Watergate was already taken

Holy Cat Shit Robin

The caught the bad guy.
Dos Reis

Are real Watergate break in kind of guy.

Definitely Kari lake behind this NOT.

Guy looks more like a homeless guy than and operative.

Can't you just wait for a fact before you post 1/2 a story pushing a possible fake narrative ?

God you are gullible.

You like to claim any made up claim about Democrats is like Watergate, or worse than watergate….so how you liking that 7 hour blank spot in the communication records from the whitehouse? Kinda like Watergate you might say, Watergate times 23.

You really think non cultists don’t care?

Enjoy.

Democrats are denied even a hearing for even their centrist picks (Garland) outrageously unconstitutionally, then Republicans pick FAR RIGHT politicos to replace moderate leftist judges. That was new, never before seen in our history.
Sotomayor and Karen are centrists, dumb shit. Kavenaugh and Barrett are extremist far right wingers….Barrett is barely even a judge, rushed in by a lame duck traitorous seditionist and his lackeys, directly contradicting their own excuse for not hearing Obama’s nomination. They actually admitted they rammed her through as fast as possible with the barest minimum of examination in order to pack the court in anticipation of them contesting the election results….admitted it before the election.
Kavenaugh and Barrett are both extremist Far right wingers, political activist judges, who lied in their confirmation, one is a multiple rapist, never investigated, the other a religious extremist with zero experience who said she would recuse herself on any issue of faith, but hasn’t recused herself from any.
Throw down the gauntlet?! Opposition to his nomination centered on his perceived willingness to roll back the civil rights rulings of the Warren and Burger courts, and his role in the Saturday Night Massacre during the Watergate scandal. On October 23, 1987, the Senate rejected Robert Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court by a roll call vote of 42—58. Bork's margin of rejection by the Senate remains, by percentage, the third-largest on record and broke a 142-year record for largest defeat of a Supreme Court nomination. A historic immediate bipartisan rejection because he was totally unsuited, and had undeniably tried to help Nixon cover up Watergate as acting AG by firing the special prosecutor at Nixon’s direction (the AG and deputy AG had quit when Nixon insisted)….*.
Absolutely nothing similar to Obama being denied a hearing for his picks for a year until his term ended….*. Holy shit! What stupidity.

There are far fewer “conservatives” today, the Republican Party is 26% of the population, not a majority.

Yes, they are throwing cases to the packed court as fast as possible before their stolen majority evaporates. I support a 15 justice Supreme Court with a constitutional amendment halting any further additions without a 2/3 majority….add 6 hyper liberals…no judicial experience necessary or even preferred…AOC would be great.

Why bring a case you might lose? Because cases are supposed to be heard on their merits, not based on political affiliation you ignorant cow. You think the Supreme Court should be a political wing of the right, choosing and deciding cases based on political affiliation, not the law, science, common sense, ethics, or precedent….but only when it serves you.

So, gun rights should be up to states? That’s the next step if you win that fight…the constitution dies and states decide everything….as civil war erupts. Great plan, so patriotic. Remember, California is big enough that when they require fingerprint scanners on all guns sold in the state, manufacturers will add them to all guns….when semi auto guns are banned, manufacturers will move to single shot guns….just like auto manufacturers changed their cars to meet our requirements. Is that your plan? Had you even considered what individual states being in control means? It means California becomes the leader of America, controlling the other states by means of our size, wealth, and international clout. Enjoy.

Not like this, it hasn’t. Never in American history has the court been politicized and weaponized against the will of the majority to ignore precedent (contrary to their oaths and confirmation statements) in order to overturn established law and constitutional rights as a political act. Never.

Now we know it was not just Democratic senators Trump had investigated to try to blackmail them, but multiple reporters were tapped to try to find their sources for embarrassing articles they published about Trump, and even "tapping" the phones and computers of his own council, who he had directed to lie to congress, in order to keep tabs on what he was really telling people about Trump's criminal activities.

The excuse they came up with was trying to find "leakers" who gave the press embarrassing facts about the administration....not even a crime. Better, what they found was nothing. No evidence against the democrats they were secretly surveilling or their families or employees or their families had done anything illegal.

Of course, Sessions and Barr deny any knowledge of these dozens of personal secret investigations their department was performing at Trump's direction, which is absolutely asinine. These liars knew from day one and had to personally authorize all these illegal fishing trip investigations of Trump's enemies list and their friends, families, and co workers at Trump's order.

"They tapped my phone! They tapped my phone! This is just like Watergate!" Insisting that anyone involved should be in prison long term. All bullshit. Trump's phones weren't tapped, only payments coming from Russia's government were being looked at as part of an investigation of Russian election interference. Tellingly, this outraged and terrified Trump.
This Trump enemies list investigation, however, was a purely personal vendetta by the president abusing the power of government agencies to embarrass and influence his political rivals by directly investigating them over non crimes in a fishing expedition that extended to family and co-workers looking for dirt, not crimes, and not as part of any legitimate investigation. Anyone involved should go to prison long term. Just one more criminal case for Trump to defend against. He'll be dead long before he's done defending himself against serious charges...let's hope his family was involved personally so maybe some of the criminals won't escape responsibility.

