My Friend Is Asking For Details On Trump Wrongdoing, But What He Really Needs Is A Hearing Aid

 

My friend and blogvesary has more questions about the Russia probe, but, suffice to say, Warren Zevon just went home with a waitress with Russian ties and that ended badlyoffhand this seems much worse. Here’s another long comment from my friend that deserves a more in depth response. Enjoy!

Pokey: Here’s some of your recent quotes, Zano: “Trump’s peeps lied across the board,” “web of wrongdoing,” “Trump’s clear felonies.” These are more generalizations. Specifics please.

[Winslow: you crashed the server again, Zano. Think summary.]

Zano: If you can’t follow today’s politics, always remember four Americans died in Benghazi and how Republicans weaponized all that bullshit into a series of investigations that ultimately elected an ass-clown. Fine. For those only listening to AM radio in some man cave, here’s my ever-growing list of Trumpian affronts to mankind:

The presidential barrier is the only thing standing between these two and indictments:

  1. Obstruction of justice: specifically dealings with Comey, Flynn and Sessions. Mueller lays out pretty specifically how to nail Trump on the way out the door, but if he’s reelected he blows beyond some of the statutes of limitations (again, pointed out by the Special Counsel). Mueller’s failing was to not indict, as the evidence clearly dictated. “Any other person who had engaged in those acts would certainly have been indicted for obstruction of justice,” Hillary Clinton.
  2. Campaign finance violations including paying off hush money to prostitutes. Remember, the person who arranged these payments is sitting in jail. Former federal prosecutor Gene Rossi, “I would have presented to the grand jury in August, an indictment against Donald Trump. The only reason he is not currently indicted is he’s the president.The Hill.

See? Both The Hill and the Hillary agree on something …and that happens, uh, never. And Mueller didn’t “choose not to indict”, he was acting from the false premise that you can’t indict a sitting president.

Some, but not all, of the impeachable offenses:

  1. It is accurate to call the president a pathological liar.
  2. The president and his minions repeatedly lied about plans for a Trump Tower in Moscow.
  3. Not even acknowledging, let alone protecting our next election from Russian hacking.
  4. The level of collusionary efforts from Trump and his minions is arguably impeachable as well (maybe not treason, but certainly not cool). Kidding, you can’t be cool and Republican. Einstein’s Special Theory of Irrelativity?
  5. Not identifying or firing foreign agents within his inner circle in a timely fashion, namely Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort. Hey, maybe just picking foreign agents to help run our government in the first place… Hmmm. But only the best foreign agents!
  6. If you don’t believe this president is profiting from his presidency then you don’t need a list, just turn up the old Miracle Ear. Emolu-mental Clause?
  7. Trump’s open support of alt-right and neo-Nazi factions post-Charlottesville was unacceptable behavior for a Commander in Chief. This one is not in and of itself impeachable and yet in the context of the rest of this list…
  8. Trump’s weaponizing of pardons, including Sheriff Joe’s pardon, his attempts to use them to obstruct the Russia probe, and last week’s gem: Trump offered the acting head of Homeland Insecurity, Kevin McAleenan, a pre-pardon to break the law on asylum seekers with the promise of a Get Out of Jail Free card.
  9. The president is clearly emotionally and psychiatrically compromised, although today it’s admittedly tough to tease this out from our average Republican politician. How can you defund mental health services and deprive Republicans the care they need? It’s like biting the hand that medicates you. Nurse Ratched, there’s a registered Republican in room two.
  10. The indictable offenses listed above.
  11. Because our impeachable offenses go to 11! No one mentions this one, and it’s more of an opinion, but destroying the planet out of greed and stupidity should be an impeachable offense. Polluting our air and water unfettered should be a crime against humanity. I realize this one is vague, but this level of blatant irresponsibility at this crucial juncture in history rises to the level of impeachment. And it’s my ultimate reason for despising this man.


