More Clinton ties on Mueller team

[Allybeboba]

You mean, like you do, with every mention of DTS or anything negative about Trump being partisan? You see the OP... right?

- - - Updated - - -



No, you didn’t disagree with any bias. You posted an article saying one of the investigators attended a Hillary party and knew Yates. You are not showing bias, but playing tribalism.

I don’t know what DTS is in the contex that you use it my friend.

Cheers

[unfilteredJW]

I don’t know what DTS is my friend.

Cheers

Why lie about something like this? What do you gain?

[Allybeboba]

Why lie about something like this? What do you gain?

Explain to me what DTS means in the contex he uses. In “texting” speak it means “down to snuggle”.

Cheers

[Felya]

Explain to me what DTS means in the contex he uses. In “texting” speak it means “down to snuggle”.

Cheers

You couldn’t tell I was referring to your use of TDS? When have you texted me?

- - - Updated - - -

Why lie about something like this? What do you gain?

Because that’s who he is... duh...

[Allybeboba]

You couldn’t tell I was referring to your use of TDS? When have you texted me

Didn’t realize it until later that was probably what you meant. I though it may have been another political acronym that I am not familiar with. The error was all mine.
You should know by now it isn’t my style to correct people’s spelling or typographical errors. That is akin to calling people names and such. I just consider that immature.

Cheers

[hakujinbakasama]

It's awful because political alliance should be absent the law. The fact that out Supreme Court is rife with political jerking is disgusting.

[Celista]

Sure is. If no democrat can investigate a republican, that would mean we're already biased.

Mueller is a Republican. Comey was a Republican until Trump shitcanned him for not dropping the investigation, now he's a registered independent. Apparently even other Republicans can't investigate Republicans at this point.

[Mormolyce]

This has somehow morphed into "if anyone on Mueller's team has ever had a political opinion in their life, or met a Clinton, they are compromised".

- - - Updated - - -

I don’t know what DTS is in the contex that you use it my friend.

Cheers

I can only assume it's Down To Suck.

[Cyberowl]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...-top-aide.html



Boy, it's great that we have a unbias, objective law enforcement investigative organization investigating our political leadership for corruption and wrong doing.....right?

I bet that was also your opinion about the Benghazi investigation, right?

[Venant]

Mueller is a Republican. Comey was a Republican until Trump shitcanned him for not dropping the investigation, now he's a registered independent. Apparently even other Republicans can't investigate Republicans at this point.

Yes all Republicans are exactly the same, just like Bernie Sanders was an exact duplicate of Hillary Clinton.

There are major factions in each party that are fighting for power. Trump is a populist/nationalist who is at ideological odds with the corporatists/Neocons. It would seem that a politicians alignment to these factions is largely based upon how desperate he/she is to get a high salary position (payoff) once leaving office. (that is, if they even wait to leave office, and they aren't already getting massive payoffs from board positions while still in office)

[Allybeboba]

This has somehow morphed into "if anyone on Mueller's team has ever had a political opinion in their life, or met a Clinton, they are compromised".

- - - Updated - - -



I can only assume it's Down To Suck.

If that is what one has on their mind I guess it could be. As I often state, it is all about your own perception.
A pessimistic person would view something totally differently than an optimistic person would.


Cheers

[Mormolyce]

If that is what one has on their mind I guess it could be. As I often state, it is all about your own perception.
A pessimistic person would view something totally differently than an optimistic person would.

Down To Suck is pessimistic?

[GennGreymane]

This has somehow morphed into "if anyone on Mueller's team has ever had a political opinion in their life, or met a Clinton, they are compromised".

- - - Updated - - -



I can only assume it's Down To Suck.

HES COMPROMISED!

[cubby]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...-top-aide.html



Boy, it's great that we have a unbias, objective law enforcement investigative organization investigating our political leadership for corruption and wrong doing.....right?

More bullshit reasons to ignore the building tide against the deplorable regime, yeppers.

You Trumpkins will do anything to detract from reality nowadays, won't'cha? I understand that the Trump administration is now focusing on discrediting the investigative team because they are finding so much on them there is literally no other course of action available to them. Glad to see Faux "News" is carrying the deplorable torch.

