If you plant ice....

 "This is it, see!!!"

You've been right all along Thom. 

Glad it's over now. lol

I mean except for Manafort giving poling data directly to Russians.  What’s the excuse?  They were stop stupid to realize what they were doing?

Actually Thom, the money they seized from dirty traitor comrade Manafort will pay for most of the investigation cost, so its good to go for a few more years, all paid up.

First a Washington Post article, now msnbc. Is Thom turning into a closet liberal?

>>>Senate Democrats Agree No Russian Collusion

 

cool, what's their consensus on obstruction of justice?

Wait, so is this "Fake News" or "Fake Investigation"????

OK, I just watched the clip (thanks, Thom):

 

"...There aren't that many witnesses left to interview..."

 

Calling Mr. Cohen....are you ready yet?

Thom watches a lot of TV for a librarian.

Didn't Stone pled the 5th with the Senate?

Go shelve a book.

 

Thom. Wrong again.

 

>Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee are pushing back on a claim by the panel’s chair, Richard Burr (R-N.C.), that the committee’s two-year investigation has not found “anything that would suggest there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.” And they dispute an NBC News report saying that Democrats agreed with Burr that they have yet to see clear evidence of a conspiracy between President Donald Trump and Moscow.

“That’s not true,” Sen. Angus King, a Maine independent who caucuses with Democrats, told Mother Jones. “I think it’s misleading. The intelligence committee hasn’t discussed the matter, let alone released a committee report.”

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/02/senate-intelligence-committ...

Thom, it takes a minimum of 5 years to investigate a campaign thoroughly.

“How many legs does a dog have if you call his tail a leg? Four.

Saying that a tail is a leg doesn't make it a leg.”

~ Abraham Lincoln

The long process of walking back two years of fantasy has begun<<<

Project much?

Gonna be a lotta wind in that library pretty soon.

Go shelve a book.<<<

Lol , but rather harsh, no?

How much for a dipshit tax?

>>>Lol , but rather harsh, no?

”shelve a book” is harsh? LOL is “go check your microfiche” ok? 

I get the feeling this thread won’t age well 

Word of the day "microfiche"

Someone on Quora asked "Why do some British people not like Donald Trump?" Nate White, an articulate and witty writer from England wrote this magnificent response.

A few things spring to mind.

Trump lacks certain qualities which the British traditionally esteem.

For instance, he has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no compassion, no wit, no warmth, no wisdom, no subtlety, no sensitivity, no self-awareness, no humility, no honour and no grace - all qualities, funnily enough, with which his predecessor Mr. Obama was generously blessed.

So for us, the stark contrast does rather throw Trump’s limitations into embarrassingly sharp relief.

Plus, we like a laugh. And while Trump may be laughable, he has never once said anything wry, witty or even faintly amusing - not once, ever.

I don’t say that rhetorically, I mean it quite literally: not once, not ever. And that fact is particularly disturbing to the British sensibility - for us, to lack humour is almost inhuman.

But with Trump, it’s a fact. He doesn’t even seem to understand what a joke is - his idea of a joke is a crass comment, an illiterate insult, a casual act of cruelty.

Trump is a troll. And like all trolls, he is never funny and he never laughs; he only crows or jeers.

And scarily, he doesn’t just talk in crude, witless insults - he actually thinks in them. His mind is a simple bot-like algorithm of petty prejudices and knee-jerk nastiness.

There is never any under-layer of irony, complexity, nuance or depth. It’s all surface.

Some Americans might see this as refreshingly upfront.

Well, we don’t. We see it as having no inner world, no soul.

And in Britain we traditionally side with David, not Goliath. All our heroes are plucky underdogs: Robin Hood, Dick Whittington, Oliver Twist.

Trump is neither plucky, nor an underdog. He is the exact opposite of that.

He’s not even a spoiled rich-boy, or a greedy fat-cat.

He’s more a fat white slug. A Jabba the Hutt of privilege.

And worse, he is that most unforgivable of all things to the British: a bully.

That is, except when he is among bullies; then he suddenly transforms into a snivelling sidekick instead.

