The Meuller Team Gets New Uniforms....

[SNiC Jet]

The Meuller Team has decided to "come out" in the open and show their true colors.


​

Each day we are learning this so-called investigation team is nothing more than a hand selected group of Trump hating/Hillary loving political hacks who were Hilary Campaign Donors and played a significant role in supporting HRC and assisting her escape(s) from prosecution.....The Fix is IN!........but rapidly unraveling!

Here is a few of the latest...
Robert Mueller Team: Nine Donated to Hillary or Democrats
Mueller's legal team donated thousands to Democrats over three decades; Two of the lawyers gave the maximum donation to Hillary Clinton last year.

Aaron Zebley, the lawyer who represented Justin Cooper, Hillary’s IT guy, is serving as Mueller’s right hand man investigating Trump collusion! This shit is getting ridiculous.


Married FBI lawyer who exchanged 10,000 texts with her anti-Trump agent lover who was a key player in Mueller's Russia probe and helped clear Hillary is seen for the first time
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5152171/The-FBI-agents-lover-seen-time.html#ixzz50fwqpwya

Report: DOJ Officials Pouring over More than 10,000 Strzok Texts After Discovering Anti-Trump Messages

Mueller Picks Another Clinton/Obama Donor For Russia Probe Team

CONFIRMED: Mueller Team Can Be Disbarred For Clinton Conflicts In Trump Case
Mueller’s team is tainted not only by partisan political donations and activities, but by direct relationships with former clients like Hillary Clinton, who is integrally involved in most of the possible evidence in this case. These conflicts clearly violate American Bar Association guidelines.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

Its intuitively obvious to even the most casual observer that this entire goat rope is nothing but a pretty "FBI" wrapper on a "soft coupe."

Anyone that denies this is not being intellectually honest.

The "Beast," officially known as the establishment is in full self defense mode. Removing Trump becomes more and more important, the further the Special Council is looked into. From my perspective, legally or constitutionally, how can this SC be shut down? I have no clue. You say Jeff Sessions? I'm not convinced that he too isn't part of it. He is showing no political courage to call these shitweasels exactly what they are. I have an honest question for 530 here, what constitutional remedy is there here? again, regardless of the characters involved. I think we all agree your knowledge of these matters is not up for debate here.

This is just like watching a movie like Walking Tall. The local cops are corrupt, so, go over their heads to the Sheriff....but his department is also corrupt.

Whether you're a Trump Supporter or not, This is bigger than President Trump, its about America staying a Constitutional Republic rather than a thinly veiled Banana Republic.

I am NOT a Trump supporter. I'm an American in fear of losing "Blind Justice."

 

[Old Texan]

Whether you're a Trump Supporter or not, This is bigger than President Trump, its about America staying a Constitutional Republic rather than a thinly veiled Banana Republic.

I am NOT a Trump supporter. I'm an American in fear of losing "Blind Justice."

That statement defines the 2016 election results. DC is full of corruption and the Good 'ol Boy way has created a government "establishment" that has exited the Constitutional set up of how governing is to take place. Citizens are fed up with this mess.

Mueller has too many connections and conflicts to have ever been considered for the SI. How to find fair and unbiased members of an investigative team needs work that the corruption is not allowing. Sessions recusing himself rightfully pissed Trump off and he should have been fired. But the detractors would have made that into another attack.

Attacks on Trump is what this whole mess is all about and it will not end until the citizens force it in some way. I have no idea how we can advance past this continuing with hunt scenario, but it needs to happen sooner than later......

 

[530RL]

The only practical way to remove a President from office under this matter is via an impeachment with a simple majority in the House and then a trial and a conviction with two thirds (67) vote in the Senate. That is what the Constitution says. Once a private citizen, he could then be subject to criminal charges, hence why Ford pardoned Nixon for anything he may or may not have done.

With respect to the others under investigation, Trump has the power to pardon anyone in his family, Flynn, Manafort and/or whomever else he wishes to during the investigation

So there can be no soft "coupe" or coup. It takes a majority of the House and a super majority of the Senate to remove Trump and Trump can pardon anyone he wants at any time.

With respect to the investigation, if Trump and his team have absolutely nothing to hide, they would go about their business and let Mueller finish. As all Mueller can really do is gather the facts and present it to the House in a report with respect to Trump, and if they have absolutely nothing to hide, there are enough fair minded people in the Senate to preclude a 2/3rds majority to remove him from office. Trying to stop this investigation mid-stream just makes it worse. Trump and his supporters live by the sword in everything they do, this is just part of that culture of inter-country hardball they promote and is growing daily in our lives.

