Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Think about this: nobody is asking him to have an automatic acceptance of something shadowy or imprecise. One, don't throw your country under the ****ing bus. Two, he is asked, and should have no problem complying, to defend, a little even, the unanimous conclusion of all the intelligence agencies in America. MAGA, you know.

I thought Trump would have all the investigation stopped after reading this board. Fortunately, Trump keeps giving them a great deal to work with and now cowards and traitors like General Flynn are going down.
Flynn is probably going to hang himself in prison. He's going to take orders from federal inmates and not like it.

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Think about this: nobody is asking him to have an automatic acceptance of something shadowy or imprecise. One, don't throw your country under the ****ing bus. Two, he is asked, and should have no problem complying, to defend, a little even, the unanimous conclusion of all the intelligence agencies in America. MAGA, you know.

---

Why on earth would he defend the Mueller probe which is an abomination of justice?
Dude's ruthlessly trying to overturn the election and desperately trying to cover up for the DOJ and the Clinton's.

They have weaponized politically against Trump and you expect Trump to praise or defend them?

The reason you're outraged is one: you hate Trump, and two you have NO IDEA what is really going on here.

Doc Holliday said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Think about this: nobody is asking him to have an automatic acceptance of something shadowy or imprecise. One, don't throw your country under the ****ing bus. Two, he is asked, and should have no problem complying, to defend, a little even, the unanimous conclusion of all the intelligence agencies in America. MAGA, you know.

---

Why on earth would he defend the Mueller probe which is an abomination of justice?
Dude's ruthlessly trying to overturn the election and desperately trying to cover up for the DOJ and the Clinton's.

They have weaponized politically against Trump and you expect Trump to praise or defend them?

The reason you're outraged is one: you hate Trump, and two you have NO IDEA what is really going on here.

---

I don't hate Trump and your idea of "what is really going on" is based on conspiracy theories, not facts.

Mueller is conducting a by the book investigation. Any leaks about what he's doing come from outside his staff. In other words, all we really have are his indictments and convictions, plus what tbose questioned have said. And that last group does not contain insiders on the investigative team.

If you have evidence (that the IG must have overlooked) that Mueller is doing anything wrong, much less presiding over an abomination of justice to overturn an election, then show it.

But please, try to keep it factual.

say's the democrat that believes every word from Fire & Fury: Inside The Trump White House

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Think about this: nobody is asking him to have an automatic acceptance of something shadowy or imprecise. One, don't throw your country under the ****ing bus. Two, he is asked, and should have no problem complying, to defend, a little even, the unanimous conclusion of all the intelligence agencies in America. MAGA, you know.

---

Why on earth would he defend the Mueller probe which is an abomination of justice?
Dude's ruthlessly trying to overturn the election and desperately trying to cover up for the DOJ and the Clinton's.

They have weaponized politically against Trump and you expect Trump to praise or defend them?

The reason you're outraged is one: you hate Trump, and two you have NO IDEA what is really going on here.

---

I don't hate Trump and your idea of "what is really going on" is based on conspiracy theories, not facts.

Mueller is conducting a by the book investigation. Any leaks about what he's doing come from outside his staff. In other words, all we really have are his indictments and convictions, plus what tbose questioned have said. And that last group does not contain insiders on the investigative team.

If you have evidence (that the IG must have overlooked) that Mueller is doing anything wrong, much less presiding over an abomination of justice to overturn an election, then show it.

But please, try to keep it factual.

---

It's not based on conspiracy theories at all.
I have asked simple questions based on facts that you guys REFUSE to answer.

Ex: Muellers latest indictment - they used a firm (Crowdstrike).

Perkins Coie, a law firm, hires and pays Crowdstrike.

They also hire and pay FusionGPS.

Mueller and the FBI used Crowdstrike for their claims of Russian hackers...the FBI also used FusionGPS for the dossier that used to get a FISA warrant to spy on Trump.

Hillary Clinton and the DNC also uses Perkins Coie as their personal law firm.

These are major conflicts of interests backed up by facts.
But you will continue to overlook this.

Dems now claiming Mueller/FBI didn't need direct access to DNC/DCCC servers & computers b/c he had "images" from CrowdStrike. Really?See IG report, which makes clear how critical it was for FBI to physically acquire devices & servers in Hillary email case.But not in Russia case?!