Crimes on the horizon:

  1. Whatever Mueller is handing off in his 14 investigations that relate to presidential wrongdoing.
  2. Some of the other ongoing investigations, perhaps not in Muellerville, including, but no limited to: inauguration committee misdeeds, the Trump tax scheme uncovered by the NYT, the Elliott Broidy shenanigans, Deutsche Bank loan irregularities, the investigation into the Trump Foundation etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, and one baby zebra.
  3. All things Cohen.
  4. All things Stone.
  5. All things great and Trump. There will likely be other white collar crimes exposed as well, such as fraud and money laundering, but only because these are the business practices Mr. Trump has employed to build his empire.

Maybe you can’t see the lies, because they’re all lies, or you can’t see the crimes, because they’re all criminal. I don’t know, I think the answer probably lies more on the willful side of conservatism. And if Trump dodges all of this shit, which is possible, he will still be ranked among the bottom ten U.S. presidents in history, and I am actually betting on the rock bottom tier. The pattern of abuse and the damage to our republic and its institutions will be mind boggling. The only thing more mind boggling is this: how can someone outright ignore all this?

But by no means am I suggesting we bypass any legal proceedings. I wouldn’t miss them for the world! But I also realize this is a much steeper climb because, well, the president now appears to be above the law. Great timing. What could possibly go wrong?

Pokey: Here’s another of your recent quotes: “Mueller thought people could still read.” It is not a prosecutor’s role to release allegations against a person who he chooses NOT to indict. That’s called slander. Why do you take this prosecutor’s allegations as gospel truth? The Constitution guarantees that a person have their day in court to defend themselves against a prosecutor’s allegations. This prosecutor says that there is not enough evidence to indict Trump and take him to court; but he’s still going to release allegations about Trump of which Trump has no chance to defend himself. That is unethical and unconstitutional. Oh, that’s fair game for Zano and the Soviets (I mean the Democrats).

Zano: Power to the Resistors! Slander is Power! Freedom is Slavery …well, at least the way you people do it. Yes, Mueller should have indicted Trump for obstruction, but instead he left it up to the flawed, partisan-filled buggerama known as Congress. Bad Idea Jeans? Mueller should have been even clearer with his recommendations. If you haven’t noticed, the right can drive a fertilizer farm through even the smallest of ambiguities. It’s what they do. Kidding …you haven’t noticed.

Pokey: Let’s step back for a moment, Zano. This whole narrative that you have bought into doesn’t make any sense. Here’s the (bullshit) story that the high-ranking FBI officials tell us to justify their investigation including the Special Counsel–in late 2015 or early 2016 they became aware that the Russian government was attempting to infiltrate the Trump campaign, so they informed President Obama.

I know that you will avoid this very simple question because it shatters the entire narrative that you have so passionately embraced, but please consider this one simple question and give me any reasonable answer: what exactly did President Obama do (to thwart the Russians schemes) when these high-ranking FBI officials reported to him in late 2015 or early 2016 that Russians were working to infiltrate Trump’s campaign?* There is no evidence that Obama took any action against the Russians until after Trump was elected. Please let that sink in.

Zano: I was waiting for that one. What took you so long? Well, I have a couple of thoughts on this one. In short, it’s not acceptable on Obama’s part either. Of course, Obama didn’t have the clear picture we have today, aka evidence provided by the Mueller investigation. The report laid out the details of the impact of this coordinated and in-depth hacking campaign. These were much less clear under Obama’s watch as the intelligence community was only just becoming aware of the scope of the problem.

Also, there was a very real fear Republicans would spin these attacks to their favor on the lead up to the election. I am not saying it’s an excuse, but I understand the concern. Not knowing how known liars will react to events is something our last two Democratic presidents really struggled with. It’s a dangerous time, for sure, which is in part why I’ve called for the disbanding of The GOP in favor of something, anything …maybe just a conservative Meetup group …that doesn’t meet up.

Besides, President Obama did eventually slink over to Mitch McConnell’s office and share the intelligence community’s findings on the lead-up to the election. At that time McConnell threatened the president with all kinds of Hannitized propagandic Foxal nuggets if he went public (as expected).