The Clinton investigation went from 1993 until 2000 before the last and final report was filed by the third of the three independent counsels. I doubt this one will go that long,

 

[SNiC Jet]

So there can be no soft "coupe" or coup.

IMO, their "stacking the deck" with hand picked Trump haters/Hillary supporters suggests their efforts are definitely in play....

 

[regor]

Clintons...............exposed, destroyed.
Media...................exposed, destroyed.
RINO's..................exposed, destroyed.
The Swamp............in the process of being exposed, destroyed.

BEST ELECTION EVER!!!!!!!!

 

[Paul65k]

I agree with you 530.......the system will preclude a coup.......on the other hand this process is not really about getting DT out of office but more importantly to "Marginalize" him in the court of public opinion, thus clearing the way for the other corrupt party (Dems) to regain some level of power even though they still refuse to find a platform that is anything other then "The other guys are bad" and yes that statement goes both ways.

I don't see myself as a "Trumpkin" as anyone on here that does not support Schumer, Pelosi, Obama and Clinton are made out to be, but you have to admit that it's the first time in a long time that we actually have a President that is truly focused on his stated agenda......agree with it or not and it is scaring the hell out of the establishment politicians on both sides of the aisle!!!

 

[Old Texan]

I agree with you 530.......the system will preclude a coup.......on the other hand this process is not really about getting DT out of office but more importantly to "Marginalize" him in the court of public opinion, thus clearing the way for the other corrupt party (Dems) to regain some level of power even though they still refuse to find a platform that is anything other then "The other guys are bad" and yes that statement goes both ways.

I don't see myself as a "Trumpkin" as anyone on here that does not support Schumer, Pelosi, Obama and Clinton are made out to be, but you have to admit that it's the first time in a long time that we actually have a President that is truly focused on his stated agenda......agree with it or not and it is scaring the hell out of the establishment politicians on both sides of the aisle!!!

As well it should. Many have much to hide or to account for what they're prone to ignoring.

DC is a place that self protection means covering one's ass and having something on those lesser than you to push the shit onto. Or having something on those more than you to keep them from dumping on you.

No one can be trusted as there is no way of knowing what players will need to deflect onto others. This system doesn't allow anyone within or newcomers owing favors, to change the system. A guy like Marco Rubio has no mojo and too many issues that can be turned against him. Even Cruz and Paul lack horsepower when it comes down to it. McCain made a point to buffer both when they entered the Senate. Show them the old dogs held the porch and they managed who got seats and where. Allies are key among the ranks unless one has independent power that can't be neutralized.

Though he is an egotistical ass, Trump came into this without needing favors and he's dealing with things as he sees fit. Highly unpopular with many, but again, it takes a gutter dweller to flush out and remove gutter dwellers.

 

[500bbc]

The only practical way to remove a President from office under this matter is via an impeachment with a simple majority in the House and then a trial and a conviction with two thirds (67) vote in the Senate. That is what the Constitution says. Once a private citizen, he could then be subject to criminal charges, hence why Ford pardoned Nixon for anything he may or may not have done.

With respect to the others under investigation, Trump has the power to pardon anyone in his family, Flynn, Manafort and/or whomever else he wishes to during the investigation

So there can be no soft "coupe" or coup. It takes a majority of the House and a super majority of the Senate to remove Trump and Trump can pardon anyone he wants at any time.

With respect to the investigation, if Trump and his team have absolutely nothing to hide, they would go about their business and let Mueller finish. As all Mueller can really do is gather the facts and present it to the House in a report with respect to Trump, and if they have absolutely nothing to hide, there are enough fair minded people in the Senate to preclude a 2/3rds majority to remove him from office. Trying to stop this investigation mid-stream just makes it worse. Trump and his supporters live by the sword in everything they do, this is just part of that culture of inter-country hardball they promote and is growing daily in our lives.

The Clinton investigation went from 1993 until 2000 before the last and final report was filed by the third of the three independent counsels. I doubt this one will go that long,

Mustard to go with that?

You know damn well what Nganga means, Trump must be removed from office at all costs, Tards don't really understand why so they support the coup.

