Impeachment proceedings against Trump

My dad managed a truck stop back in the 70's - it ended up a Chinese restaurant after he left - no one else wanted to work the 24 hour shifts it took to make money there, that was before credit cards of course.

Don't weep for McCabe. He will find a nice cushy job on Wall Street that will pay him much more than his pension. Like Eric Holder did.

McCabe got off easy, he should be treated the same way Flynn was because what he did was worse. I suspect the IG report will leave the left searching for ways to spin reality once again and they will once again fail. I love how this investigation is backfiring on the real corruption and liars who used their powerful positions to try and change the election results. Russia Russia Russia!!! LOL yeah, what a joke.

Now Muller is looking into Trump's business dealings trying to find ANYTHING that will stick since the collusion thing is being exposed as just manufactured assumptions and paid for tabloid Russian crap (paid for by Clinton).

There's no doubt Russia has been trying to do a lot of bad things in the US, but Obama did nothing, even when he knew.

But, as far as this election collusion accusation, we are all going to see that the collusion was done by Americans in the highest and most powerful positions, against Trump. I'll look for some good crow recipes for all those who will be forced to eat some.

I'm having a little trouble following the indignation here. DOJ's IG Horowitz was appointed by Obama in 2012. He first served in government as a federal prosecutor in Clinton's DOJ. Horowitz is a MCL Harvard Law grad with a distinguished record as a private practitioner in white collar criminal defense. And the Democrats harrumphed loudly and approvingly when it was made public that Horowitz would investigate, among other things, the DOJ's investigation into Clinton's email server attacks during the 2016 campaign. McCabe, a lawyer himself, knew the ethics rules when he signed up two decades ago. Now, the DOJ IG has concluded that one of its employees lied and acted unethically, i.e., Horowitz called balls-and-strikes for what they were, but the Democrats disapprove. What do McCabe and the left want --- another Clintonian pass for a Washington elite who broke rules? I tried to find some sympathy for an unethical lawyer (reportedly McCabe gathered his crew after the inauguration and said, "first, we ___ Flynn, and then we ___ Trump") who manipulated our justice system and lied, and now complains he can't retire at age 50 with a full government pension, but those tears just won't come. Good riddance.

The OIG's report wasn't released publicly before McCabe was fired because it's incomplete.
The charges against McCabe arose out of the broader DOJ OIG investigation into the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email investigation. The IG, Horowitz, was appointed by President Obama and is a former career Justice Department lawyer who began his career in the Clinton Administration. The IG has a great deal of statutory independence, and Horowitz has used it. Horowitz notably produced a highly critical 2012 report into the Justice Department’s “Fast and Furious” program. We should presume Horowitz shoots straight.

After McCabe's ethical transgressions arose during the course of the broader investigation, Horowitz’s office provided a report on McCabe’s conduct to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility, which investigates allegations of misconduct against bureau employees. Horowitz had no ethical alternative as a lawyer but to report his interim findings on McCabe to the cognizant disciplinary office. This office is headed by career DOJ official Candace Will who was appointed to that office by then-FBI Director Robert Mueller in 2004. Make no mistake, McCabe's FBI colleagues recommended that he be fired, not crazy republicans or the administration. When Horowitz completes the final report next month, it will become public one way or another, and should provide much grist for online discussion.

And you're right, it's likely McCabe will land on his feet. Democrat congressmen and -women have stated they will hire McCabe (after the OIG recommended his firing and the FBI fired him for lying) so he will be able to retire at age 50 on a full government pension, all at public expense. That's a good indicator of why Congress is held in such low esteem today. In any event, McCabe will write a book that Clintonites will buy that will cover his lost pension.

As for Trump taking aim at Mueller, I don't know what gets most people up in arms, but when someone takes aim at me, I defend myself. Last time I checked, presidents immemorial have used the bully pulpit to advance their positions even if it rubbed opponents the wrong way. After 15 months, Mueller's office has upturned no evidence to support the legal theories that Trump colluded with non-US citizens to rig our elections or obstructed justice by firing Comey. In fact, the evidence indicates that the democrats were the ones using information obtained from Russian sources to distort the FISA process, spy on the opposition and gain an electoral advantage. Why not defend oneself? The longer Mueller keeps his investigation open, the more of a target he presents to those he's aiming at.

Today, many theorize that Mueller continues to investigate in hopes that 1) the democrats will take the House in 2018 and bring articles of impeachment in 2019 to further the "resistance," while 2) continuing to mine information through the discovery process that may be leaked to "resistance" operatives, all at public expense. Were the players reversed, i.e., had the criminal investigation system being used to kneecap Obama, the left would be as outraged as the right is now. I'd get a bag of popcorn and keep watching. Potentially, we have a political scandal with criminal conduct that will dwarf Watergate.

I'm also having a bit of trouble following the hysteria on slow-walking Congress' Russia sanctions. The administration issued a signing statement after Trump signed that bill pointing out material provisions arguably violated the Constitution. [LA Times article: www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-n...87924-htmlstory.html ]

This seems to be a point worth a serious pause for consideration in the larger context of the controversy about shifts in the separation of powers between Congress and the president. Again, had Congress passed the same bill onto President Obama, the same objections as Trump raised likely would've applied. No president could unravel the sanctions Congress passed, which sanctions extended beyond Congress' power of the purse. Even Slate, a leftwing media outlet, agreed that this administration's constitutional objections had merit.

As for returning the compounds to Russia, I'd rather hold my enemies close. Those compounds, like ours in Russia, likely are laden with surveillance equipment. The compound issue arose when Russia hindered construction of our St. Petersburg compound and began harassing US diplomats, i.e., part of a mutual diplomatic tit-for-tat. Go ahead, Putin, staff them up again.