In latest development Mueller is offering Podesta immunity to testify against manafort for what they did together

Mueller hopes to flip manafort against Trump

Ok, what does that mean? Tony Podesta is tied to Clinton's tightly. Manafort is tied very loosely to Trump.

Mueller offers immunity to one tied to Clinton to Crucify manafort, tied to Trump, and they both did same thing together

That's corruption

Additionally, manafort is in solitary confinement as Podesta is relatively free soon

Florda_mike said:

---

In latest development Mueller is offering Podesta immunity to testify against manafort for what they did together

Mueller hopes to flip manafort against Trump

Ok, what does that mean? Tony Podesta is tied to Clinton's tightly. Manafort is tied very loosely to Trump.

Mueller offers immunity to one tied to Clinton to Crucify manafort, tied to Trump, and they both did same thing together

That's corruption

Additionally, manafort is in solitary confinement as Podesta is relatively free soon

---

I'm trying to figure out what he's getting immunity for:

Conspiracy against the U.S?
Money laundering?
FARA violations?
False FARA statements.

Those crimes could put him in prison for the rest of his life.

Florda_mike said:

---

In latest development Mueller is offering Podesta immunity to testify against manafort for what they did together

Mueller hopes to flip manafort against Trump

Ok, what does that mean? Tony Podesta is tied to Clinton's tightly. Manafort is tied very loosely to Trump.

Mueller offers immunity to one tied to Clinton to Crucify manafort, tied to Trump, and they both did same thing together

That's corruption

Additionally, manafort is in solitary confinement as Podesta is relatively free soon

---

Where is corruption? I'd say a prosecutor is pursuing a conspiracy. There may be nothing at the end of the rainbow, but plea/sentence negotiations are not corrupt.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

In latest development Mueller is offering Podesta immunity to testify against manafort for what they did together

Mueller hopes to flip manafort against Trump

Ok, what does that mean? Tony Podesta is tied to Clinton's tightly. Manafort is tied very loosely to Trump.

Mueller offers immunity to one tied to Clinton to Crucify manafort, tied to Trump, and they both did same thing together

That's corruption

Additionally, manafort is in solitary confinement as Podesta is relatively free soon

---

I'm trying to figure out what he's getting immunity for:

Conspiracy against the U.S?
Money laundering?
FARA violations?
False FARA statements.

Those crimes could put him in prison for the rest of his life.

---

Yeah they'll get Manfort on same and he'll cave(he'll then lie about Trump if needed) or manafort will die in prison! That's the Mueller MO! He's an SOB that'll probably never pay for his own corruption in this life

Manafort is accused of income tax fraud. He made millions and didn't declare it.

Trump hired him

Osodecentx said:

---

Manafort is accused of income tax fraud. He made millions and didn't declare it.

Trump hired him

---

Yes, and not only that: Trump's ties to the Kremlin and to money laundering were widely known at the time Trump hired him to be his campaign manager. It's not like all this stuff surfaced later and to everyone's surprise.

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Think about this: nobody is asking him to have an automatic acceptance of something shadowy or imprecise. One, don't throw your country under the ****ing bus. Two, he is asked, and should have no problem complying, to defend, a little even, the unanimous conclusion of all the intelligence agencies in America. MAGA, you know.

---

Why on earth would he defend the Mueller probe which is an abomination of justice?
Dude's ruthlessly trying to overturn the election and desperately trying to cover up for the DOJ and the Clinton's.

They have weaponized politically against Trump and you expect Trump to praise or defend them?

The reason you're outraged is one: you hate Trump, and two you have NO IDEA what is really going on here.

---

I don't hate Trump and your idea of "what is really going on" is based on conspiracy theories, not facts.

Mueller is conducting a by the book investigation. Any leaks about what he's doing come from outside his staff. In other words, all we really have are his indictments and convictions, plus what tbose questioned have said. And that last group does not contain insiders on the investigative team.

If you have evidence (that the IG must have overlooked) that Mueller is doing anything wrong, much less presiding over an abomination of justice to overturn an election, then show it.

But please, try to keep it factual.

---

It's by the book in every respect but one: there's no justification for its existence.