“McConnell refused. As the Washington Post reported in 2017, when national security officials told congressional leaders about Russia’s interference, it was McConnell who not only didn’t want to alert the public, he also questioned the validity of the intelligence.” And, “Brian Beutler put it this way: “McConnell ran interference for Trump during the campaign to stop Obama from warning the country about things Trump was lying publicly about.”

MSNBC

Please, let that sink in.

So, yes, Obama should have been quicker on the draw, but there’s always a resistance to the truth from our Republican friends. It’s simply not their thing. But to have a full blown attack on our election play out, with details as presented by the special counsel, and to ignore them outright …well, that is a far far more egregious crime, isn’t it?

Some information = Obama tries to warn congress 

Two years later.

488 pages of proof and indictments = Trump ignores

It reminds me of when Barney Frank, the man Republicans blame the subprime mortgage crisis on, came to George W. Bush (two years before the crash) saying we have a housing bubble issue, but Bush shooed him along because his friends were making too much money to give a shit.

You’re forgetting the algorithm, Poke. Start with the premise that Republicans are dead-wrong and when liberals do blunder—and they do blunder—it’s the Republican’s unpatriotic duty to somehow top that shit. It.Never.Fails.

Pokey: I know that you don’t want to hear this, Zano, but it doesn’t make any sense unless the high ranking FBI officials are lying and Sean Hannity is correct. Wait, wait, wait, don’t float off into Hyperbolic Generalization-land. Put your need to prove your rightness on hold for just a moment. Doesn’t it bother you at all that you are not able to give a reasonable answer to that one simple question? If you take that question seriously and research it to it’s conclusion (as I have done) you will understand the truth of this matter: the Obama administration was never seriously concerned about Russian interference until after Trump was elected. Obama directed the FBI to investigate the Trump campaign (not for reasons of justice or national security, but) for political reasons. Honestly, doesn’t that make sense to you?

Zano: I disagree, you research things to someone else’s conclusions. And to your point, no, things that make sense to me have to make sense to me. In your defense, whereas I have access to the news, you are only allowed tidbits that support a growing AM radio-spawned upside down. I usually understand the liberal political brain and their choices, but Republican thought processes and decision making is wholly irrational in the 21st century. Today’s GOP …well, envision Ozzy Osbourne and Jerry Garcia co-conducting a bullet train full of nukes heading toward a reactor.

 

 

(Visited 46 times, 1 visits today)
Mick Zano

Mick Zano

Mick Zano is the Head Comedy Writer and co-founder of The Daily Discord. He is the Captain of team Search Truth Quest and is currently part of the Witness Protection Program. He is being strongly advised to stop talking any further about this, right now, and would like to add that he is in no way affiliated with the Gambinonali crime family. 

  9 comments for “My Friend Is Asking For Details On Trump Wrongdoing, But What He Really Needs Is A Hearing Aid

  1. pokey
    April 25, 2019 at 8:39 AM

    There is much false with what you say. Let me address this–I briefly read Washington Post article you referred me to I may have missed it, but can you find me a quote showing that Obama addressed specifically–Russian attempted infiltration of Trump’s campaign, because that’s what I was referring. Maybe it’s there–I read it quickly.

    You say Mueller should have indicted–he would have if the evidence was there, right. Since he didn’t indict–Trump has the Constitutional right to be treated as though he were not-guilty. If a prosecutor decides that there is not enough evidence to indict, then it’s over–it is unethical and unconstitutional to present findings to the public about an individual whom they have investigated without giving that person their day in court to defend themselves. But you seem to be okay with–if if is a political adversary of yours.

    The Mueller report could not substantiate any claim relating to Trump or his campaign and their alleged “collusion” with the Russians or with Trump being a compromised agent of the Russians. Mueller verified none of that, even the part about Carter Page being a spy.

