyond that some are still trying to find a way forward to impeach him last year well before any finding were released so I question their intentions and motivation.

Way more than that.

Make some time over the holiday weekend and read the report.  Don't let someone else...not even me...interpret it for you.  I honestly think it will open your eyes.

But...and I'm not being glib here...until you do, you can't really argue from a position of knowledge on this one.  You're letting someone else speak for you, based on their interpretation (likely partisan and agenda driven) of that report.

Congress is doing their constitutionally assigned job, part of which is oversight of the executive branch. And they're doing essentially what Mueller suggested in his report that they do.

You question their motives, I'd suggest, mostly because you cheer for the other team. It would be naive to say NONE of it is politically motivated.  It would be equally naive (and partisan) to say ALL of it is politically motivated.  There's enough evidence to justify their investigations, at this point.

Ask yourself this: Did you question the Repub controlled congresses motives when they went after Obama on Fast and the Furious, Benghazi, etc?
 

There is easily as much evidence Trump obstructed justice as there was at the outset of those investigation for those incidents.  As you pointed out...Mueller was pretty exhaustive (or as much as he could be).

[pilferk]

Instructing administration officials to interfere with an ongoing investigation 10 different times is more then bad behavior.

I mean...and that's just the tip of the iceberg.  There is SO much more than just that in the case Mueller lays out. 

[pilferk]

Waiting for fake Pelosi video to be posted here in 3.....2......1

[Dr. Blutarsky]

I can get into more later as I'm off to work, but just wanted to touch base on the comment regarding Republicans and Benghazi, Fast and Furious. If we had a special counsel look into those we probably would not have needed the multiple congressional investigations on them.  

 

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Waiting for fake Pelosi video to be posted here in 3.....2......1

I dont see the need for an edited video. There is enough unedited video out there on Pelosi that makes me question her sharpness and mental state  such as this one-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jr5TKYR64wc

Ok now I really have to go. You're getting me sucked into this.....enjoy the day fellas.

[pilferk]

I can get into more later as I'm off to work, but just wanted to touch base on the comment regarding Republicans and Benghazi, Fast and Furious. If we had a special counsel look into those we probably would not have needed the multiple congressional investigations on them.  

And, if we had, once the special council was done....there would have been additional congressional hearings/investigations.

As there have been EVERY other time a special council submits their report, and congress reviews it. All the way back to Whiskey Ring in 1875. And CERTAINLY in the years since Nixon. Iran-Contra (remember those congressional hearings on TV? Jeebus, it felt like Ollie North was on my TV screen for MONTHS), Whitewater (tons of congressional hearings after the Starr report), etc.

Again, this is the way it has happened in every previous instance of a special council's appointment when it has involved the president, and there were some findings that needed action.

So....if you're saying that you had no issue with the above investigations.....then you REALLY have no principled stand against these.