Doc Holliday said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Think about this: nobody is asking him to have an automatic acceptance of something shadowy or imprecise. One, don't throw your country under the ****ing bus. Two, he is asked, and should have no problem complying, to defend, a little even, the unanimous conclusion of all the intelligence agencies in America. MAGA, you know.

---

Why on earth would he defend the Mueller probe which is an abomination of justice?
Dude's ruthlessly trying to overturn the election and desperately trying to cover up for the DOJ and the Clinton's.

They have weaponized politically against Trump and you expect Trump to praise or defend them?

The reason you're outraged is one: you hate Trump, and two you have NO IDEA what is really going on here.

---

I don't hate Trump and your idea of "what is really going on" is based on conspiracy theories, not facts.

Mueller is conducting a by the book investigation. Any leaks about what he's doing come from outside his staff. In other words, all we really have are his indictments and convictions, plus what tbose questioned have said. And that last group does not contain insiders on the investigative team.

If you have evidence (that the IG must have overlooked) that Mueller is doing anything wrong, much less presiding over an abomination of justice to overturn an election, then show it.

But please, try to keep it factual.

---

It's not based on conspiracy theories at all.
I have asked simple questions based on facts that you guys REFUSE to answer.

Ex: Muellers latest indictment - they used a firm (Crowdstrike).

Perkins Coie, a law firm, hires and pays Crowdstrike.

They also hire and pay FusionGPS.

Mueller and the FBI used Crowdstrike for their claims of Russian hackers...the FBI also used FusionGPS for the dossier that used to get a FISA warrant to spy on Trump.

Hillary Clinton and the DNC also uses Perkins Coie as their personal law firm.

These are major conflicts of interests backed up by facts.
But you will continue to overlook this.

Dems now claiming Mueller/FBI didn't need direct access to DNC/DCCC servers & computers b/c he had "images" from CrowdStrike. Really?See IG report, which makes clear how critical it was for FBI to physically acquire devices & servers in Hillary email case.But not in Russia case?!

---

Gonna need more than "they used a firm" to establish a conflict.

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Think about this: nobody is asking him to have an automatic acceptance of something shadowy or imprecise. One, don't throw your country under the ****ing bus. Two, he is asked, and should have no problem complying, to defend, a little even, the unanimous conclusion of all the intelligence agencies in America. MAGA, you know.

---

Why on earth would he defend the Mueller probe which is an abomination of justice?
Dude's ruthlessly trying to overturn the election and desperately trying to cover up for the DOJ and the Clinton's.

They have weaponized politically against Trump and you expect Trump to praise or defend them?

The reason you're outraged is one: you hate Trump, and two you have NO IDEA what is really going on here.

---

I don't hate Trump and your idea of "what is really going on" is based on conspiracy theories, not facts.

Mueller is conducting a by the book investigation. Any leaks about what he's doing come from outside his staff. In other words, all we really have are his indictments and convictions, plus what tbose questioned have said. And that last group does not contain insiders on the investigative team.

If you have evidence (that the IG must have overlooked) that Mueller is doing anything wrong, much less presiding over an abomination of justice to overturn an election, then show it.

But please, try to keep it factual.

---

It's by the book in every respect but one: there's no justification for its existence.

---

Indictments notwithstanding...

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Think about this: nobody is asking him to have an automatic acceptance of something shadowy or imprecise. One, don't throw your country under the ****ing bus. Two, he is asked, and should have no problem complying, to defend, a little even, the unanimous conclusion of all the intelligence agencies in America. MAGA, you know.

---

Why on earth would he defend the Mueller probe which is an abomination of justice?
Dude's ruthlessly trying to overturn the election and desperately trying to cover up for the DOJ and the Clinton's.

They have weaponized politically against Trump and you expect Trump to praise or defend them?

The reason you're outraged is one: you hate Trump, and two you have NO IDEA what is really going on here.

---

I don't hate Trump and your idea of "what is really going on" is based on conspiracy theories, not facts.

Mueller is conducting a by the book investigation. Any leaks about what he's doing come from outside his staff. In other words, all we really have are his indictments and convictions, plus what tbose questioned have said. And that last group does not contain insiders on the investigative team.