#deplorable45

- - - Updated - - -

Who appointed him?

And this is my favorite question of all time.

[rogueMatthias]

Everyone has their own political opinion so it's hard to let that get in the way and you have to assume people are professional and put their biases aside when investigating these things.

That said, it's hard to see why Mueller let people on the team who were known to have donated thousands to Trumps direct opposition - it's such an easy target for anyone to bring their findings into disrepute.

[Daelak]

Late to the party, but that’s not why she was fired. She was fired for taking a political stance and not defending the travel ban. The same ban all signs show SCOTUS supporting since they’ve smacked down two stats so far. Try to keep the same facts as everyone else. Then you won’t make up narratives in your head.

It wasn't political, it was because the government will never be able to prove their argument for the ban, considering there hasn't been any terrorist strikes made by people from those countries while also downplaying the current vetting process as incomplete or substandard, even though is has been objectively one of the most stringent immigration processes in the world. She was doing the Trump Administration a favor. This is the same rigamarole conservatives play with DACA. The expansion of parameters of DACA (age) were being litigated against, not the actual program, because it would be impossible to argue that the program is unconstitutional.

[Daelak]

Umm, except they’re doing just that. Sure, the President can make whomever he wants a lower deportation priority. He can in effect tell ICE not to deport any arbitrary class. But he can’t confer a legal status to them, which is what DACA did. That some of you think Obama’s EO was legal while Trump’s wasn’t, shows how few understand the constitution and the law. The constitution allows Trump to somewhat controls what non citizens enter the country so long as he isn’t in violation of congressional law. It didn’t allow Obama to ignore congressional law and give a legal status to millions of illegals, as was determined in DAPA and will be affirmed in DACA should it make it to SCOTUS. All these lawsuits on behalf of illegals are going to end in SCOTUS ruling the initial waiver by Obama was unconstitutional.

No they aren't. The current lawsuit that has to with DACA has nothing to do with the existence of the program, and everything to do with the expanded parameters of who would be protected under DACA, a much easier argument to contest, and one without the burden of expelling millions of people without their families in a foreign country. Which if it goes to SCOTUS will certainly be one of the first questions asked by the Justices.

The government's argument, if it makes it to SCOTUS, will have to overcome the objective results of the success of not only the recent Obama mandate for stricter processes and monitoring of those countries, which the Obama DOJ and Immigration thought was prudent, they also have to argue why during the stated six month timeline, no terrorist attacks.

[Daelak]

I don’t know where you’re getting your information, but numerous states are suing on the grounds Obama didn’t have the constitutional authority to create DACA. (Something he himself claimed before doing it).

The President can’t declare millions of people legal residents. He doesn’t have that authority.

And quit the hyperbole. It’s not a foreign country. It’s their home.

Here's the lawsuit they filed in 2014, after Obama wanted to expand who was eligible to be protected under DACA.

https://web.archive.org/web/20150402...uit%281%29.pdf

They were not filing suit against the existence of DACA which was created in 2012 with narrower parameters.

It isn't hyperbole, they were children when they entered the US and have been here longer than five years. Most are in college, spending the majority of their life in the US. This is the only country they know.

[Grapemask]

And quit the hyperbole. It’s not a foreign country. It’s their home.

Their home being America, right? Or am I misreading this? Because it's about their "home" as Mexico would be if you found out today that you were actually born in Mexico.

[Noxx79]

My passport and birth certificate all say born in the USA. And my parents are US citizens, so your point is moot. DACA covers anyone brought in illegally until the age of 16. Quit pretending these are all infants. If you came over at 13 and didn’t know the country you lived in for the previous 13 years is where you were born, you’re retarded.

I’m interested in the law. Not your own version of morality that’s as thought out as a 14 year old’s manifesto. Either Obama wasn’t a “constitutional scholar” when he said he lacked the authority or he violated the constitution to create a political hand grenade. Either way, what he did was legally wrong. No one asked anyone to violate the law to come to America.

Lack of empathy is a sign of emotional immaturity, like an edgy 14 year old.


If you found out your parents lied to you and you were brought here as a minor, you'd deport yourself, right?