There are unspoken rules to this stuff - the Queensberry rules of basic decency - and he breaks them all. He punches downwards - which a gentleman should, would, could never do - and every blow he aims is below the belt. He particularly likes to kick the vulnerable or voiceless - and he kicks them when they are down.

So the fact that a significant minority - perhaps a third - of Americans look at what he does, listen to what he says, and then think 'Yeah, he seems like my kind of guy’ is a matter of some confusion and no little distress to British people, given that:
* Americans are supposed to be nicer than us, and mostly are.
* You don't need a particularly keen eye for detail to spot a few flaws in the man.

This last point is what especially confuses and dismays British people, and many other people too; his faults seem pretty bloody hard to miss.

After all, it’s impossible to read a single tweet, or hear him speak a sentence or two, without staring deep into the abyss. He turns being artless into an art form; he is a Picasso of pettiness; a Shakespeare of shit. His faults are fractal: even his flaws have flaws, and so on ad infinitum.

God knows there have always been stupid people in the world, and plenty of nasty people too. But rarely has stupidity been so nasty, or nastiness so stupid.

He makes Nixon look trustworthy and George W look smart.

In fact, if Frankenstein decided to make a monster assembled entirely from human flaws - he would make a Trump.

And a remorseful Doctor Frankenstein would clutch out big clumpfuls of hair and scream in anguish:

'My God… what… have… I… created?

If being a twat was a TV show, Trump would be the boxed set.

>>"MSNBC Reporting Senate Democrats Agree No Russian Collusion…."

>>The long process of walking back two years of fantasy has begun.

 

Except it was untrue:

Silly Democrats

Expecting Justice from a repub led investigation

 

^correct, the Republicans are only able to conduct sham investigations,  their eight years of investigations into the Obama administration is proof of this.

Devin, take one for the team, Nunes

now also the subject of a house investigation.

Can you say, Obstruction ?

Never seen such devotion in droids before.

But the repubs devotion to trump is totally warranted.

They got their tax cut for the rich,

And 2 on the SC maybe 3

Whatever they do going forward is gravy -  possible wall.

Truth, Justice And The American Way be damned.

Their morally bankrupt end justify's their unorthodox means.

 

Thom, spend 5 minutes reading this thread: https://twitter.com/sethabramson/status/1095685694012432384?s=21

Did you hear Trump has personally paid for at least 8 abortions?

Timmy, I'm not sure Thom can handle 5 minutes of the truth. 

22 trillion and rising debt now.

https://twitter.com/JoeNBC/status/1089178316681162752

 

 

John McCain's 2008 campaign manager:  https://twitter.com/SteveSchmidtSES/status/1083038812639510533

>>>>Did you hear Trump has personally paid for at least 8 abortions?

Is that bad?

FWIW:

 

How Team Trump keeps changing its story in the Russia investigation

 

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/politics/trump-team-russia-then-now/

>22 trillion and rising debt now.<

wait, i thought "conservatives" were anti-debt?

oh, i see not when we are going into debt to fund corporations and billionaires. got it.

Riiight, Thom.  There's NOTHING to see here. Let's listen to the Senators who don't have Rick Gates telling them exactly what went down.  Lets listen to the Senators who don't have General Flynn telling them exactly what went down. Yeah, that's it. 

"NOTHING TO SEE HERE!" - deaf, blind, decrepit THOM

here's the latest bombshell from the WaPo from yesterday, go ahead and yell FAKE NEWS and plug your ears old man Thom. We'll have a laugh at your expense.

 

Politics

How Manafort’s 2016 meeting with a Russian employee at New York cigar club goes to ‘the heart’ of Mueller’s probe

 

By Rosalind S. Helderman and

Tom Hamburger

February 12 at 4:43 PM

The 2016 nominating conventions had recently concluded and the presidential race was hitting a new level of intensity when Paul Manafort, Donald Trump’s campaign chairman, ducked into an unusual dinner meeting at a private cigar room a few blocks away from the campaign’s Trump Tower headquarters in Manhattan.

Court records show that Manafort was joined at some point by his campaign deputy, Rick Gates, at the session at the Grand Havana Room, a mahogany-paneled space with floor-to-ceiling windows offering panoramic views of the city.

The two Americans met with an overseas guest, a longtime employee of their international consulting business who had flown to the United States for the gathering: a Russian political operative named Konstantin Kilimnik.