 

[500bbc]

I

I agree with you 530.......the system will preclude a coup.......on the other hand this process is not really about getting DT out of office but more importantly to "Marginalize" him in the court of public opinion, thus clearing the way for the other corrupt party (Dems) to regain some level of power even though they still refuse to find a platform that is anything other then "The other guys are bad" and yes that statement goes both ways.

I don't see myself as a "Trumpkin" as anyone on here that does not support Schumer, Pelosi, Obama and Clinton are made out to be, but you have to admit that it's the first time in a long time that we actually have a President that is truly focused on his stated agenda......agree with it or not and it is scaring the hell out of the establishment politicians on both sides of the aisle!!!

I disagree, we're watching a soft coup, no riots or bullets flying but a coup nonetheless.

Deep state can't afford to have him exposing the depths of corruption our government as sunken to.
That's why COTUS walks free as well as the Talking Turd and the rest of their ilk on both sides of the aisle.

 

[Andy B.]

I have a question, if killary was elected do you think all these sexual harassment accusations would have come out and exposed members of our corrupt government? Something to think about all you Trump haters!!!!!

 

[was thatguy]

I have a question, if killary was elected do you think all these sexual harassment accusations would have come out and exposed members of our corrupt government? Something to think about all you Trump haters!!!!!

 

[pack3tZer0]

I have a question, if killary was elected do you think all these sexual harassment accusations would have come out and exposed members of our corrupt government? Something to think about all you Trump haters!!!!!

To answer your question, no. That isn't just a hyper theoretical .

 

[Andy B.]

View attachment 606715

That made my day !!! Spit up water all over my computer screen!!!!!

 

[pack3tZer0]

That made my day !!! Spit up water all over my computer screen!!!!!

Drinking water? booo, lol

 

[Andy B.]

Drinking water? booo, lol

At work but happy hour will be soon!!!!!!

 

[pack3tZer0]

Indictment coming
Same for LYNCH
Same for HOLDER
Same for COMEY
Same for CLAPPER
Same for BRENNAN
Same as RICE
Same for RHODES
Same for POWER
Same for KAHL
Same for BAKER
Same for MCCABE
Same for PAGE
Same for STRZOK

 

[pack3tZer0]

 

[jet496]

All I know is that libbies are the dumbest group of people the world has ever seen so all this shit they're doing will turn on them & bite 'em in their pussies. Just watch.

 

[Hullbilly]

As I’ve said all along...#nothingsammich

Indictment coming
Same for LYNCH
Same for HOLDER
Same for COMEY
Same for CLAPPER
Same for BRENNAN
Same as RICE
Same for RHODES
Same for POWER
Same for KAHL
Same for BAKER
Same for MCCABE
Same for PAGE
Same for STRZOK

Clearly yore racist!

 

[Bobby V]

All I know is that libbies are the dumbest group of people the world has ever seen so all this shit they're doing will turn on them & bite 'em in their pussies. Just watch.

'All you know". Is that the limit of your knowledge...Ha Ha... LMAO

 

[SNiC Jet]

All I know is that libbies are the dumbest group of people the world has ever seen so all this shit they're doing will turn on them & bite 'em in their pussies. Just watch.

​

 

[SNiC Jet]

Robert Mueller sabotaged his own investigation, "They're done" says Judicial Watch

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

The only practical way to remove a President from office under this matter is via an impeachment with a simple majority in the House and then a trial and a conviction with two thirds (67) vote in the Senate. That is what the Constitution says. Once a private citizen, he could then be subject to criminal charges, hence why Ford pardoned Nixon for anything he may or may not have done.

With respect to the others under investigation, Trump has the power to pardon anyone in his family, Flynn, Manafort and/or whomever else he wishes to during the investigation

So there can be no soft "coupe" or coup. It takes a majority of the House and a super majority of the Senate to remove Trump and Trump can pardon anyone he wants at any time.

With respect to the investigation, if Trump and his team have absolutely nothing to hide, they would go about their business and let Mueller finish. As all Mueller can really do is gather the facts and present it to the House in a report with respect to Trump, and if they have absolutely nothing to hide, there are enough fair minded people in the Senate to preclude a 2/3rds majority to remove him from office. Trying to stop this investigation mid-stream just makes it worse. Trump and his supporters live by the sword in everything they do, this is just part of that culture of inter-country hardball they promote and is growing daily in our lives.

