First Principles: Why Are You Okay with This?

 

It seems that many historically Republican and conservative commentators, thought leaders and pundits take the same side as those in the Democrat party on certain issues that involve President Trump. One of those is Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation and the related controversy over the FBI and DOJ, and in particular the secret Memo. They insist that Trump is wrong-headed in his attacks on the FBI and DOJ.

One glimpse of this perspective is voiced by Senator Marco Rubio:

From his reputation and everything I know about him, I remain convinced that when this is all said and done, Mueller is going to only pursue things that are true, and he will do it in a fair and balanced way.”

My question is what about all of the new revelations coming out about the nefarious activities within the FBI? The 50,000 (seriously?!) texts between Strzok and Page were the earliest signs. But now on the eve of the Memo being released, more details are leaking out about serious criminal activity, at the highest levels of management.

Today, there is an article at PJ Media which provides much more detail about the truly nefarious activities of the now fired and shamed former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

It seems that the Deputy Director intentionally sat on and prohibited further investigation into Anthony Weiner’s laptop. At the exact same time, his wife “was receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Clinton’s close allies.” Only after the WSJ published an October 24 story about the donation to his wife’s campaign from Clinton sources did the Deputy Director get pressured to move forward. Evidently, there was also internal FBI grumbling and pressure to do something from the investigative team on the Weiner matter.

People within the FBI weren’t just asking about Weiner’s laptop — they were also asking about McCabe’s role in the Clinton email scandal. If McCabe was indeed stalling on the emails, it seemed he could do so no longer.

Something is very rotten in the state of our Federal Law Enforcement. Possibly treasonous behavior.

Why are you okay with such a politicized and criminal DOJ/FBI?

There are 63 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    The FBI and the CIA, and indeed, most all of the Deep State, are  staffed by “lifers” who have no experience outside their bureaucracies. They are all about self-perpetuation, and they are beholden to the political class most likely to fund and expand them — the Democrats. If they were businesses, they would be Sears and Blockbuster Video; except there is no market to weed out dysfunctional governmental organizations.

    • #1
  2. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):
    The FBI and the CIA, and indeed, most all of the Deep State, are staffed by “lifers” who have no experience outside their bureaucracies. They are all about self-perpetuation, and they are beholden to the political class most likely to fund and expand them — the Democrats. If they were businesses, they would be Sears and Blockbuster Video; except there is no market to weed out dysfunctional governmental organizations.

    That is the Iron Law of Bureaucracy. In every organization, those people who are dedicated not the mission but to the organization itself will take over and write the rules.

    https://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html

    • #2
  3. Valiuth Inactive
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Again, this post is high on speculation and ascribing of intent to rather loosely connected facts. How long did they sit on those e-mails a few weeks? Were they really sitting on them or were they just backed up. In the end they not only reviewed them before the election they also released a communication saying they had them just two weeks out from the day of voting. How convenient for Republicans? See I can do it too.

    You, and the Right in general,  employ the same logical fallacies and conspiratorial mindset that Black Lives Matters uses to judge police departments. Every eventuality that seems politically unfavorable to you is amplified, every instance where they make mistakes in your favor are ignored. The FBI handling of the Clinton e-mail investigation was a hot mess, but I think in large part it was a hot mess because they tried to split the baby and give everyone something political to chew on. And it was exactly this pressure to not seemingly step on anyone’s political toes that makes it all look so bad.

    You have already made your conclusions about the FBI and are working back from those. The rest of us are trying to sort it all out still.

    For instance you mention McCabe was fired? I’ve read he just retired, and was going to retire sometime before March to get his pension. To me it seems far more likely that Republicans and Democrats are playing political games with innocuous facts. Each spinning them to concoct a fantasia for their base.

    • #3
  4. Pony Convertible Inactive
    Pony Convertible
    @PonyConvertible

    Not OK with it.  I think the FBI and DOJ need to be investigated and held accountable, by Congress.  This is one of those cases where the checks and balances need to be put to use.

    Rubio’s comment is irresponsible. He should not assume innocence simply because of “reputation and everything I know about him”.  It is what he doesn’t know that needs to be investigated.