If you have evidence (that the IG must have overlooked) that Mueller is doing anything wrong, much less presiding over an abomination of justice to overturn an election, then show it.

But please, try to keep it factual.

---

It's by the book in every respect but one: there's no justification for its existence.

---

Indictments notwithstanding...

---

Doc is closer to the truth than you might think. Not about the conflicts of interest, but about the political nature of the special counsel appointment. There already was, and should have been, an active investigation of Russian interference. You don't need a special counsel to find what they found on these 12 Russians. You don't need indictments when there's no extradition treaty and no chance the cases will ever be tried. The indictments serve one and only one purpose, that for which you just used them--to provide the appearance of justification after the fact. Otherwise they're not worth the paper they're printed on.

As if to prove as much, the indictments have now been buried in the DOJ's National Security Division. This tells us two things. First, they're not prosecutable. Second, the DOJ has no conflict of interest. Yet these are the only two reasons a special counsel should ever have been appointed in the first place. Rather than prove the need for his position, Mueller has just demonstrated how irrelevant he is to any legitimate investigation.

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Think about this: nobody is asking him to have an automatic acceptance of something shadowy or imprecise. One, don't throw your country under the ****ing bus. Two, he is asked, and should have no problem complying, to defend, a little even, the unanimous conclusion of all the intelligence agencies in America. MAGA, you know.

---

Why on earth would he defend the Mueller probe which is an abomination of justice?
Dude's ruthlessly trying to overturn the election and desperately trying to cover up for the DOJ and the Clinton's.

They have weaponized politically against Trump and you expect Trump to praise or defend them?

The reason you're outraged is one: you hate Trump, and two you have NO IDEA what is really going on here.

---

I don't hate Trump and your idea of "what is really going on" is based on conspiracy theories, not facts.

Mueller is conducting a by the book investigation. Any leaks about what he's doing come from outside his staff. In other words, all we really have are his indictments and convictions, plus what tbose questioned have said. And that last group does not contain insiders on the investigative team.

If you have evidence (that the IG must have overlooked) that Mueller is doing anything wrong, much less presiding over an abomination of justice to overturn an election, then show it.

But please, try to keep it factual.

---

It's by the book in every respect but one: there's no justification for its existence.

---

Indictments notwithstanding...

---

Doc is closer to the truth than you might think. Not about the conflicts of interest, but about the political nature of the special counsel appointment. There already was, and should have been, an active investigation of Russian interference. You don't need a special counsel to find what they found on these 12 Russians. You don't need indictments when there's no extradition treaty and no chance the cases will ever be tried. The indictments serve one and only one purpose, that for which you just used them--to provide the appearance of justification after the fact. Otherwise they're not worth the paper they're printed on.

As if to prove as much, the indictments have now been buried in the DOJ's National Security Division. This tells us two things. First, they're not prosecutable. Second, the DOJ has no conflict of interest. Yet these are the only two reasons a special counsel should ever have been appointed in the first place. Rather than prove the need for his position, Mueller has just demonstrated how irrelevant he is to any legitimate investigation.

---

There are more than Russians indicted, including Trump's former campaign manager. That does not create "an abomination of justice". Try holding Doc to the facts, not me.

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Think about this: nobody is asking him to have an automatic acceptance of something shadowy or imprecise. One, don't throw your country under the ****ing bus. Two, he is asked, and should have no problem complying, to defend, a little even, the unanimous conclusion of all the intelligence agencies in America. MAGA, you know.

---

Why on earth would he defend the Mueller probe which is an abomination of justice?
Dude's ruthlessly trying to overturn the election and desperately trying to cover up for the DOJ and the Clinton's.

They have weaponized politically against Trump and you expect Trump to praise or defend them?

The reason you're outraged is one: you hate Trump, and two you have NO IDEA what is really going on here.

---

I don't hate Trump and your idea of "what is really going on" is based on conspiracy theories, not facts.

Mueller is conducting a by the book investigation. Any leaks about what he's doing come from outside his staff. In other words, all we really have are his indictments and convictions, plus what tbose questioned have said. And that last group does not contain insiders on the investigative team.

If you have evidence (that the IG must have overlooked) that Mueller is doing anything wrong, much less presiding over an abomination of justice to overturn an election, then show it.

But please, try to keep it factual.

