Trump Supporters: Please explain this

In his statement today, Trump repeated his assertion that "there was a crime on the other side" - referring to the Democrats and or Clinton. Someone please explain what crime he is alleging?

My impression is that he's referring to the "Steele dossier," but what's the actual crime? Conspiracy? Whatever the crime is supposed to have been, what evidence establishes (or is suggestive of) guilt - and which individuals are implicated?

It appears to me that Trump can only claim the Dems did something similar to what he did: engage in opposition research that included soliciting and utilizing of information that came from foreign sources. But if that's the case, it implies he considers such actions to be crimes, so it implies his campaign's actions to be crimes.

I may be missing something, so I ask you Trump supporters to help me make sense of this.

 

It could be something Hillary Clinton did. Or maybe there's a classified document that Trump knows about that he isn't telling us about.

 

What is clear though, is we need a special investigator, so we can force Bill to show his bent wang in court again.

 

I cant speak for trump but he could be referring to the spying by the Deep State on his campaign

Or the warrents obtained from the FISA court using the Steele dossier

Or hillary mishandling classified documents

Or her destroying 33,000 emails

 

I am not a Trump supporter, but from where I sit, he is giving them a taste of their own medicine.

 

He's probably asked Barr to re-investigate Benghazi.

 

I always get a chuckle when liberals don't understand their tyranny might actually be illegal....

 

Precisely... There's a long list of items to choose from...

 

Given that you think every action by Dems, you judge as illegal, you must sound like a hyena.

 

As you likely know already, no TrumpHumper will delve into what you stated or anything else counter to the image of greatness he has created for them and they believe religiously. Distraction is the primary tool of both and interrupting it is tantamount to treason, so you, the Dems, Congress and 70% of the American population need to be quiet and leave him alone to his tin soldiers and Big Macs so he can finally make some serious money.

 

Your wild swing to hyperbole aside... No, not everything democrats do is illegal. Just the stuff that actually is.

 

Maybe, but when a President accuses someone of committing a crime, shouldn't he be explicit? It's easy to make a vague charge, but as a Trump supporter, shouldn't you demand to know the specifics? Surely you've noticed that Trump can sometimes talk hyperbolically; shouldn't you be trying to find out whether this is hyperbole or actual knowledge of a crime?

Regarding Hillary's alleged crimes: I don't care if she's investigated, convicted, and faces a firing squad. I would think Trump supporters would feel the same about Trump if he's indeed guilty of a crime. Am I wrong, or do you really not care if Trump committed crimes and is playing you by appealing to your anti-Hillary or anti-Lib feelings? Or is it that you have complete faith in Trump's intentions, and you haven't the least bit of doubt?

 

I care if Trump is committing crimes, but he hasn't committed any. The years-long Russia probe has been a complete nothingburger, as has this "release tax returns" nonsense... He hasn't committed any crimes.

On the other hand, Hillary has committed numerous crimes over the years which she ought to be in prison for; some of them have been listed here already.

If anything, Trump ought to be suing the fake news media for libel, as well as suing the NYT (as well as the person/people who leaked the tax return information to the NYT) for releasing private tax return information to the public without permission.

 

Hubris goeth before a fall, and Trump is going to fall hard.

 

FISA courts authorizing spying based on flimsy, unvetted intelligence.

Not once, but 5 times.

 

She will always walk free. Not Trump. Sooner or later, he falls.

 

This sound like a prediction. Sounds pretty much like the same vague crap we've been hearing for years now though.

Please elaborate.

Provide specifics and timelines please.

 

Should Hillary have sued the **** outta the fifteeith
Ben Ghazzi investigation? Should Obama had sued the **** outta the lying scum accusing him of being foreign, and ineligible for Pres?

 

The same crap of course is FISA, Steele, Hillary, emails, Benghazi, and other such nonsense that never goes anywhere.

Mueller got a lot of indictments, convictions, jail time, and obstruction is still on the table for Congress or the next administration, and twelve still ongoing investigations in Trump and his buddies.

Jeff Sessions and Rod Rosenstein saved the Republic from Trump.

 

There is evidence of obstruction of justice and that is most certainly a crime, and certainly not a "nothingburger." I'm refraining for insisting he's guilty, since it hasn't been adjudicated, but the evidence looks pretty compelling. Have you read this part of the Mueller report? If so, I'd like to understand what mitigates his apparent guilt. Why is it OK to ask for evidence to be falsified? Why is OK to dangle pardons to prospective witnesses?

I'm sympathetic to the tax return issue, that the Democrats subpoena is largely motivated by politics. However, they do have the legal right to demand them. Reminds me a bit of the endless Benghazi hearings. It would have been wrong for Hillary to refuse to respond to her subpoena in spite of the fact that the hearings were politically motivated.

What seems odd is that you assume Hillary is guilty of crimes that have neither been adjudicated nor even charged. The impression this gives is that you are prejudiced against Hillary, while you have a quasi-religious faith in Trumps virtue. Personally, I'm open to the possibility she has committed some crimes. I don't think she should have deleted emails, nor should she have used a personal server. As to whether her actions constitute prosecutable offenses, I have no choice but to defer to the prosecutors who make those decisions. The same thing applies to Trump, although he obviously can't be criminally indicted, so it's up to Congress.

IMO, we should all strive to judge events and actions using consistent principles, rather than knee-jerk assuming your side is 100% right and the other 100% wrong. I guess I'm old fashioned.

 

Breathing

 

How did he do that? I thought at the last moment he chickened out, and did not wear a wire?

 

The FBI knowingly used made up information to get warrants to wiretap members of the Trump Campaign.

They did it on Clinton's behalf.

If that's not a serious felony. Then this country is in really bad shape

It would mean that the FBI can spy on anyone at ant time for any made up reason they want.

The people leading the investigation , the people who paid for the Dossier and the people who made it up should be given rooms at a supermax for the rest of their lives.
Thats how serious of a crime it is.

And it wasn't seriously investigate because the FBI was in Clintons back pocket.

 

Ah-ha.