    • #4
  5. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    I think that the Obama presidency politicized much of what should be neutral, and professional government agencies.   The IRS targeting is the classic example.   But it extended throughout the administrative branch from State to Justice to EPA etc,    including the FBI. And recall, they were flashing it around. … the way someone might open their jacket to make the gun in their waistband visible.     The IRS didn’t get caught targeting conservatives … they just tossed it out there … they admitted it.   Remember, they admitted doing it in an answer to some pre-planted question at a conference.    They did it.   And they wanted us to know that they were doing it.   They were playing for the ‘chilling effect’.   The politicisation of the administrative state was encouraged.    That being the case, it is almost a given that McCabe would try to run out the clock on HRC’s e-mails.

    Even if he wasn’t a partisan, no seasoned bureaucratic survivor would want to be seen pushing the embarrassing investigation of someone who seemed certain to be your new boss’s boss.   I’m sure that looked like the short path to early retirement.    So he binned it.

    • #5
  6. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    This is my litmus test for whether a politician or pundit is legitimate or a tool ( or operative) of the deep state status quo.

    Before, they could hide behind Trump’s questionable demeanor. But now we can see that it’s more than that. Much more.

    Of course spy agencies would have a tremendous amount of power and influence should they decide to use it, and it sure looks like they do. Why wouldn’t they have corrupted, co-opted, blackmailed, bribed, intimidated or hired individual politicians, pundits and journalists, if they are already corrupt themselves? That’s what they do they just weren’t supposed to do it to us. Now things start to make sense.

     

     

     

    • #6
  7. Brian Watt Inactive
    Brian Watt
    @BrianWatt

    Rubio hasn’t articulated that he thinks the FBI and DOJ have acted properly lo these many months, has he? I think if you look over his questioning of Comey he wasn’t happy with the responses he was getting. What he said about Mueller is essentially the exact same sentiment that Trey Gowdy has expressed. So, using that to assume that he’s not upset with what’s happening at the FBI and DOJ would be a stretch.

    • #7
  8. Kay of MT Member
    Kay of MT
    @KayofMT

    I am not okay with it, but other than complain not much I can do about it. Those agencies are rotten at the core and we have known so for years. Fast & Furious, anybody? EPA confiscating someone’s land because they dug a hole to encourage birds to land? Bundy cattle ranch land grab?

    • #8
  9. Pony Convertible Inactive
    Pony Convertible
    @PonyConvertible

    Ekosj (View Comment):
    I think that the Obama presidency politicized much of what should be neutral, and professional government agencies. The IRS targeting is the classic example. But it extended throughout the administrative branch from to Justice to EPA etc, including the FBI. And recall, they were flashing it around. … the way someone might open their jacket to make the gun in their waistband visible. The IRS didn’t get caught targeting conservatives … they just tossed it out there … they admitted it. Remember, they admitted doing it in an answer to some pre-planted question at a conference. They did it. And they wanted us to know that they were doing it.

    That may have been their mistake.  They told us they were doing it. Then we noticed that they were in fact doing it. Then we reacted and voted for Trump.

    • #9
  10. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    I’m not clear on what Rubio voicing support for Mueller’s integrity in his own investigation has to do with likely problems in the present FBI.

    • #10
  11. danok1 Member
    danok1
    @danok1

    Ekosj (View Comment):
    think that the Obama presidency politicized much of what should be neutral, and professional government agencies. The IRS targeting is the classic example. But it extended throughout the administrative branch from to Justice to EPA etc, including the FBI. And recall, they were flashing it around. … the way someone might open their jacket to make the gun in their waistband visible. The IRS didn’t get caught targeting conservatives … they just tossed it out there … they admitted it. Remember, they admitted doing it in an answer to some pre-planted question at a conference. They did it. And they wanted us to know that they were doing it. They were playing for the ‘chilling effect’.

    As was Chuck Schumer when he warned Trump that the intelligence agencies would come after him:

    New Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Tuesday that President-elect Donald Trump is “being really dumb” by taking on the intelligence community and its assessments on Russia’s cyber activities.