    Early on, CIA intelligence experts pegged the Dossier as unreliable, yet CIA leader pushed the Dossier. FBI used the Dossier to obtain and renew FISA warrants. Now it seems that much of the information provided by the Russian officials was purposeful disinformation. So it can be accurately said that Hillary Clinton paid a foreign spy to work with Russian officials to spread disinformation to effect election. That’s a true statement, right?

    • Mick Zano
      April 25, 2019 at 1:22 PM

      So Hillary is a triple agent now? I’m with Madam Hari? I too would like to find out the origins of this investigation and why it ended up being so limited in scope in the face of a mountain of criminality. And you are correct, Trump must be treated as innocent until proven republican. Fine, I’ll bite. There’s a ton of smoke created by the Russians surrounding Trump, while they’re trying to throw the election for their ass-set. There’s a shit ton of wrongdoing occurring within Trump Tower that relates to Moscow as revealed in the Mueller report. The president does everything within his power to end the investigation, but is thwarted by several staffers and in part due to these dangled pardons. The argument can be made before we even see Trump’s finances that it’s highly likely he’s compromised to not one, but several foreign entities. Hell, he has two foreign agents in key positions at the onset of his administration. So at the end of the day maybe he shouldn’t be shot for this, but Hannity’s ‘Murica translates this as, “Don’t investigate at all and reopen the Pizzagate inquiry?” Is pot legal in PA now? Oh, the munchies. Hmmm.

      Two key players, Stone and Manafort, didn’t cooperate. I have never been sure of that full blown conspiracy (treason) occurred and I’m still not, but there’s the very real possibility the president avoided conspiracy via successful obstruction. Isn’t it the Feds job to investigate known threats? How can our president be considered anything but a clear and present danger …and several other Harrison Ford films? How can you not hear the contents of that report and go, holy shit, how did I support this for so long? So a Manchurian candidate is an acceptable scenario just as long it doesn’t come with any socialist sensibilities?

      I am not avoiding anything; disinterested at times, sure. We will have the investigation into the origins of the Russia probe. Do you think we won’t? Really? I have predicted it will occur and that it will be a sleeper …and several other Woody Allen films. There was more than enough smoke to expect a FISA fire, as we shall soon see. Now we have to wait patiently until I’m proven right. And if the Feds chose not to investigate this one, they have outlived their usefulness.

      • pokey
        April 25, 2019 at 3:26 PM

        “I would like to find out the origins of the investigation”–well, why in the world don’t we know specifically how and why the investigation started? It’s a simple question. We’ve been asking the high-level FBI to explain it to us for a year, and the more information they are forced to disclose, the less sense their story makes.

        With everything we now know–give me a more reasonable explanation than–the reason the FBI has not informed us to the specifics of how and why Trump investigation began is because it’s totally political and their actions probably illegal? There is no legitimate justified reason for them to investigate Trump’s campaign when they did.

        That’s the only explanation that makes sense with all of the known relevant facts.

        Give me a better one .

        • Mick Zano
          April 25, 2019 at 4:38 PM

          This is just another distraction. Flynn = known foreign agent to Turkey, Manafort = known foreign agent to Ukraine, Page = self described “adviser to Russia”, Papadapwhatsas described some of the collusion efforts ultimately uncovered in the Mueller report (well, the parts that weren’t outright obstructed), the dossier = concerned the president enough to start obstructing justice (between tweets). Almost everyone Trump associates with was on the Feds radar prior to 2016 in one form or another, because this may come as a surprise to you, but the Feds monitor crime families. They’re funny that way. You are forgetting the FISA warrant is the start of the process, not the end. We know how these end now, with uncharged felony obstruction. But you’re right, the concerning behavior didn’t reach the level of a FISA warrant, because it Usain Bolted over that shit long ago. Perhaps there was too much suspicious behavior to register? This was not only good enough to obtain a FISA warrant, they could have gone for the FISA deluxe, the Big Gulp FISA or even the lesser ordered Triple Dipple Whipple Mocha FISAccino. I hope this helps.

          • pokey
            April 25, 2019 at 6:19 PM

            The way you describe it is not correct. Why do you buy the mainstream story without digging deeper.