---

It's by the book in every respect but one: there's no justification for its existence.

---

Indictments notwithstanding...

---

Doc is closer to the truth than you might think. Not about the conflicts of interest, but about the political nature of the special counsel appointment. There already was, and should have been, an active investigation of Russian interference. You don't need a special counsel to find what they found on these 12 Russians. You don't need indictments when there's no extradition treaty and no chance the cases will ever be tried. The indictments serve one and only one purpose, that for which you just used them--to provide the appearance of justification after the fact. Otherwise they're not worth the paper they're printed on.

As if to prove as much, the indictments have now been buried in the DOJ's National Security Division. This tells us two things. First, they're not prosecutable. Second, the DOJ has no conflict of interest. Yet these are the only two reasons a special counsel should ever have been appointed in the first place. Rather than prove the need for his position, Mueller has just demonstrated how irrelevant he is to any legitimate investigation.

---

There are more than Russians indicted, including Trump's former campaign manager. That does not create "an abomination of justice". Try holding Doc to the facts, not me.

---

Doc posts a lot. I noticed he was wrong about the Perkins Coie thing, but I'm not in charge of catching his every mistake. Or yours.

Indicting people for making false statements doesn't go to the original justification for the special counsel. You can always hook someone if you fish long enough.

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Are you talking the intel agencies or Trump? Irony meter is going off when you speak of imprecise, non specific. Notice Trumps use of "things."

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

quash said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you don't automatically accept the imprecise, non specific, never fully explained finding of shadowy intelligence agencies that have long track records of making serious mistakes, you've betrayed your country. They must be believed without question, or else.

Think about that.

---

Think about this: nobody is asking him to have an automatic acceptance of something shadowy or imprecise. One, don't throw your country under the ****ing bus. Two, he is asked, and should have no problem complying, to defend, a little even, the unanimous conclusion of all the intelligence agencies in America. MAGA, you know.

---

Why on earth would he defend the Mueller probe which is an abomination of justice?
Dude's ruthlessly trying to overturn the election and desperately trying to cover up for the DOJ and the Clinton's.

They have weaponized politically against Trump and you expect Trump to praise or defend them?

The reason you're outraged is one: you hate Trump, and two you have NO IDEA what is really going on here.

---

I don't hate Trump and your idea of "what is really going on" is based on conspiracy theories, not facts.

Mueller is conducting a by the book investigation. Any leaks about what he's doing come from outside his staff. In other words, all we really have are his indictments and convictions, plus what tbose questioned have said. And that last group does not contain insiders on the investigative team.

If you have evidence (that the IG must have overlooked) that Mueller is doing anything wrong, much less presiding over an abomination of justice to overturn an election, then show it.

But please, try to keep it factual.

---

It's by the book in every respect but one: there's no justification for its existence.

---

Indictments notwithstanding...

---

Doc is closer to the truth than you might think. Not about the conflicts of interest, but about the political nature of the special counsel appointment. There already was, and should have been, an active investigation of Russian interference. You don't need a special counsel to find what they found on these 12 Russians. You don't need indictments when there's no extradition treaty and no chance the cases will ever be tried. The indictments serve one and only one purpose, that for which you just used them--to provide the appearance of justification after the fact. Otherwise they're not worth the paper they're printed on.

As if to prove as much, the indictments have now been buried in the DOJ's National Security Division. This tells us two things. First, they're not prosecutable. Second, the DOJ has no conflict of interest. Yet these are the only two reasons a special counsel should ever have been appointed in the first place. Rather than prove the need for his position, Mueller has just demonstrated how irrelevant he is to any legitimate investigation.

---

There are more than Russians indicted, including Trump's former campaign manager. That does not create "an abomination of justice". Try holding Doc to the facts, not me.

---

Doc posts a lot. I noticed he was wrong about the Perkins Coie thing, but I'm not in charge of catching his every mistake. Or yours.

Indicting people for making false statements doesn't go to the original justification for the special counsel. You can always hook someone if you fish long enough.

---

Look at the original order. While investigating their primary assignment they can prosecute anything thehy find along the way. Can, but not required to. They have handed off some things, held on to others.

What I have said all along is let it play out. Trump's almost daily meltdowns serve his base but not his case.