    “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,” Schumer told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.

    • #11
  12. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    I’m not ok with it. Which is why I don’t understand the line of argument which goes: the Mueller investigation could have been avoided if it weren’t for Donald Trump saying something stupid.

    I don’t want this to go away. I want it resolved instead. Everything in the light. Having it go away is a return to the status quo. Nuts to that – let’s turn this into a win instead.

    Also, if what I believe to be true turns out to be correct: then this all looks like Trump asking not to be thrown into the briar patch. He can’t be seen leading the charge to clear this section of swamp (that would taint the findings, cries of obstruction, etc). What better way than to force/welcome/invite an investigation which can’t possibly avoid the real scandals because they are seemingly omnipresent and poorly disguised with zero substance to them.

    • #12
  13. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Funny. I’ve heard some really bad things about him and some of his team.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-02/13-shocking-facts-about-special-prosecutor-robert-mueller

    • #13
  14. Doug Watt Moderator
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    At this point in time I don’t think that we can assume that Mueller was informed by McCabe, and the two lovers of their conflict of interest, text messages, and whatever goals they may have had in this entire fiasco.

    I will agree that the politicization of law enforcement is a dangerous thing. It isn’t working too well for the citizens of Chicago, or Baltimore at the local level, and it isn’t working too well at the state level concerning sanctuary policies.

    By the way not only the Left is guilty of this, good old Sheriff Joe in Arizona, now running for the Senate in Arizona politicized his department. Even though President Trump carried Maricopa County he could not find enough votes from Republicans to win his race for Sheriff. Incompetence is a benevolent criticism for the malfeasance that went on when he was Sheriff.

     

    • #14
  15. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Again, this post is high on speculation and ascribing of intent to rather loosely connected facts.

    Are you talking about Rubio’s speculations here?

    • #15
  16. Kay of MT Member
    Kay of MT
    @KayofMT

    Mueller didn’t know whether or not, under Obama, he could assassinate an American on American soil? Good grief!

    • #16
  17. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    Pony Convertible (View Comment):

    Ekosj (View Comment):
    I think that the Obama presidency politicized much of what should be neutral, and professional government agencies. The IRS targeting is the classic example. But it extended throughout the administrative branch from to Justice to EPA etc, including the FBI. And recall, they were flashing it around. … the way someone might open their jacket to make the gun in their waistband visible. The IRS didn’t get caught targeting conservatives … they just tossed it out there … they admitted it. Remember, they admitted doing it in an answer to some pre-planted question at a conference. They did it. And they wanted us to know that they were doing it.

    That may have been their mistake. They told us they were doing it. Then we noticed that they were in fact doing it. Then we reacted and voted for Trump.

    Agreed.    Trump is a wildcard.   He didn’t feature in anyone s predictions.   His extraordinary election elicited extraordinary responses.

    • #17
  18. Hank Rhody, Bombast Savant Contributor
    Hank Rhody, Bombast Savant
    @HankRhody

    Ed G. (View Comment):
    Also, if what I believe to be true turns out to be correct: then this all looks like Trump asking not to be thrown into the briar patch. He can’t be seen leading the charge to clear this section of swamp (that would taint the findings, cries of obstruction, etc). What better way than to force/welcome/invite an investigation which can’t possibly avoid the real scandals because they are seemingly omnipresent and poorly disguised with zero substance to them.

    I hope so. I’ve had very little respect for the FBI since the fiasco of Hillary’s emails. I would really like to have a professional civil service that was, you know, professional. Interested in doing the job they swore to do.

    • #18
  19. DocJay Inactive
    DocJay
    @DocJay

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Again, this post is high on speculation and ascribing of intent to rather loosely connected facts. How long did they sit on those e-mails a few weeks? Were they really sitting on them or were they just backed up. In the end they not only reviewed them before the election they also released a communication saying they had them just two weeks out from the day of voting. How convenient for Republicans? See I can do it too.