The Clinton investigation went from 1993 until 2000 before the last and final report was filed by the third of the three independent counsels. I doubt this one will go that long,

Thanks for that 530. That's the "legal" and above board answer. My question refers to Mueller, seemingly stacking the deck with a group of lawyers, agents and investigators whom have a strong anti Trump bias.

If you were to Juxtapose the Trump SC against the HRC "matter," the HRC investigation was populated with a HRC fan club. This Trump group is a group of people whom share a bias against President Trump. Hell, watching the above Greg Jarrett video, some actually attended HRC's victory party (which never happened). One of the agents even changed the verbiage from gross negligence to extremely careless. Im sure it was done so they could "thread the legal needle" to not indict HRC.

I understand your feelings about Trump and have no issue with that. I know you have strong convictions about the Constitution. This SC may have all the appearances of it being done legally but you can't square the fact that it's biased. Legally, ones feelings and political party affiliation are hard to make absolutes but this is the definition of conflict of interest.

 

[530RL]

Thanks for that 530. That's the "legal" and above board answer. My question refers to Mueller, seemingly stacking the deck with a group of lawyers, agents and investigators whom have a strong anti Trump bias.

If you were to Juxtapose the Trump SC against the HRC "matter," the HRC investigation was populated with a HRC fan club. This Trump group is a group of people whom share a bias against President Trump. Hell, watching the above Greg Jarrett video, some actually attended HRC's victory party (which never happened). Hell, one of the agents even changed the verbiage from gross negligence to extremely careless. Im sure it was done so they could "thread the legal needle" to not indict HRC.

I understand your feelings about Trump and have no issue with that. I know you have strong convictions about the Constitution. This SC may have all the appearances of it being done legally but you can't square the fact that it's biased. Legally, ones feelings and political party affiliation are hard to make absolutes but this is the definition of conflict of interest.

Meh,

If HRC was elected President, I believe both the House and the Senate would be having investigations, like they are with Trump; and I believe there would be a special counsel as Comey would have no choice, just as Sessions had no choice.

However I accept that the vast majority of the regular posters in here, the Trumpkins, believe that an HRC investigation would be just and legal; whereas this "bull shit" going on today is a "witch hunt" despite that fact that this witch hunt has resulted in 4 indictments so far to include charges of tax evasion in an amount exceeding the cost of the investigation to date. Some of them actually believe that everything would all be swept up under a rug if HRC had won, despite there being Republican control of both chambers of Congress and Republican control of investigative powers at the Legislative branch. It is goofy.

It was repeatedly stated by Bill Clinton supporters that Kenneth Starr had vast conflicts and was horribly biased as was his team. Equally true Mueller and his team are viewed by Trump supporters as having vast conflicts and biases. Welcome to everyday life.

At the end of the day, Bill Clinton was not convicted at his trial after a seven year run of the special counsel, and if the evidence points out the same pretty weak case for expulsion as they had against Bill Clinton, I can't imagine enough R Senators lining up to throw Trump out of office either.

My personal view is that Trump supporters can not objectively see that this is politics as usual. They believe this is somehow so much worse. It is unfair.

And the reasons they don't want to admit it is the same reason Bill Clinton supporters thought there was a coup against Bill Clinton and that was unfair, and that is because everyone believes their guy is innocent, your guy is guilty. And everything else is fake news.

There was going to be an investigation of whomever won the 2016 election. Or to put it in an evangelical way, I am pretty confident that neither Trump nor Clinton is even gonna get to have a discussion with St. Peter, they both have the express ticket.

 

[was thatguy]

I quit reading at "trumpkins".
"Vast majority of posters in here"??

Steve can't stand Trump...yet Trumpkin he is labeled.
You have a knack for ending discussion, no doubt about that.

For being one of the most intelligent posters in here, you sure do go to the basement a lot.

 

[530RL]

I quit reading at "trumpkins".
"Vast majority of posters in here"??

Steve can't stand Trump...yet Trumpkin he is labeled.
You have a knack for ending discussion, no doubt about that.

For being one of the most intelligent posters in here, you sure do go to the basement a lot.

1) Nganga has admitted he voted for Trump, voting for an individual is the ultimate sign of support in our form of government.

2) Are you saying Nganga would vote for someone he can not stand? That he is irrational?

3) For being the number one guy who is consistently tacking derogatory labels on people, I will admit you have the absolute most credibility with respect to how to go to the basement.

