Like this?
Or maybe you think Trump should have sent someone over there to kick someone in the balls and set the stage for a war? Since Page was investigated some years ago and yet again, and Not Indicted for Being a Russian agent, maybe it's a Nothing Burger?

Gee, never seen Anyone trying to work with Russia. We don't buy their rockets or ask them to haul Our astronauts into space. We USED to have a space program. Who was president when that ended?

President Obama got caught in private conversation with a hot mic today in Seoul, South Korea, telling outgoing Russian president Dmitry Medvedev that Vladimir Putin should give him more "space" and that "[a]fter my election I have more flexibility."

Jake Tapper has the exchange:

President Obama: "On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space."


President Medvedev: "Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…"

President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."

What I Want to be true is that Trump didn't do anything wrong. That doesn't mean I would ignore evidence that he did. I hope others wouldn't create evidence that would make it appear he did.
Since Page WAS the crux of the FISA warrant, AND since he didn't get indicted
Then in what sane world does he somehow manage to be the reason for all those re-issuing warrants?
If there is no actionable evidence in that amount of time, gee, maybe it's not there?

Or, was a flimsy foundation for a warrant used to surveil Page used to Also check out everyone he had contact with?
Funny how the Hillary investigation was Solely politically motivated, and Comey listed reasons for indictment, yet the Trump investigation is nothing but pure.

For those of us who are less educated, and can't quite get a handle on grammar, let me be of assistance:

"There":
1.  In, at, or to that place or position.
"We went on to Paris and stayed there eleven days"
2.  Used in attracting someone's attention or calling attention to someone or something.
"See what I did there?"

"They're":
Contraction
they are.

"Their":
1.  Belonging to or associated with the people or things previously mentioned or easily identified.
"Her taunts had lost their power to touch him"
2.  Used in titles.
"A double portrait of Their Majesties"


You're (not your) all welcome.

MnSpring wrote on 02/05/18 at 12:43:22:



no I don't see what you did THERE...  

use English please,  

looks like you mostly just say "nah nah nah nah" and wiggled your thumb against your nose in some childlike mocking behavior,  are you old enough to be at the Tall Table?

FormerlyLostArtist wrote on 02/05/18 at 13:28:26:


I'll have to disagree with you there Lost.  I find it nearly impossible that our president will be found innocent in collusion with russia.  It's far too coincidental that his businesses have been propped up by russian oligarchs over the last decade.  I'd also find in nearly impossible that he hasn't laundered money for those very same oligarchs.

I will conceded one point about his alleged collusion - I honestly think he didn't think any of it was wrong.  Therein lies the problem -
he gave it no thought - I honestly believe he is a very dumb person.

The redhats are idiots, they know Trump is guilty of treason but they are making the old mistake "The enemy of my enemy is my freind" I guess Trump is the greatest Conman in history he has convinced the uneducated hillbily reds that their own neighbors are worse than the russian government that attacked their democratic institutions. These idiots cannot be saved and will take it to their graves. We need to remove all power from this Russian cult and hold them accountable in the midterm elections. And any traitorous russian sympathizers here in the states should have voting rights taken away, we cannot allow the institutions be manipulated by lazy idiots without critical thinking skills to discern fact from propaganda. These people are a danger to themselves and to our society they can move to russia if they love putin so much.

justin_o_guy2 wrote on 02/05/18 at 21:27:59:



so Russia has thousands of nuclear weapons already right?   More than enough to destroy the world a bunch of times.   The Uranium that is of concern in the Uranium One deal is fuel/power grade, not nuclear weapon grade. We don't use nuclear power as much as we used to, the demand for us to keep that Uranium is down.  oh, and Uranium One is/was a Canadian company with mines in the USA. and just like with oil, uranium is a worldwide marketplace, so us keeping "our" oil/uranium, kinda just a numbers game.

now was their some maybe inappropriate @ss kissery with the Clinton Foundation and speeches and what not, maybe, but that's mostly circumstantial and as of yet, no hard evidence of wrong doing. Is is fishy, yes, illegal, idk, probably not, maybe, idk. because when it comes down to it, they'd have had to do the same for the other 8 voting members and the President, just to ensure the approval of the sale.   and there's no evidence, not even circumstantial that they did any of that.  And Clinton, herself, had no direct intervention in this decision, she didn't even personally vote for it.

Read the fact check, there's enough there to at least put some pause on all the right wing paranoia over this.  was it a good deal, maybe not, but it wasn't within Clinton's power to stop or force it to go through.  She , herself or by proxy, could have voted against it and it could have still gone through.  

most important part of the fact check to me:
"First, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission had to approve the transfer of two uranium recovery licenses in Wyoming from Uranium One to the Russian company. The NRC announced it approved the transfer on Nov. 24, 2010. But, as the NRC explained at the time, “no uranium produced at either facility may be exported.”

As NRC explained in a March 2011 letter to Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, the Russian company would have to apply for and obtain an export license and “commit to use the material only for peaceful purposes” in accordance with “the U.S.-Russia Atomic Energy Act Section 123 agreement for peaceful nuclear cooperation.”

In a June 2015 letter to Rep. Peter Visclosky, the NRC said it granted RSB Logistics Services an amendment to its export license in 2012 to allow the Kentucky shipping company to export uranium to Canada from various sources — including from a Uranium One site in Wyoming. The NRC said that the export license allowed RSB to ship uranium to a conversion plant in Canada and then back to the United States for further processing.

Canada must obtain U.S. approval to transfer any U.S. uranium to any country other than the United States, the letter says.

“Please be assured that no Uranium One, Inc.-produced uranium has been shipped directly to Russia and the U.S. Government has not authorized any country to re-transfer U.S. uranium to Russia,” the 2015 letter said."

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one/

this is an example of SPIN. Conservative media spins this by using just the base facts to justify the worst possible (most fearful) possibility.   in my experience, conservatives, don't like and don't perceive nuance well, so when things get really complicated, they have to simplify things down in their heads to keep track of how bad or scary it is, even if procedures and rules were put in place to alleviate those concerns, which is a big part of why I don't trust the Nunes memo