    You, and the Right in general, employ the same logical fallacies and conspiratorial mindset that Black Lives Matters uses to judge police departments. Every eventuality that seems politically unfavorable to you is amplified, every instance where they make mistakes in your favor are ignored. The FBI handling of the Clinton e-mail investigation was a hot mess, but I think in large part it was a hot mess because they tried to split the baby and give everyone something political to chew on. And it was exactly this pressure to not seemingly step on anyone’s political toes that makes it all look so bad.

    You have already made your conclusions about the FBI and are working back from those. The rest of us are trying to sort it all out still.

    For instance you mention McCabe was fired? I’ve read he just retired, and was going to retire sometime before March to get his pension. To me it seems far more likely that Republicans and Democrats are playing political games with innocuous facts. Each spinning them to concoct a fantasia for their base.

    Hogwash.

    • #19
  20. EDISONPARKS Member
    EDISONPARKS
    @user_54742

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Again, this post is high on speculation and ascribing of intent to rather loosely connected facts. How long did they sit on those e-mails a few weeks? Were they really sitting on them or were they just backed up. In the end they not only reviewed them before the election they also released a communication saying they had them just two weeks out from the day of voting. How convenient for Republicans? See I can do it too.

    You, and the Right in general, employ the same logical fallacies and conspiratorial mindset that Black Lives Matters uses to judge police departments. Every eventuality that seems politically unfavorable to you is amplified, every instance where they make mistakes in your favor are ignored. The FBI handling of the Clinton e-mail investigation was a hot mess, but I think in large part it was a hot mess because they tried to split the baby and give everyone something political to chew on. And it was exactly this pressure to not seemingly step on anyone’s political toes that makes it all look so bad.

    You have already made your conclusions about the FBI and are working back from those. The rest of us are trying to sort it all out still.

    For instance you mention McCabe was fired? I’ve read he just retired, and was going to retire sometime before March to get his pension. To me it seems far more likely that Republicans and Democrats are playing political games with innocuous facts. Each spinning them to concoct a fantasia for their base.

    A few weeks in October of an election year is kind of a big deal.

    Knowing what we know now about McCabe and his involvement in the HRC/Server/ClassifiedDocMishandlingDestruction  investigation …. or matter …. and McCabes meetings as discussed in the Strzok and Page texts, it would be incredibly naive to give McCabe the benefit of the doubt.

    As to the retired vs fired: Richard Nixon technically “resigned” or “retired before the completion of his term”

    Here is a fun notion to ponder: We focus so heavily on HRC’s mishandling of classified materials and destruction of e-mails and devices because we know she actually did this, what ever happened to finding out what was on those e-mails and devices that HRC felt it so important to destroy.   Since the same ahrseclowns who worked on the original “hot mess” investigation …. or matter …. now appear to have been in the bag for HRC, should we really just move along nothing to see here folks…. it’s all over ….or should we take another look with investigators who are actually investigating.

    • #20
  21. Jack Hendrix Inactive
    Jack Hendrix
    @JackHendrix

    Let me first say I think parts of the FBI is up to no good. Hardly a shock though, as a classical liberal and student of history, I have no reason to trust law enforcement (especially federal cops) to be angels.

    But I think it is a mistake to conflate the Mueller investigation with problems in the federal law enforcement bureaucracy. The special prosecutor was not a function of fbi malfeasance. It was a function of Trump’s political naïveté. Or some combo of the two.

    Regardless, I don’t think the fbi corruption story tells us anything about the scope of the Mueller investigation. As far as I can tell, it’s not yet exceeded its mandate.

    Im of the opinion that we should in fact support the Mueller probe as it will likely exonerate Trump (if not a few of his subordinates.) I’m of course ready to change my mind if it becomes a clear abuse but I wait for evidence on that.

    • #21
  22. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Jack Hendrix (View Comment):
    Let me first say I think parts of the FBI is up to no good. Hardly a shock though, as a classical liberal and student of history, I have no reason to trust law enforcement (especially federal cops) to be angels.

    But I think it is a mistake to conflate the Mueller investigation with problems in the federal law enforcement bureaucracy. The special prosecutor was not a function of fbi malfeasance. It was a function of Trump’s political naïveté. Or some combo of the two.

