I think those two are more guilty of treason than he is of collusion. I think they wanted to overturn an election
He's wrong because he's thinking the FBI is part of the Executive branch of government & must be loyal to him as President. But the FBI is loyal to the Constitution & the laws of the U.S.--NOT the President. To commit treason, the FBI would have to betray the Constitution, but it has the responsibility to investigate ANYONE who is suspected of illegal actions, INCLUDING the President.
Come on, no one believes that any more! Saddam had about 5000 nerve agent bombs and shells from his 1990s stockpile, he could easily have provided it to any number of the terrorist groups he supported and they could have smuggled it into the US. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...t/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html Saddam continued to develop (but not manufacture) chemical weapons whose sophistication shocked inspectors and were still lethal enough to poison the troops who found them a decade later. https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_2004/chap5.html#sect3 Saddam maintained his vast Uranium stockpile and never lost his desire to attain WMDs, despite the fact he could have sold it on the civil nuclear market for tens of millions of dollars (as the post liberation Iraq's democratic government later did). www.nbcnews.com/id/25546334/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/secret-us-mission-hauls-uranium-iraq/#.XKMfuPZFzIU Saddam did have connections with AQ, meeting up with them to see if he should sponsor them but turning them down as too wild for him. No one EVER claimed Saddam was behind 9/11, that was a link people made in their minds but not by the administration. The worse you can accuse the administration of is believing what they wanted to hear from the Iraqi exiles, just like in the first Gulf War? Remember the Kuwaiti nurse who gave heartrending testimony of the babies who died because the Iraqi soldiers stole their incubators? Turned out all to be baloney and she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador? But who wouldn't tell a few white lies to be liberated from a tyrant? What do you have against Mueller? He has proven himself an honourable and honest man?
You should read your links better. Finding bunch of old shells that that had been buried = improperly disposed of - does not qualify as an active WMD program. There is a difference between "Had" an active WMD program in the past "finding remnants of a long abandoned program" and having an active WMD program. Regardless- this does not change any of the Lies that I listed - there were no biological weapons programs - as Stated by Powell .. and having a stockpile of uranium does not constitute a nuclear program. Claiming "we could face the threat mushroom cloud if we do not act now" is a complete falsehood on steroids. These claims are additionally absurd on the basis that 1) North Korea at the time did have a active nuclear program that was advancing - and we knew it. 2) We had complete control of Saddam's air space and weapons inspectors in Iraq at the time. . It was a completely illegal war based on lies. What is also nonsense is your inference that the Administration was not to put the idea in the minds of US public that Saddam was connected to 911.. A complete falsehood. Connections to Al Qaeda in some indirect way means nothing. If we were attacking nations based on "connections to Al Qaeda" - which is essentially what you bogus claim is - we would have gone after Saudi Arabia. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/sep/07/usa.theobserver So where did the US public get this idea in the run up to the war ? - did the tooth fairly leave notes on the pillows of children to warn the US public ? WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Does Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein provide assistance to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda? It's a case the Bush administration has tried hard to make. http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/11/Iraq.Qaeda.link/ Lies and falsehoods. Then you come up with this "Mueller" is an honorable man - demonstrably false statement. Give me a break.
YOU should read my links better! 5000 nerve gas munitions do not qualify as a 'handful' and they're still poisoning the troops who found them years later. Saddam had suspended his manufacturing programme but there were plenty of WMDs in Iraq. How exactly does having a massive stockpile of uranium not qualify as a nuclear programme? What else is he going to use it for? As the CIA assessed Saddam never gave up his ambition to create a WMD programme and continued to develop chemical weapons. No biological weps, the Iraqi exiles fooled us, that's a long way from saying General Powell lied. True about NK but they were protected by China, had the ability to wreak havoc on SK and weren't sitting on a huge reserve of oil and in a position to threaten Israel, Kuwait, Jordan, Saudi etc There were connections between AQ and Saddam but he didn't back them. SA was and is our friend and ally where some citizens backed AQ but not the government, that's like saying Britain should have attacked the US because Irish-American fascists backed the IRA. No lies, no falsehoods, Mueller is an honourable man who fought for his country and more than did his duty in delivering this report.
I didn't say "a handful" but it matters not. Saddam did not have an active chemical weapons program that was a threat to the US homeland. Nor does this change the fact that lies were told Saddam having active biological weapons program and active nuclear program. Numerous countries have stockpiles of Uranium .. this does not an active nuclear weapon program make ... in any sense of the word. Do I seriously need to dumb this down to kindergarten level and explain to you what an active nuclear weapons program looks like - one that has some realistic possibility of being a threat to the homeland ? Give me a break por favor. Then your comparing "ambition" to action - as if they are the same with respect to the context of the conversation is pure nonsense. We attacked on the basis of "ACTIVE" programs that were touted as being a significant threat to the homeland. Bush himself inferred that if we didn't attack now - we could be facing a "Mushroom Cloud". Have you never read the findings of the investigative committee ? These were not just falsehoods - they were intentional falsehoods. These were not falsehoods based on "bad intelligence/bad information" these were falsehoods based on systematic ignoring of good information and good intelligence. You completely avoided responding to 2 = we had control of Saddams air space at the time - and weapons inspectors running around Iraq. You are completely ignoring the fact that this war was Illegal - which is why the vast majority of our allies did not join in. You are completely ignoring the fact that there was no plausible imminent threat to the US .... while the actual threat (North Korea) was ignored - that we attacked on the basis of a "fake threat" while ignoring the "real threat".