Bronte, a Republican Trump appointment

Yates-fired for warning about Flynn's crimes and refusing to implement the illegal Muslim ban, not for legitimate cause, not for malfeasance

Comey- the Republican man who personally handed Trump the presidency by publicly claiming Clinton was still under criminal investigation (she wasn't, and there was no new evidence) and hiding that Trump was under investigation for treasonous behavior with the Russians, a man who Trump praised lavishly until he wouldn't politicize the FBI into Trump's weapon, he deserved far worse than firing.

McCabe- another Republican Trump appointment, fired for working hard on the Trump Russia probe

Rosenstein- another Republican Trump appointee accused of not illegally politically interfering in the Trump Russia probe for Trump, not crime

>1/2 of your swamp clearing was Republican muck brought in by Trump himself. Hilariously you forgot all the other Trump chosen cabinet members removed for criminal actions, convictions not accusations....more than any other administration except Nixon after Watergate....with many more pending.

If you want to clean the swamp, you would vote Democrat, the comparison of criminal convictions by administration is startling.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/1/11/1619079/-Comparing-Presidential-Administrations-by-Arrests-and-Convictions-A-Warning-for-Trump-Appointees

But in your mind, the only crime is not being an unpatriotic criminal for Trump's personal gain. You should be leading the #derpstate

Your video, Wait, What Was Watergate Again?, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download
"On or about December 29, 2016, FLYNN called a senior official of the Presidential Transition Team ("PTT official"), who was with other senior ·members of the Presidential Transition Team at the Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, to discuss what, if anything, to communicate to the Russian Ambassador about the U.S. Sanctions. On that call, FLYNN and 2 Case 1:17-cr-00232-RC Document 4 Filed 12/01/17 Page 2 of 6 the PTT official discussed the U.S. Sanctions, including the potential impact of those sanctions on the incoming administration's foreign policy goals. The PIT official and FLYNN also discussed that the members of the Presidential Transition Team at Mar-a-Lago did not want Russia to escalate the situation. "

^The Trump campaign knew about him breaking the law conducting affairs with a foreign adversary but still kept him in the White House until it was clear he was going to be indited.

Also, Flynn and Kushner (again this is prior to swearing in, aka illegal) https://www.wsj.com/articles/flynn-promoted-nuclear-plant-project-while-in-white-house-1505328226

--------------
--------------

I can go through the rest, but see for yourself
https://www.justice.gov/sco
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^All the indictments hosted on the justice department's website.

I could go through all of them like I did Flynn above, but thankfully, people are already compiling a list of contacts and the denials associated with said contacts: https://cdn.themoscowproject.org/content/uploads/2018/06/14110352/MoscowProject-TrumpContacts-0618.pdf

---------------
---------------

And last but not least, those denials about contact that were made to the investigators arguably constitute obstruction of justice, the thing Nixon and Bill Clinton were impeached for.

Here's a quote from Nixon's first article of impeachment:
"The means used to implement this course of conduct or plan included one or more of the following:

making false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;

withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;

approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counselling witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings;

interfering or endeavouring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, and Congressional Committees;"

http://watergate.info/impeachment/articles-of-impeachment


Honestly now, has Trump made any false or misleading statements about his team's contact with Russia? Has he withheld any relevant evidence?




Did he endevor to interfere with the conduct of an investigation?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/N1MbFesSC7M" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
^ iframe not working https://www.youtube.com/embed/N1MbFesSC7M


-----------------
-----------------

So did he collude with Russia? who cares, no one is being charged or investigated with collusion.

Did he obstruct justice by misleading any US official or interefere with said investigation? That's debateable, and we'll have to see all that Meuller is going to put in the public record before anyone can make a clear decision. But it sure as hell looks bad, and it's very much NOT "Still no crime Still ZERO ZIP NADA"

If you look at the timeline for Nixon or Bill Clinton's impeachment, a lot of staffers (human shields) went down before the investigators got to the top.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Watergate_scandal
http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/history/johnson/clintontimeline.htm

The entire thing is bias, not factual, or at best misleading because of intentional omission of fact. I can't say what fact is false if there's no fact. Opinion about perceived/alleged bias isn't factual.
A lie by omission is a lie. The whole thing is that kind of lie.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/feb/05/devin-nunes/nunes-memo-twists-james-comeys-words-steele-dossie/

The "unverified and salacious" (not wrong or debunked, mind you) part was personal accusations, you know, the golden showers with Russian hookers part, which was NOT used to get a warrant. He was clear that was not his opinion about the entire thing.