    Regardless, I don’t think the fbi corruption story tells us anything about the scope of the Mueller investigation. As far as I can tell, it’s not yet exceeded its mandate.

    Im of the opinion that we should in fact support the Mueller probe as it will likely exonerate Trump (if not a few of his subordinates.) I’m of course ready to change my mind if it becomes a clear abuse but I wait for evidence on that.

    First let me say this seems a very fair way of looking at things.

    Where I would quibble is with the bold section. By its very existence the investigation has exceeded the mandate of a Special Counsel. The Statue authorizing this says that it is for criminal matters, not just looking into a bunch of stuff to see what is happening.  Before there can even by a Special Counsel, they have accuse someone of a real, definable crime. Collusion ,even if it did occur, is a political issue not a crime.

    • #22
  23. Columbo Member
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/01/tom-fitton-mueller-fbi-implicated-lois-lerner-irs-scandal-robert-mueller-cannot-trusted-video/

    Robert Mueller was involved in many scandals during his time as FBI Director from 9/4/2001-9/4/2013. 

    From the Uranium One scandal to the Lois Lerner IRS scandal, he cannot be trusted to uncover Obama FBI/DOJ abuses targeting President Trump, says Judicial Watch president, Tom Fitton.

     

    • #23
  24. Jack Hendrix Inactive
    Jack Hendrix
    @JackHendrix

    Jager (View Comment):

    Jack Hendrix (View Comment):
    Let me first say I think parts of the FBI is up to no good. Hardly a shock though, as a classical liberal and student of history, I have no reason to trust law enforcement (especially federal cops) to be angels.

    But I think it is a mistake to conflate the Mueller investigation with problems in the federal law enforcement bureaucracy. The special prosecutor was not a function of fbi malfeasance. It was a function of Trump’s political naïveté. Or some combo of the two.

    Regardless, I don’t think the fbi corruption story tells us anything about the scope of the Mueller investigation. As far as I can tell, it’s not yet exceeded its mandate.

    Im of the opinion that we should in fact support the Mueller probe as it will likely exonerate Trump (if not a few of his subordinates.) I’m of course ready to change my mind if it becomes a clear abuse but I wait for evidence on that.

    First let me say this seems a very fair way of looking at things.

    Where I would quibble is with the bold section. By its very existence the investigation has exceeded the mandate of a Special Counsel. The Statue authorizing this says that it is for criminal matters, not just looking into a bunch of stuff to see what is happening. Before there can even by a Special Counsel, they have accuse someone of a real, definable crime. Collusion ,even if it did occur, is a political issue not a crime.

    I agree that collusion is not criminal. My understanding is that the investigation is into conspiracy which is a crime. Based on the current indictments, there doesn’t seem to be much overreach yet.

    But I think you identify a real fear, namely that the investigation serves as a vehicle to facilitate the criminalization of political acts (in this case imagined political acts.) And as I said, i remain a skecptic on the whole thing generally.

    • #24
  25. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Jack Hendrix (View Comment):
    I agree that collusion is not criminal. My understanding is that the investigation is into conspiracy which is a crime.

    How can a conspiracy to do something non-criminal be criminal?

    • #25
  26. Jack Hendrix Inactive
    Jack Hendrix
    @JackHendrix

    Columbo (View Comment):
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/01/tom-fitton-mueller-fbi-implicated-lois-lerner-irs-scandal-robert-mueller-cannot-trusted-video/

    Robert Mueller was involved in many scandals during his time as FBI Director from 9/4/2001-9/4/2013.

    From the Uranium One scandal to the Lois Lerner IRS scandal, he cannot be trusted to uncover Obama FBI/DOJ abuses targeting President Trump, says Judicial Watch president, Tom Fitton.

    I certainly respect the work judicial watch does but I guess I doubt the premise a bit. I’m not sure that being head of the fbi means involvement in irs or state dept. corruption. My reading of those scandals seemed to make very clear the bad actors were Lois Lerner and hrc with cover by Obama. But regardless, I haven’t seen malfeasance yet by Mueller. Indeed, as John Yoo noted, Mueller appears to be doing trump  solid so far.