 

[was thatguy]

1) Nganga has admitted he voted for Trump, voting for an individual is the ultimate sign of support in our form of government.

2) Are you saying Nganga would vote for someone he can not stand? That he is irrational?

3) For being the number one guy who is consistently tacking derogatory labels on people, I will admit you have the absolute most credibility with respect to how to go to the basement.

View attachment 606908

1) He "admitted" nothing...he "stated" that he voted for trump. Using the word "admitted" in your sentence makes implications of complicity in some form of deceit or attempt to deceive, and reinforces my stated opinion of your tactics.
You don't get to steer every conversation with your foreshadowing, at least not with me.

2) I can't answer for Steve concerning what he will or will not do, but I DO know he has stated that he found Trump to be the lesser evil, and actually electable in an effort to prevent Killary from occupying the wh.
What I find "irrational" is casting ones vote for a candidate that you know full well has zero chance of winning at all. To me, that is the epitome of being irrational, self serving, and is nothing more than an action to maintain plausible deniability and remove oneself from the process while thinking it raises you above the din.
With all due respect to those who cast their votes otherwise following their true wishes, I believe you and Shameus cast your meaningless votes in spite...and I qualify that remark by presenting your posts and rhetoric since the election.

3) Ah...but I do not posture as being above it...Or should I say I "admit" it?

 

[500bbc]

1) Nganga has admitted he voted for Trump, voting for an individual is the ultimate sign of support in our form of government.

2) Are you saying Nganga would vote for someone he can not stand? That he is irrational?

3) For being the number one guy who is consistently tacking derogatory labels on people, I will admit you have the absolute most credibility with respect to how to go to the basement.

View attachment 606908

Or against the likes of COTUS and the deep state, pretzel boy.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

1) Nganga has admitted he voted for Trump, voting for an individual is the ultimate sign of support in our form of government.

2) Are you saying Nganga would vote for someone he can not stand? That he is irrational?

3) For being the number one guy who is consistently tacking derogatory labels on people, I will admit you have the absolute most credibility with respect to how to go to the basement.

View attachment 606908

530,

I am making an assumption here. You voted for Evan McMullen.

If so, you, by the quoted statement, are agreeing with all his positions, both social and financial. That would include the beliefs of the Mormon church?

Again, its my assumption of your vote. If not, disregards the rest.

As far as voting for someone I find repugnant. I don't think its irrational to simply "zero out" someones vote for HRC.

 

[regor]

530,

I am making an assumption here. You voted for Evan McMullen.

If so, you, by the quoted statement, are agreeing with all his positions, both social and financial. That would include the beliefs of the Mormon church?

Again, its my assumption of your vote. If not, disregards the rest.

Hell yes he supports Mormons, hell he gets on his knees for them!!!

 

[530RL]

1) He "admitted" nothing...he "stated" that he voted for trump.

You're baking continues to improve.....

530,

I am making an assumption here. You voted for Evan McMullen.

If so, you, by the quoted statement, are agreeing with all his positions, both social and financial. That would include the beliefs of the Mormon church?

Again, its my assumption of your vote. If not, disregards the rest.

As far as voting for someone I find repugnant. I don't think its irrational to simply "zero out" someones vote for HRC.

As an Arizona resident who voted and is no idiot, you would know that Evan McCullen was not on either the primary or general election ballot.

Why don't you take a try at responding to my position that this is not any more a "coup" than was the seven year Clinton investigation.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander. The Republican are simply reaping what they have sown in the past. Just as the Democrats did when Obama was in office. There is little difference between the two.

 

[was thatguy]

You're baking continues to improve.....

Yeah I figured you had nothing.

 

[530RL]

What I find "irrational" is casting ones vote for a candidate that you know full well has zero chance of winning at all. To me, that is the epitome of being irrational, self serving, and is nothing more than an action to maintain plausible deniability and remove oneself from the process while thinking it raises you above the din.

 

[was thatguy]

Yeah, I figured you had nothing.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

You're baking continues to improve.....





As an Arizona resident who voted and is no idiot, you would know that Evan McCullen was not on either the primary or general election ballot.

Why don't you take a try at responding to my position that this is not any more a "coup" than was the seven year Clinton investigation.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander. The Republican are simply reaping what they have sown in the past. Just as the Democrats did when Obama was in office. There is little difference between the two.