Yes, as I've told you at least twice now, I read it twice before commenting on it looking for anything in it and found nothing but biased whining. "Steele said bad things about Trump, so he's an untrustworthy liar" is hardly even an honest accusation, much less evidence he lied about anything, and farther from proof that this one piece in the puzzle of evidence against Trump's administration was key. One statement by one person taken out of context and misrepresented is not even an indication, much less proof that this was THE key bit of evidence, without which there was no case, but that's what this is all about. it was likely the most damning bit that tipped the scales from 'could just look bad' to 'this is something that needs investigation today'.
Recall, the continuing investigation already actually found criminal activity PROVEN, ADMITTED, AND CONVICTED.

As I've told you repeatedly, they (democrats , the fbi, and the DoD) tried to block it because 1) they wouldn't let the FBI screen it for secrets/classified information/pure lies and 2) republicans blocked (and continue to block) releasing the full story because it paints a completely different picture from the memo. Don't pretend to be so dumb you don't understand that.

Just keep saying bombshell, that will make it real...Jebus Christ.

I'm sure it is just the tip....of the ass fucking the Republicans are giving our democracy and system of checks and balances. What it's not is the tip of some insane conspiracy iceberg between liberals and top law enforcement.

Get your head out of your ass. No one is ever going after Obama or Clinton, as they committed no crimes, they've both been investigated with pure malice and bias for years and Republicans found nothing, this is just more nothing. It's almost funny you would even consider that, but it's actually sad you are that deluded you could keep thinking such nonsense after so many disappointments.

Really? A pure bias opinion piece from ' the hill' is your evidence? It was factless, logic free garbage that actually referenced Benghazi as one of Obama's prosecutable crimes, I'm dumber for having read it. You should feel shameful.

Clearly you don't recall that Obama's administration had zero convictions for misuse of power, zero indictments, how many has Trump's had already? 5? 6? 10? At least 4 high ranking members have been convicted or plead guilty already before year one or the first investigation is complete. Only Nixon's record was worse, and that only after he left office after Watergate.
Trump has by far the worst criminal conviction record for sitting administrations on record....by FAR!

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/1/11/1619079/-Comparing-Presidential-Administrations-by-Arrests-and-Convictions-A-Warning-for-Trump-Appointees

John Oliver - Stupid Watergate has been added as a related post - related requested by PlayhousePals on that post.

@heropsycho
here here..we need a special prosecutor.
i have been fairly reticent jump on board during this whole media circus,not because i am a trump fan,but because i saw no evidence,just conjecture and speculation.which i felt more politically motivated than anything.

now to be honest,there STILL is no HARD evidence,but the circumstantial and political machinations of the trump administration has become increasingly suspect.reminiscent to the nixon administration during the watergate scandal.

could this all just be an innocent mistake,from a bumbling president and an inept staff?

sure..that is a possibility,but with the mounting evidence,and the trump administration continually evading and obfuscating and in some instances,outright blocking any inquiry into the russian connections?

yeah,we need a special prosecutor.

Today, the morning after firing Comey, (possibly for requesting more funding for the investigation into Trump's administration colluding with Russia yesterday), Trump is meeting in secret (closed door meetings) with the two Russian diplomats that are indisputably directly involved in the collusion on tape.

There has yet to be a shred of evidence that even appears to exonerate them of these charges of treason, and every single action they take indicates guilt.

Insane that we are now in a position where we have to hope this follows Watergate's lead, because the alternative path is directly into tyrannical despotism.

Part two: Stupid Watergate

@asynchronice @Engels
this is opinion that just happens to be on RT.
the opinion is coming from chris hedges,a pulitzer prize winning,war correspondent for 20 years for the NYT.who has been extremely vocal in his criticism of american neoliberal policies.

he also has a show on RT called "on contact".

as always,the answer is discernment,and for that to happen there has to be a basic understanding of what propaganda actually is,and to dismiss hedges analysis simply due to the venue,is intellectually dishonest.

example:
it has been known for years that FOX news is a meme machine,a message of the day producer of misinformation and obfuscation.

does this mean that every story FOX covers is false? or manipulated?

of course not.

conversely,does this mean that every story RT posts should be taken at face value?

again,the same calculus applies.

i find that when RT deals with the russian state,and stories regarding putin,they tend to lean towards state "message of the day",but when they cover stories that are critical of american foreign policy,they tend to source and back their conclusions in a solid journalistic manner.

in regards to the washington post and their latest appeals to power and influence,is just a symptom of a much larger problem.

if you recall back in 2003.when the bush administration was pushing for an invasion of iraq,the washington posts editorial board was possibly the biggest cheerleader.they outshine even the new york times in their desire to please their masters in the white house and pentagon,and because at that time print news still had credibility and washpo was,indeed,considered a beacon of stellar journalism (remember watergate?).they almost single handedly handed the war powers to president bush to execute an illegal war,based on lies.

so in my opinion,the washington post last it's credibility over a decade ago.this is also a main,driving factor why i abandoned corporate news media.

i prefer independent news outlets.the very same outlets that washpo,and their un-sourced propornot,targeted.

lie to me once...shame on you.
lie to me twice..shame on me.