    Again, since the most likely scenario is exoneration, I’d hate to attack the whole thing without more evidence.

    • #26
  27. Jack Hendrix Inactive
    Jack Hendrix
    @JackHendrix

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Jack Hendrix (View Comment):
    I agree that collusion is not criminal. My understanding is that the investigation is into conspiracy which is a crime.

    How can a conspiracy to do something non-criminal be criminal?

    Fair point. The conspiracy would have to be to break a law of the US. Unfortunately, that is a long list so take your pick: wire fraud, election law etc. This doesn’t mean I personally think that’s likely, it’s just the idea. The text by Rosenstein states investigation into cooperation with the trump campaign and Russia to interfere in the election. Since they are looking for crimes, that would necessarily mean conspiracy.

    • #27
  28. Columbo Member
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Jack Hendrix (View Comment):

    Columbo (View Comment):
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/01/tom-fitton-mueller-fbi-implicated-lois-lerner-irs-scandal-robert-mueller-cannot-trusted-video/

    Robert Mueller was involved in many scandals during his time as FBI Director from 9/4/2001-9/4/2013.

    From the Uranium One scandal to the Lois Lerner IRS scandal, he cannot be trusted to uncover Obama FBI/DOJ abuses targeting President Trump, says Judicial Watch president, Tom Fitton.

    I certainly respect the work judicial watch does but I guess I doubt the premise a bit. I’m not sure that being head of the fbi means involvement in irs or state dept. corruption. My reading of those scandals seemed to make very clear the bad actors were Lois Lerner and hrc with cover by Obama. But regardless, I haven’t seen malfeasance yet by Mueller. Indeed, as John Yoo noted, Mueller appears to be doing trump solid so far.

    Again, since the most likely scenario is exoneration, I’d hate to attack the whole thing without more evidence.

    Indeed. Time will tell … Release The Secret Memo!

    • #28
  29. Columbo Member
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Mueller Requests Postponement Of General Mike Flynn Sentencing … [link]

    Against a newly discovered likelihood the Robert Mueller investigation began under false pretenses; and against the backdrop that FBI surveillance and wiretaps were obtained through materially (intentionally) false representations to the FISA court; and against the backdrop the original Flynn plea judge (Contrereas) was also the approving FISA judge; and that judge ‘was summarily recused’ from the case; and against increasing evidence that Mike Flynn was set up by a terminal animus, and politically-motivated investigative rogue unit, operating within the FBI; and against surfacing IG Horowitz evidence that FBI investigators manipulated (lied on) their FD-302 interrogation documents; and understanding those falsified 302’s were used in the Mueller/Flynn charging document…

    …Special Counsel Robert Mueller now asks for postponement of sentencing:

    • #29
  30. Jack Hendrix Inactive
    Jack Hendrix
    @JackHendrix

    Columbo (View Comment):
    Mueller Requests Postponement Of General Mike Flynn Sentencing … [link]

    Against a newly discovered likelihood the Robert Mueller investigation began under false pretenses; and against the backdrop that FBI surveillance and wiretaps were obtained through materially (intentionally) false representations to the FISA court; and against the backdrop the original Flynn plea judge (Contrereas) was also the approving FISA judge; and that judge ‘was summarily recused’ from the case; and against increasing evidence that Mike Flynn was set up by a terminal animus, and politically-motivated investigative rogue unit, operating within the FBI; and against surfacing IG Horowitz evidence that FBI investigators manipulated (lied on) their FD-302 interrogation documents; and understanding those falsified 302’s were used in the Mueller/Flynn charging document…

    …Special Counsel Robert Mueller now asks for postponement of sentencing:

    This is your post so I don’t want to keep badgering you but I’m not sure I follow the argument above. There’s a lot of conjecture in that piece linked to. As you say, only time will tell. But more troublesome (potentially) for Trump is if mueller and Flynn agree to postpone sentencing, isn’t the more likely scenario that the postponement is because Flynn is wiling to testify to some other crime committed higher up?

    • #30

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.