The Aug. 2, 2016, encounter between the senior Trump campaign officials and Kilimnik, who prosecutors allege has ties to Russian intelligence, has emerged in recent days as a potential fulcrum in special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation.

It was at that meeting that prosecutors believe Manafort and Kilimnik may have exchanged key information relevant to Russia and Trump’s presidential bid. The encounter goes “very much to the heart of what the special counsel’s office is investigating,” prosecutor Andrew Weissmann told a federal judge in a sealed hearing last week.

One subject the men discussed was a proposed resolution to the conflict over Ukraine, an issue of great interest to the Russian government, according to a partially redacted transcript of the Feb. 4 hearing.

During the hearing, the judge also appeared to allude to another possible interaction at the Havana Room gathering: a handoff by Manafort of internal polling data from Trump’s presidential campaign to his Russian associate.

The new details provide a rare hint at what Mueller is examining in the final stretch of his nearly 21-month-old investigation — and underscore his deep interest in the Grand Havana Room gathering, which ended with the three men leaving through separate doors, as Judge Amy Berman Jackson noted.

Weissmann said in the hearing that one of the special counsel’s main tasks is to examine contacts between Americans and Russia during the 2016 race and determine whether Trump associates conspired with the Russian-backed interference campaign.

“That meeting — and what happened at that meeting — is of significance to the special counsel,” he said pointedly.

The hearing was held in a closed courtroom, and only a partial transcript was released because the special counsel has argued that public disclosure of the issues discussed could harm “ongoing law enforcement investigations.”

A spokesman for Mueller declined to comment.

A spokesman for Manafort, who prosecutors have alleged breached a cooperation agreement by lying to investigators, also declined to comment. Manafort has pleaded guilty to crimes related to consulting work he did in Ukraine. He has not been accused of coordinating with the Russians to tilt the election.

Kilimnik, whom prosecutors have charged with working with Manafort to obstruct the investigation, did not respond to a request for comment.

In a 2017 statement to The Washington Post, he denied any connection to Russian intelligence. Kilimnik said the Grand Havana Room meeting had nothing to do with politics or the presidential campaign. Instead, he called the session a “private” visit, during which he and Manafort gossiped about “bills unpaid by our clients” and the political scene in Ukraine, where Manafort had worked as a political consultant for a decade before joining Trump’s campaign.

'An unusual time'

There have long been questions about why Manafort would break away from his duties running Trump’s campaign to meet with his Russian employee, an encounter The Post first reported in 2017.

 

Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, a former CIA official who now teaches at Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, said that episode raises many red flags.

Manafort “goes way outside the normal bounds of behavior,” Mowatt-Larssen said.

A former senior U.S. intelligence official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation, called the details about what occurred at the Grand Havana Room gathering “the most interesting and potentially significant development we have seen in a long time.”

Prosecutors have alleged that among the false statements Manafort made to investigators during his interviews in recent months were key lies about the Aug. 2 meeting and other interactions with Kilimnik.

Manafort’s lawyers have acknowledged he gave incomplete and sometimes conflicting information during 12 interviews and two sessions in front of a grand jury. But they said he did not intend to lie, but was instead confused and at times forgetful.

Jackson told the lawyers she will probably rule Wednesday on whether she believes that Manafort lied to prosecutors, a decision that could impact his sentencing in March.

The Grand Havana Room meeting took place during a critical moment in the 2016 race.

Less than two weeks earlier, the issue of Russia’s role in the campaign exploded into view when WikiLeaks published thousands of emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee. Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s supporters immediately fingered Russia in the hack, a view later embraced by U.S. intelligence agencies.

Instead of condemning the Kremlin, Trump mockingly asked Russia to find emails Clinton had deleted while serving as secretary of state. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he said at a July 27 news conference.

Trump also made a series of public statements in July that appeared to echo Kremlin talking points on foreign policy. In an interview with the New York Times, he questioned the U.S. commitment to defending NATO partners from Russian aggression. Then he promised to look into recognizing Russia’s invasion of Crimea.

“You know, the people of Crimea, from what I’ve heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were,” he said in an ABC News interview July 31.