OK, Lets do it. But, let's stay on message.

I wasn't politically aware back then. I was busy smoking grass, drinking and driving and being an all around Nefarious Rapscallion.

My point here is; Can you honestly say that Mueller hasn't stacked the deck against Trump?

I cannot name the players back then. SO you have the advantage.

As to the HRC email "investigation." She was interviewed by the FBI and not even sworn in and not recorded. , neither was Heather Mills, neither was Huma Abadein (sp). That is highly suspect and obviously gives them an out as to lying to the FBI. Yet Flynn...

In Comey's dissertation at the end, he admitted she lied but, "No reasonable prosecutor would indict" (or whatever his exact words were)

Their testimony was just scribed, by hand by the interviewer...who just as a coincidence was one of the agents on the Trump case.

Take ALL the names out of this SC. Just examine the process, do you still have faith its unbiased?

One more time Dan, I loath this President's character, his tweeting, his bombastic behavior and also his mocking the handicapped. All that said, I voted for him. If that is your litmus test, I am a Trumpkin.

 

[530RL]

OK, Lets do it. But, let's stay on message.

I wasn't politically aware back then. I was busy smoking grass, drinking and driving and being an all around Nefarious Rapscallion.

My point here is; Can you honestly say that Mueller hasn't stacked the deck against Trump?

I cannot name the players back then. SO you have the advantage.

As to the HRC email "investigation." She was interviewed by the FBI and not even sworn in and not recorded. , neither was Heather Mills, neither was Huma Abadein (sp). That is highly suspect and obviously gives them an out as to lying to the FBI. Yet Flynn...

In Comey's dissertation at the end, he admitted she lied but, "No reasonable prosecutor would indict" (or whatever his exact words were)

Their testimony was just scribed, by hand by the interviewer...who just as a coincidence was one of the agents on the Trump case.

Take ALL the names out of this SC. Just examine the process, do you still have faith its unbiased?

One more time Dan, I loath this President's character, his tweeting, his bombastic behavior and also his mocking the handicapped. All that said, I voted for him. If that is your litmus test, I am a Trumpkin.

Let's take the items one at a time.

1) If someone like myself and others in here who did not even vote for HRC can be repeatedly labeled "retarded", a "tard", a "turd", a "terd", a "libtard" and on and on and on, it seems fairly reasonable by RDP P&G standards that someone who voted for Trump would be a Trumpkin and should have little trouble with such label. It certainly is less insulting than referring to you as the byproduct of having a nice big steak and can of beans that people drown in a porcelain bucket of water the next day. You voted for him, you own him. All of him. That is part of personal responsibility. My guy didn't win, I get to throw sticks and rocks just as all you did the last eight years. You reap what you sow. On the positive side, I did vote for someone who is an admitted grass smoker, and since there is an open house seat now in your district, you might consider giving it a shot.

2) Mueller has absolutely stacked the deck to get as many scalps as possible. That is his job. He absolutely wants people who are motivated to leave no stone unturned. No different than the investigation against Bill Clinton that started with Whitewater and ended up with consensual sex between two adults.

3) However, anything that gets dug up by Mueller and his group has to go through a grand jury and then a jury trial for anyone but the President; and has to go through the Republican controlled Congress for the President. So Mueller should do his job and the grand jury and Congress will do theirs.

4) If the President and his team did nothing, there is no reason to give a shit about the investigation. I was never a nefarious rapscallion who smoked grass and drank and drove. So if there was an investigation into such matters, I would not care and I would laugh about it. I would argue facts and not the law. However if I had engaged in those things, I would certainly behave differently and argue the law as opposed to the facts. You know arguments like, what about bob, bob smoked pot, why aren't you going after bob?

5) With respect to HRC, it is what it is. But every time the defense is; why are you going after my guy when you should go after HRC, I can't help but go back to why are you making that argument about Bob?

 

[500bbc]

So Oracle terd, was Clinton being investigated by the FBI under the direction of the sitting POTUS for six months before the election?
Were all of the officials associated with the investigation partisan hacks with deep ties to Clinton's enemies?
Was the MSM, the most efficient propaganda machine the globe has ever seen, screaming for his impeachment before he was even elected?
Did they continue those screams minute by minute unceasingly from the minute he was elected?
Did the deeply entrenched backroom good ole' boy network in his own party attack him before he was elected as well, continuing to do so at least through the first year of his administration?