US Attorney Durham objects to IG findings on Russia probe origins in stunning statement

Which is the problem. You can't(or well you shouldn't) "investigate" someone for a crime they never committed and go "Well, woops, my bad". What about the unknown 4th person now who also hadn't committed a crime?

There are serious and grave problems here, everything Liberals/Libertarians said about the Patriot Act, has come to pass.

 

He referred to people Trump refused to allow testify. You referred to people Trump will graciously allow to testify. Who are you referring to?

 

All of the above. Impeachment is DOA at the Senate, as Pelosi refused to take this seriously.

 

Now you are guessing. Funny.

 

So.....Trump, Rudy, Mulvaney et al will not give any testimony?

 

I don't know at this point. Even I'm stunned by the Speaker's inability to take this seriously and to have only submitted two weak referrals that are absolutely going to get shut down by the Senate. It's wholly possible there isn't a trial. I know Trump wants one at this point, but he should take a que from Eisenhower and have a "radio chat". An address to the Nation on all abuses. Sure, it's technically "not" under oath, but it'll be known to all at that point, and then we'll have to say "are we okay with letting a VP strongarm a foreign nation".

I'm not okay with that. Biden's strong arming disqualifies him from the presidency. And yes, regardless of that fact being convenient to a POTUS Trump doesn't make it illegal. As Carter Page had said in the IG report, I'm glad to have known of corruption even if it took a corrupt act(Russian hacking) to find out.

We as citizens should be demanding the public transparency so that doesn't have to happen. Page wasn't radical, he was actually quite simplistic about the matter.

 

I was trying to paste the seen from the Breakfast Club in which Bender asks D*ck if Barry Manilow knew he raided his closet and D*ck’s response was “I’ll give you the answer to that question next Saturday.”

You have to forgive me but I’m a baby boomer and have no clue when it comes to wireless technology. When I go see my grandkids they have to show me new things on my phone.

 

Is there any difference between what Biden did and what Trump has done*?

 

My God, my post was almost word for word the same as stone6’s except the fact that I changed 1 word. It was for a joke.
Lighten Up!!!

 

You'll have to forgive me, I am a baby boomer and I have no clue when it comes to reading humour on a dead flat screen.

 

What the House purports that Trump did. And the problem is that what the House purports to have happened, and what Trump actually said happened, and what what little evidence we have says happened, are very different things.

Hence they even dropped quid pro quo and extortion ROFL. It's a sad day for the House.

 

Yes.

 

Not in the house. The dem clown show is in too much of a hurry to subpoena them.

 

How odd all 17 'errors' the IG found were against Trump, and all the 'errors' he found in his Hillary email investigation were in her favor. Wonder what the odds of that are?

 

The probable cause threshold for opening a counter-intelligence investigation is lower than that used for a federal criminal investigation, since the repercussions from the former could be far greater than the latter - i.e. another 9/11 versus a far more limited crime.

 

That was on purpose. Those weren't just typical accounting errors or process issues and oversights.

 

Hmmm...Missed "The Breakfast Club." I was in Europe during those years. You are forgiven.

 

Biden is old enough to fend for himself...but the basic difference is Biden's threat was consistent with national policy, while Trump's was personal.

 

So as long as the President agrees it’s OK since the President determines national policy. See the problem.

 

What do you think Trump has "cleaned up?" I see him as more corrupt than ever.

 

Try opening your eyes for a change.

 

Let's pretend that Trump did what the House alleges he did. Any difference between that and what Biden did*?

 

Will they give testimony in the Senate?

 

I have no problem with the President taking the lead on foreign policy if it's consistent and in the national interest. Congress may intervene when appropriate. The founding fathers did not anticipate our global success and, IMO, thought about foreign policy in far more limited terms, wherein their constitutional oversight and advice and consent powers would be sufficient. Trump apparently secretly shifted policy toward Ukraine, via back-channels and failed to notify Congress of his intent to withhold the aid and the reason, until AFTER such time as the July 25th tel-con was revealed by the Whistle Blower.

 

Read the report.