1. True, you said; 'Finding bunch of old shells that that had been buried = improperly disposed of - does not qualify as an active WMD program. There is a difference between "Had" an active WMD program in the past "finding remnants of a long abandoned program" and having an active WMD program.' Not a handful, a 'bunch'. 5000 is not a 'bunch'. Saddam could easily have supplied them to a terrorist group which could have smuggled them anywhere in the world, whether we controlled their airspace or not (I mean we couldn't even stop them smuggling oil). 2. True plenty of countries have uranium stockpiles but Saddam was a dictator who had a habit of invading his neighbours and tried to develop nukes. That he had suspended his programme is true but he never lost his ambition. Bush was right, if he had not been toppled Saddam would inevitably have developed atomic weapons, just as NK did. Yes I have read the reports and these are the facts from them I'm pointing out. Please find me one report which states anyone deliberately lied and said something they knew to false rather than just repeat false intel? Come on, it's over, no one believes absurd conspiracy theories any more. The fallacy that 'Bush lied, people died' was over long ago. Robert Mueller is a war hero who delivered an honest and far reaching report and investigation. For you to abuse him simply because the facts do not suit your prejudices is appalling.
There goes Trump again, attempting to denigrate those that would put him in an orange suit. Way to go, Mr. con-man.
Ah, you mean a 22 month investigation that found no one in the Trump administration conspired with Russia, you know, the whole reason for the investigation in the first place proving it was a farce in the first place? One thing the lefties never hear are the facts because their news comes from the left wing media and late night comedians but there is plenty of evidence. Employees like McCabe fired for bias, the fake dossier, the abuse of the FISA system. The only people the left hates are those tackling government corruption or those that are not corrupt.
Utter nonsense. You obviously get your "news" from Hannity. No one conspired with Russia? Really? Where there is suspicion there is an investigation. McCabe was fired because Trump wanted it, and nothing more. No abuse of the FISA system and no bias, only what Trump put in your mind. You think that everyone working for our intelligence community has to support Trump? Reagan brought experts into his administration whether they supported him or not. The intelligence community is loyal to the people of our country and not Trump. The dossier has not proven to be fake except in your mind. And government corruption is alive and flourishing in the White House, just as he did in private life.
Only in the world of the loony land left do these conspiracy theories live. Facts need not apply. Trump didn't fire McCabe, the FBI did based on the IG report. The political entities of the FBI, not the rank and file, are the ones that pulled this off. The left keeps trying to avoid the obvious.
There are hundreds of reports that claimed the Bush admin deliberately lied. You had to have been living in a cave not to know this. The Lies that Led to the Iraq War and the Persistent Myth of ‘Intelligence Failure’ https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.co...-the-persistent-myth-of-intelligence-failure/ Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline/ The claim that having a uranium stockpile constitutes a nuclear weapons program that is an imminent threat to the US homeland is abject nonsense on steroids. Mueller is a complete scum bucket with a proven track record of going after and imprisoning innocents, violating the rules of justice in order to get a conviction - including ignoring exculpatory evidence - and completely lacking in integrity and honesty. You drink way to much koolaid and do not do enough thinking for yourself.
Whatever you say. If it wasn't for Trump, that very capable guy would still be there. I am hardly a loony, so if you want to start a name calling exercise, try someone else.
Yes, no one conspired with Russia as Mr Mueller proved. McCabe was fired for clear anti-Trump bias and malpractice, he didn't recuse himself from the Trump investigation even when his wife was a DNC candidate funded by the Clintons. The dossier has yet to be explored but it will be interesting when it is.
That's IT? That's all you have? 2 opinion pieces from a couple of left-wing rags which selectively pick and choose their evidence? COME ON! Saddam had a uranium stockpile giving him the ability to build nukes and as the CIA report stated, never lost his ambition to make them. Do please give me examples of WHY war hero Robert Mueller is a 'scum bucket'? Specifically? Never drunk Koolaid in my life, Jim Jones. I do think for myself, that's your problem with me, I'm slaughtering your sacred cow and you have no riposte.
When I first heard the claim that Bush linked Saddam to 9/11, I thought it was correct. In the local paper when people started to criticize the invasion a NG grunt wrote in to chastise people asking if they forgot about "a little thing called 9/11". Even a soldier deployed to Iraq thought he was involved. Then I found out that Bush actually never linked the two, but after reading his speeches I see what he did. Whenever he mentioned Saddam, in the next sentence he would then mention 9/11. The gun grabbers use that same false correlation by talking about Zimmerman and then in the next sentence talk about stand your ground. They never actually link the two but continuously mention the two in the same breath which causes people to start linking the two together.
