03.24.2019 05:18 PM

Age of Obstruction


  1. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Does Trump win as a result of this summary? Well, narrowly so on collusion. It’s a wash on obstruction — because after 22 months Mueller himself did not find the evidence sufficiently probative to subpoena the President of the United States.

    But it would be naive to suggest that other ongoing investigations are at least looking at Trump as a person of interest. So, Trump likely isn’t out of the woods just yet.

  2. Mongo says:

    Kinsella is plenty stupid, no doubt about that.

    For starters, why would Putin want Trump to win when every one of Trump’s policies was bad for Putin?
    Did Putin want a stronger US military and a stronger NATO?
    Did he want to see US energy independence and did he want to see the US export natural gas to Europe to lessen Russia’s monopoly on gas supplies there?
    The idea that Putin wanted Trump to win is an idea that only idiots could embrace.
    It makes no sense.

    • Ronald O'Dowd says:


      You see the forest but are entirely clueless about the trees.

      Yeah, sure, all that cyber activity was just for kicks.

      • Craig Austin says:

        Russia is a gas station that sell war material at the checkout, Trump is their worst nightmare. He has made America the biggest oil producer, by deregulation. He is threatening the gas line to Germany. On the other hand Hillary gave up American uranium to Vladimir, and vowed to curtail oil production..

        • The Doctor says:

          This Hillary/Uranium one thing is such BS. Go check out the CFIUS statute that was in play (Committee on Foreign Investment in the US). The transaction required the approval of NINE different government departments. The State Department was only one of nine.

          So it was not Hillary Clinton’s deal to approve. She was one of only nine decision makers.

          So stop peddling that Trump Bootlicker BS that suggests that she singlehandedly approved the deal.

          • Fred from BC says:

            “The transaction required the approval of NINE different government departments. The State Department was only one of nine.”

            Wrong. It’s not nine government departments…it’s nine people who were all (?) appointed by (and worked for) the President of the United States (in this case, Barack Obama).

            “The Committee on Foreign Investments has nine members, including the secretaries of the treasury, state, defense, homeland security, commerce and energy; the attorney general; and representatives from two White House offices (the United States Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy).”

            As for “requiring approval”:

            “The committee can’t actually stop a sale from going through — it can only approve a sale. The president is the only one who can stop a sale, if the committee or any one member “recommends suspension or prohibition of the transaction,”

            So Hillary wasn’t solely responsible for approving it (nor did the poster above claim she was), but she also didn’t oppose it either.

            And of course, you conveniently forget to mention that the real scandal involving Hillary Clinton, and the one most people are so outraged by, is *not* the fact that she was one of the people who approved it, but the fact that she alone seems to have profited by it:

            “The Times detailed how the Clinton Foundation had received millions in donations from investors in Uranium One.

            The donations from those with ties to Uranium One weren’t publicly disclosed by the Clinton Foundation, even though Hillary Clinton had an agreement with the White House that the foundation would disclose all contributors. Days after the Times story, the foundation acknowledged that it “made mistakes,” saying it had disclosed donations from a Canadian charity, for instance, but not the donors to that charity who were associated with the uranium company.”

            THAT’S the scandal. Right there (and you know it).

            Stop peddling Clinton Bootlicker BS, Doc. Doesn’t look good on you.

          • The Doctor says:

            So you agree with me that Hillary Clinton did not singlehandledly approve the deal, nor was she singlehandedly responsible for approving the deal. Thanks for confirming that.

    • The Doctor says:

      Mongo, thanks for the Kremlin talking points.

      What bubble are you living in, anyway?

  3. geek49203 says:

    Do you mean, people who want the truth to come out and the guilty, if any, to be punished?

  4. Tee says:

    and vice versa those who celebrated Lametti are outraged by Barr.

  5. Algoria says:

    It all makes sense now.

    The Soviet Union killed millions of their own citizens and imposed totalitarian communism on millions more in Eastern Europe and Asia. They also materially supported the spread of brutal communist regimes in Africa, the Americas and elsewhere. However, this was merely a “red scare” exaggerated by right-wingers in the US. It was laughable to think there was ever any real threat to our freedom.

    Now that the USSR has imploded and Russia’s power is diminished they have become the greatest threat we have ever seen because Russian bots are posting on Twitter, YouTube and Facebook.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *