Wildcat said:
ogling the office ho that dresses like a wench on the one day of the year it is socially acceptable.
Good god man we have rules here.
Wildcat said:
ogling the office ho that dresses like a wench on the one day of the year it is socially acceptable.
backintexas2013 said:Wildcat said:
ogling the office ho that dresses like a wench on the one day of the year it is socially acceptable.
Good god man we have rules here.
I agree, but it will certainly rev up this thread. It's been in need of a little information blast that we can all review and research.backintexas2013 said:
Dozens of indictments? I call bs.
I really hope a sexual assault allegation comes out. It will be a thing of beauty.
Prognightmare said:
I just followed you with my new account on Twitter. Last one caught the perma last weekend.
Quote:
Wildcat said:SpreadsheetAg said:
What a load of crap. If it was to break tomorrow, it would break today. No one sits on a story of such magnitude to drop it on Halloween while everyone is distracted by handing out candy to kids and ogling the office ho that dresses like a wench on the one day of the year it is socially acceptable.
Obligatory, meth is a helluva drug.Quote:
ETA. Interesting anecdote. Here in Oklahoma a I'm constantly seeing "healthy" gals like this paired up with guys that are rail thin, about half their weight, and 4 inches shorter. I've never understood that but it's something prevalent in these parts.
aggiehawg said:Obligatory, meth is a helluva drug.Quote:
ETA. Interesting anecdote. Here in Oklahoma a I'm constantly seeing "healthy" gals like this paired up with guys that are rail thin, about half their weight, and 4 inches shorter. I've never understood that but it's something prevalent in these parts.
Obligatory rule #1fasthorses05 said:
Holy Cow, man.
That's certainly no Dia del Muerte.
Quote:
...As I've written before, the Russia investigation is a puzzle designed never to be solved. The investigation's ongoing nature is Rosenstein's tool to thwart congressional oversight and further public disclosure of U.S. Department of Justice's collaboration with the Hillary Clinton campaign's effort to tilt the 2016 election and subsequently to undermine the Trump administration. Upon Rosenstein's signing of the final Carter Page Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant application and participation in firing former FBI director James Comey, the investigation's endlessness protects his skin.
If the purpose of the investigation is to prevent more details of Clinton-DOJ collusion from ever reaching Congress and the public, then DOJ is absolutely correct that disclosing the Page FISA warrant application will obstruct that very un-justice-like goal. But the idea that making this information public would obstruct legitimate investigative objectives of the Mueller probe just doesn't make any sense. As I previously wrote, there doesn't seem to be any logical or coherent explanation for why Mueller needs that information to remain secret in order to finish his investigation.
If President Trump were to declassify this information, the DOJ could attempt to refer the case the House of Representatives for impeachment under an obstruction of justice theory. But this would require articulating a coherent explanation about why continued secrecy would help Mueller investigate Trump-Russia collusion.
And that's the paradox. The obstruction theory only works if Mueller and Rosenstein can legitimately show that the de-classification interfered with a legitimate investigative objective. It's reasonable to assume that the president wouldn't be trying to get the information out if he believed he were guilty of collusion with the Russians.
One can see how the subject's innocence would significantly undermine an investigation. But is the innocence of a target a legitimate and lawful reason for the Department of Justice to frustrate the will of both the elected president and Congress to inform Americans of the DOJ's shenanigans in the 2016 election?...
backintexas2013 said:
Found it. This is awesome on so many levels.
Two weeks ago, I was contacted by a woman who claimed to be a former associate of Mueller who said that she got a phone call from a man working on behalf of a GOP operative who was paying women to come forward to make up sexual assault allegations.
Quote:
I worked on this story and chased down leads, but found the woman to be very unreliable. She wouldn't get on the phone, she lied about journalists she was working with, etc. Furthermore, I got in contact with the man who allegedly was offering the money....
Quote:
He was extremely willing to confirm that he was indeed paying women to tell stories about Mueller. I concluded that this was an effort to discredit journalists working on the Trump-Russia story by planting a false story and see who would print it.