In court last week, prosecutors focused on Manafort’s choice to meet with Kilimnik in person during this period.

“There is an in-person meeting at an unusual time for somebody who is the campaign chairman to be spending time and to be doing it in person,” Weissmann said.

At the same time, Manafort was strategizing about how to use his prominent role with the Trump campaign to halt a personal financial spiral, court records show. He owed millions in property taxes and for home improvements, insurance policies, credit cards and other debts, according to documents introduced during his trial in Virginia last summer.

Manafort viewed Kilimnik — his liaison to high-level Ukrainian politicians and Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska — as key to leveraging his unpaid role as Trump’s campaign chairman, emails reviewed by The Post show. The two were in frequent contact during Manafort’s tenure at Trump’s campaign, according to court records.

A Russian army veteran who had trained at a military language academy known as a feeder school for the intelligence services, Kilimnik had worked for Manafort since 2005, when he began serving as a translator for Manafort’s Ukraine operation.

In documents filed in court last year, Mueller’s prosecutors wrote that Gates, Manafort’s deputy, said Kilimnik told him he had formerly been an officer in the GRU, the Russian military intelligence unit accused of engineering the 2016 election interference. Prosecutors said the FBI has assessed that Kilimnik’s intelligence ties continued into 2016.

 

Kilimnik was also well known at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, and officials there met with him frequently to discuss Ukrainian politics, according to people familiar with his work. During last week’s hearing, prosecutors acknowledged there was “no question” Kilimnik had been in communication with State Department officials.

Manafort told the Times in February 2017 he had never “knowingly” spoken to a Russian intelligence officer. “It’s not like these people wear badges that say, ‘I’m a Russian intelligence officer,’ ” he added.

'Tuesday would be best'

In April 2016, Manafort emailed Kilimnik to ask if the “OVD operation” had seen the positive press Manafort was receiving for his Trump work, The Post previously reported. That was an apparent reference to Deripaska, a onetime Manafort business partner.

“How do we use to get whole?” Manafort wrote.

Kilimnik has told The Post he came to the United States and met with Manafort on May 7 to discuss business issues. Then, on July 7, Manafort emailed Kilimnik, asking him to inform Deripaska that if he needed “private briefings” about the campaign, “we can accommodate.”

A Deripaska spokeswoman has said he was never offered nor received campaign briefings. Manafort spokesman Jason Maloni also said no briefings for Deripaska took place, telling The Post in 2017 the email ex­changes reflected an “innocuous” effort to collect past debts.

On July 29, 2016, Kilimnik wrote Manafort a cryptic note.

Kilimnik told Manafort he had met that day with the man who had given Manafort “the biggest black caviar jar several years ago.” The Post has previously reported that congressional investigators believed Kilimnik’s reference to “black caviar” was a code for money.

Kilimnik wrote that he and the man had talked for five hours and he had important messages to relay to Manafort as a result. Kilimnik asked when Manafort would be available to meet.

“Tuesday would be best,” Manafort responded. The following Tuesday was Aug. 2.

When they saw each other days later at the Grand Havana Room, one topic the men discussed was a peace proposal for Ukraine, an agenda item Russia was seeking as a key step to lift punishing economic sanctions, according to court records.

Prosecutors have accused Manafort of lying to them about how frequently he and Kilimnik discussed the matter — initially telling investigators he would not “countenance” the idea because he viewed it as a “backdoor” of some kind. Despite Manafort’s claim of disinterest, prosecutors said he and Kilimnik continued to pursue the subject in several subsequent meetings, including one in January 2017 when the Russian was in Washington for Trump’s inauguration.

In court, Manafort’s lawyers contended that he was candid about the discussions when reminded by prosecutors and denied that his account has been inconsistent.

'An extremely sensitive issue'

 

There are also indications in the transcript of last week’s hearing that prosecutors have explored whether it was at the Manhattan cigar bar that Manafort shared polling data related to the 2016 White House race with Kilimnik — another topic about which Manafort lied, they allege.

The sharing of that data was first disclosed, apparently inadvertently, in a court filing by Manafort’s attorneys last month. At the time, it was unclear when Manafort passed along the information to his Russian employee — as well as the substance of the material.

