At 6:55 a.m. this morning, Trump tweeted:
They made up a phony collusion with the Russians story, found zero proof, so now they go for obstruction of justice on the phony story. NiceThe following response quickly appeared on Twitter:
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 15, 2017
Good question! If everything to do with the special counsel is mere fake news, why indeed appear constantly to cover it all up, deflect attention away from it, and fire a troublesome FBI director who refused to kiss the ring and pledge his loyalty?If the collusion story was phony, why bother obstructing the investigation? 🤔🤔🤔 https://t.co/yjr06Oh1iX— scotus marshall (@LoganJames) June 15, 2017
The WashPost scoop linked above also reports that investigators have been looking "for any evidence of possible financial crimes among Trump associates." Hasn't it always been about money with the guy at the top, and presumably his associates too? Many dots would appear to connect Trump to Russian oligarch money, which would be the main reason IMO to "collude" with Russians. Piles of cash!
I believe Robert Mueller is following the money as well as the obstruction. When a president reacts to any mention of Russia's interference like a man who's just felt a hot branding iron next to his thigh -- that's suspicious.
 |
| "You're the greatest thing that's ever happened, and everything you do is intentional!" |
7 comments:
I'm just suspicious enough to think that even if Mueller reports significant obstruction and /or connections of DJT to Russian $ that the House of Representatives will not take that information and vote impeachment.
Virginia Foxx . . . our brave defender of the Constitution.
Billy Blue
What about the Virginia Ballpark Shooter? As a hard core Democrat - I think it's time to talk about our views on violence and how it destroys lives and communities.
I do not know any hard core democrats who don't agree, Billy Blue. I am a Democrat and a gun owner (we live in the country - it's for varmints), and I firmly believe that people with a history of violence, like the Virginia shooter, have no business owning a lethal weapon. And no one, no matter how law-abiding, should conceal-carry without training.
So, maybe we should amend the constitution to read...."The right of the people with proper training to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"?
Amen, Opinionated! The Virginia shooter just emphasizes that we need stricter regulations. People with a history of domestic violence and mental health issues should not have access to firearms, period. Why is that such a controversial thing? All of our rights come with restrictions, so why should this be any different?
Well, why don't we have more restrictions on government officials of all levels ?
Post a Comment