            “FISA warrant is the start of the process.” ARE YOU LISTENING TO ANYTHING I’M WRITING–THAT’s the problem–the FBI was surveilling the Trump campaign BEFORE the FISA warrant–Halper was monitoring Papadopolous and Page before there ever was a FISA warrant. Page (have you listened to Carter Page’s take yet?) was invited to a symposium by Halper on 6/7/16–a full month before the first (dossier-less) application for a warrant to spy on the Trumpaign was rejected (7/5/19). Yes, the FBI applied for a FISA warrant and it was rejected.

            Then after the dossier (Russian Disinformation) was added, the FBI received a warrant to spy on Carter Page–and three extensions. So one years worth of spying on Carter Page, and what evidence do you have that he is Russian agent. Zano, I’ve looked into this–the FBI had already interviewed Page years before after he visited Russia. They knew CarterPage wasn’t a spy. If you take the time to listen to that blabbermouth Page for 5 minutes you’d KNOW he is many things, but a spy ain’t one of ’em.

            A little bit n the Dossier and the liars who stood behind it:
            1/5/19–a Susan Rice email tells that Comey secretly met with Obama, Biden, Yates, and Rice.
            1/6/19–Comey briefs Trump on the existence of “salatiuos and unverified” Russian Dossier. Now, by this time Comey had already signed a FISA application that INCLUDED the Dossier–his signature affirming that the information provided was true to the best of his knowledge (yet it’s salatiuos and unverified?)
            1/6/19–James Clapper leaks (I believe that’s illegal) details of the Dossier to CNN’s Jake Tapper.

            Within hours of COmey’s meeting with Trump, the existence of the Dossier is reported by CNN.

            That’s the context by which Trump asked Comey about his loyalty. That’s the context that Trump fired Comey.

            So I ask you again–what specific actions led to the pre-FISA spying on the Trump campaign?

            • Mick Zano
              April 25, 2019 at 8:11 PM

              Oh, the Clapper-Tapper connection …the just rhyme, no reason attack. It’s all becoming clear now. You have the up hill battle, not me, because your ilk hasn’t gotten anything right in my adult life time. Hint of the day: I.Am.Old. What if Trump wasn’t investigated? Who would be held accountable then? If irregularities occurred at the onset, prove them in a court of law. You stacked the deck with known fascists, so you just might even win. But, keep in mind, actual crimes are legal now, so good luck with that. Summary alert: if your side can get away with treason, my side should be able to get away with trying to stop it.

              • pokey
                April 26, 2019 at 8:25 AM

                “prove it in a court of law.” I prove things in the court of fact, reason, and honest debate. It’s your side that’s forced our president into a legal war.

                But thank you for acknowledging that–that’s what all this is about. “Trump is an evil fascist” was the rallying cry of the Resistance from before and after his election. The Resistance assumes that “stopping Trump” by any means necessary is a good thing, so they have trained each other to look the other way as they commit the crimes that they accuse their opponents of committing. You could have tried to beat him in the arena of policy debate, deliberation, and politics, but no. Your side was willing to lie, cheat, steal, or “character” assassinate because of your self-assured righteousness in the cause. Well, your legal assassination attempt against Trump has failed. You go after a man like that, and fail, well now that gives him unprecedented power.

                You created this potential tyrant, not me.

  2. pokey
    April 25, 2019 at 10:19 AM

    The real question that you have not answered–*What actions or events first justified the FBI beginning to investigate the Trump campaign?*

    First they told us it was the Dossier; then after the Dossier was discredited they told it was Papadopolous and Downer; then we learned about Halper being paid by FBI to spy on Papadoplolous and Page before that event; so *what specific actions or events gave the FBI the justification to spy on Trump’s campaign?* Who authorized it and why?

    Zano, quit playing dumb–you know what really happened.

    Let’s watch how Zano avoids this question and rationalizes the FBIs actions

    • Mick Zano
      April 25, 2019 at 1:29 PM

      No comment. Ha, check my other comment.

Leave a Reply

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