During last week’s hearing, the judge devoted a significant portion of time to discussing what appeared to be the polling data — something she noted Manafort initially said “just was public information.”

Weissmann said Manafort had a motive to lie about sharing material with Kilimnik as he was running Trump’s campaign. “It’s obviously an extremely sensitive issue,” the prosecutor said, adding, “We can see what it is that he would be worried about.”

What exactly might have been shared with Kilimnik at the Grand Havana Room appears to be a matter of dispute.

On the day of the gathering, Manafort sent Gates an email asking him to print material for a meeting, according to court records. The substance of the material has not been publicly disclosed.

An attorney for Gates declined to comment.

Jackson indicated in the hearing that Gates has testified that the material was shared at the Grand Havana Room gathering. “Didn’t he say it happened at the meeting?” she asked.

“I don’t believe so,” responded Richard W. Westling, an attorney for Manafort.

Westling noted that the email Gates printed did not specifically reference Kilimnik, implying the material may not have been for the Russian. And he argued that Gates has offered inconsistent accounts and should not be believed.

Manafort’s defense team also suggested that the information was too detailed to be helpful and would have been useless to Kilimnik. “It frankly, to me, is gibberish . . . It’s not easily understandable,” Westling said.

Jackson appeared skeptical. “That’s what makes it significant and unusual,” the judge said.

As a longtime aide to Manafort, Kilimnik had experience using public surveys. In a February 2017 interview, Kilimnik described to Radio Free Europe the key role polling has played in Manafort’s political consulting.

“I’ve seen him work in different countries, and he really just does, you know, takes very seriously his polling and, you know, he can stand, you know, two weeks going through the data, and he’ll come with the best strategy you can ever have, and he’ll put it on the table of the candidate,” Kilimnik said.

It is unclear how long Kilimnik remained in the United States after the Grand Havana Room meeting.

Flight records show that a private plane belonging to Deripaska landed at Newark Liberty International Airport shortly after midnight on Aug. 3, just hours after Kilimnik and Manafort met. The plane spent only a few hours on the ground before taking off again and returning to Moscow.

Larissa Belyaeva, a spokeswoman for Deripaska, said the plane carried only members of his family.

“We can confirm that Mr. Deripaska has never lent his private jet to Mr. Kilimnik nor has ever had any interaction with him,” she said.

In the days after the meeting, Manafort’s work in Ukraine bubbled into public view. On Aug. 19, he resigned from Trump’s campaign.

 

tldr

How many years will it take for the bombshells to explode? 

>>>How many years will it take for the bombshells to explode?

i got a call this morning, it’s gonna be at least another year. I hope that helps you.

Q:  Where is Trump's campaign chair right now?

A:  prison.

https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/1095696849787326466

https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1095783250365165571

He ain't going to read any of this pholks. 

Thom will never read the articles, correct. 

That's not why we post them though, Thom is a lost cause - he's buried his increasingly decrepit head in the MAGA sands desperate to NOT learn what is so obviously trickling out day after day.

The articles and links are informative and instructive to OTHERS - so that other zoners don't become brain-drained losers shouting at clouds like ol' Thom.

 

https://secure.actblue.com/donate/adam-schiff-2

 

So Paulie Walnuts has been lying about his contacts with a Russian agent while he was running Trump's campaign.

Yeah, Thom is right - there's NOTHING to see here!

Please be patient Thom. The fbi is going over all the data from roger stones cell phones and computers, this takes time. In the mean time Deutsche bank keeps being fined heavily on a daily basis for withholding evidence on money laundering.

All good things in all good time.

 

Nice ^

>> And the walk back continues....

>> https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/you-may-be-disappoin...

>> Lowering expectations on a daily basis.

 

jesus christ THOM - your mental capacities are deteriorating about as fast as your dear orange leader's!

DID YOU READ THE ARTICLE YOU LINKED, OLD MAN?

The article is discussing the logistics of the Special Counsel's report and whether it will be released in full or stymied by the Justice Department. That's it. There's nothing EXCULPATORY in that article for the administration in the slightest, just the matter of whether Justice Dept will try to keep the report from Congress. But...really, keep your radio tuned to Rush and keep only reading the headlines of news articles and you'll keep your old gray head under the sand in MAGA land where you like it. Just don't think you can do all that without being laughed at for the intellectual dishonesty you need to get there.

And by the way - if you think this report will never see the light of day due to Justice Department shenanigans, good luck with that. Representative Schiff has indicated he's willing to subpoena Mueller and the evidence if necessary. There's no sticking a finger in this dyke. It's all coming down.

 

as always, thanks for the laughs!

Lowering expectations on a daily basis<<<

I have zero expectations the "right thing" will be done when the time comes. 

I suspect Putin didn't just go "half in"; and too many of our leaders are compromised.

Poor Thom.

I can't possibly believe thom is as dense as he portrays on this list.

The degree to which he refuses to notice reality is either disturbing or all an act.

Nobody but chumps base is that politically retarded / mentally challenged.

And who would embarrass themself publically by showing allegiance to the anti-American disgrace ?

I think thom's just a king mixer like Paul's grandfather.

Bored to death he likes to get feathers ruffled for kicks, laughing all the way.

Because again, nobody on the zone can be that thought process hampered.

Mission Accomplished Mr T

 

Bag O'Dung, are you stupid,  or just woefully misinformed?

 

https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/News/video/senate-intelligence-committee-odds...

 

 

 

Newsbusters

RIGHT BIAS

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

Notes: Newbusters claims to expose liberal bias much like its parent website MRC, however this site is also very right wing biased like MRC and perhaps even less factual.  Newsbusters uses extensive loaded words and always covers just one side of the story. That side always benefits conservatives and is against liberals. (D. Van Zandt 7/19/2016

 

 

Given your choice of sources,  I'm going with stupid and misinformed. 

Are you sure that you are a librarian?

Do the other librarians say, "Bless his heart," when talking about you?

Douschawitz  -  another well known repub nut stroker

 

Thom the purpose of politics is to serve mankind. You seem to regard it as some kind of anal head insertion dodge... or hustle.

Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable! You are a poor political scientist, thom

>>>"Well, if that’s true it is clearly an attempted coup d’etat… Any justice department official who even mentioned the 25th Amendment in the context of President Trump has committed a grievous offense against the Constitution <<<

Said the guy who gets massages from under age girls with his buddy Jeffery Epstein.

 

Dershowitz is Trumps bitch.

 

Strong work Thom as usual.

It’s been two days since NBC’s exclusive reporting<<<<

Ha. That's good. 

 

>If you depend on people with an agenda for your "news", don't be surprised when you end up believing their agenda<

 

Bag O'Dung, i see that you have absolutely no self awareness.

I got to say Thom, you've started to sound a lot like Bryen in here.

Have you guys met?

 

You guys are the Heckle and Jeckle of derp.

 

 

The 25th amendment (meaning it is part of the Constitution)....is...unconstitutional?

what is it about Donald that turns his supporter's brains into mush?

 

p.s.  from what I've heard, his Rose garden speech today screams out for the 25th.

As far as zoner nicknames go Bag O’ Dung is one of the worst.

 

No shit.  He sounded like a kid giving a book report on a book they didn’t read.

Thom the purpose of politics is to serve mankind. You seem to regard it as some kind of anal head insertion dodge... or hustle.

Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable! You are a poor political scientist, thom<<<<

.

Thom have you ever posted under a different name here?

Tho6

>>> Thom have you ever posted under a different name here? >>>

 

https://twitter.com/TheRickWilson/status/1096544335632519169

...

MUELLER SENTENCING MEMO: MANAFORT was "plainly the leader" of a "criminal scheme" that included RICK GATES, KONSTANTIN KILIMNIK & others. Special Counsel recommends a sentence of 19.5 to 24.5 years in prison.

 

 

or as everyone's favorite idiot THOM says:  "Clearly Hillary Clinton will be indicted soon."  

Will Trump be indicted before November 2020?

Yes. Got any more questions?

 

 Will the Supreme Court stop Trump's national emergency?

You need a magic 8 ball, dude.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/15/politics/national-emergency-supreme-court...

If Trump won his presidency by cheating and is proved so...

Does that mean his Supreme Court picks don't count?

 

*Dumb'd that down for the FOX viewers