Thursday, February 22, 2018


You can't make this up. 
The President of the United States wants to combat gun violence in schools by.....arming teachers. 

PS 110. East Village. NYC. 2021.
Ms. Postdam's Kindergarten class. 
First Day of School. o

Good morning class. I am Ms. Postdam. Please find your seats. Welcome boys and girls to the President Donald Trump Grade School in New York. As we all know, President Donald Trump was born and raised in New York. In fact, when you look out the window, you can see the President  Donald Trump Firearm and Ammunition store. It's right across the street and next to the President Donald Trump and Vice President Vladimir Putin's chain of  Russian-American Friendship Tea and Vodka Shoppes. 
Class, we have a few rules in Kindergarten. If you need to go poopy or peepee you need to raise you hand and ask  to go to Mr. Potty. 
If you are hungry, then raise your hand and ask for Mr. Snackee. 
And if a bad man comes to the school to kill all of you and your friends with his assault rifle, then you need to tell me right away to get Mr. Boom-Boom. 
Does everyone understand? 
Now today, we are going to start with finger painting. Then we are going to learn the "Lock Hillary Up and Throw her in Jail Song!"  But before we start singing,  we are going to learn the pledge of allegiance to President and Dear Leader Donald Trump. 
But first we need to learn a safety issue. It's called "duck and cover."
Let's pretend a bad man comes and has an automatic rifle, which of course is his god given right to own and possess. But lets pretend he is having  a bad day and instead of hunting doves with his AR-15 automatic rifle with dum-dum bullets, he decides to show up to school and kill everyone like happened right here in this school  eleven times last year. 
Who knows what to do? Sally?"

Sally: We duck and cover!

Ms. Postdam: That's right Sally. You duck under your desk and cover your head with your hands. Ask your grandparents. In the 1950's they had to learn how to duck and cover because before Vice President Vladimir Putin became Vice President of the United States while also being President of Russia, people in the United States were worried Russia would blow them all up with a thermo-nuclear weapon. And the best way for us to survive a nuclear weapon one hundred times more powerful than the one we dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, is to duck and cover. In fact, it's a known fact that if the Japanese had all learned to duck and cover, they would have won the war. Now we can use those same skills that protected your grandparents from 10,000 degree nuclear heat, to protect us from bullets fired from a high-powered semi-automatic weapon. 

Now, let's  all start our day by saying the pledge of allegiance, which of course is now the law:
"I pledge allegiance to our dear leader President Donald Trump and the United States of America and Russia. And to our dear leaders, who protect our lives, we pledge- unlike former FBI Directors,   everlasting loyalty to our dear leader President Donald Trump. So Help Us God."

Wonderful. Now we are going to learn the "Lock her up" song. 
"Who's responsible for everything bad?
Hillary-LOCK HER UP!
Who's responsible for fake news? 
Hillary-LOCK HER UP!
And who's the one who lied about global warming?
Hillary- LOCK HER UP!
And who's the one who opposed our dear leader and almost wrecked our lives?
Hillary, Hillary, Hillary....LOCK.....HER    UP!

Excellent class. Now if you will all take out your Russian books we will start with lesson one....

From Occupied America, there are people who dream of a place like this. Where teachers are armed, and children are brainwashed.  Fight The Power!


Anonymous said...

I’m sure the teachers in parkland wish they were armed. Wow dude, get a grip.

Rumpole said...

Yeah- I also bet they really wished they had an armed broward deputy sheriff on school grounds to stop the shooter and save everyone....oh wait....there was an armed sheriff deputy on the school grounds. How did that work out "dude"?

Anonymous said...

Rump: If Trump is cleared by Mueller, will you disclaim all your silly, fantastical posts about Russia? Or will you persevere? Just curious.

Rumpole said...

In times like these, I take refuge in the greatest man of the 20th Century- Winston Spencer Churchill. "Never, never, never, never, never surrender."
We shall fight him in the courts. We shall fight him in the streets, and in the congress, and in the senate...and if in the long course of this nations glorious history it shall be necessary to temporarily relinquish our nation, we shall take our fleet and our people and we shall fight him from Canada, and Australia, and England and Germany and Spain...until in the lord's time, reason, and peace and democracy returns to our great nation.

Am I clear on this?

However, I'd be happy to buy you a beer if Mueller clears the moron.

BTW- please point to one, ONE "fantastical post" I've written about Trump colluding with Russia. Just one. I haven't. And that's because, now that you ask, I don't think he colluded with Russia any more than Clinton or Sanders. I do believe Russia tried to influence the election to Trump OR Sanders to weaken this country. And they succeeded. But I don't think Trump was involved in such a conspiracy. He doesn't have the brain power to do it. Neither do the people around him. None of them are deep thinkers. They were middling political hacks who were manipulated by master manipulators- Russians. They rolled over in the face of a few million dollars and the offer of the presidency. They didn't understand what was really going on. They committed crimes, but it wasn't a vast conspiracy. I fully believe the accounts of election day and evening when Trump and those around him were sure they had lost. Trump won because, like Mr. Magoo, he stumbled into a few things- a perfect storm of disaffected, unemployed and uneducated lower class white people, and a middle and upper class unimpressed with Clinton, who as a candidate could never come up with a one sentence reason she deserved to be president that resonated. "Stronger together" ?? Really? What moron approved that?

Anonymous said...

I'm sure the teachers in Parkland do not wish they had been armed. In fact, I haven't yet heard any teachers speak in favor of this suggestion. Teachers in some red state staged a strike this week to protest low pay. Haven't heard of teachers protesting lack of machine guns in school supply rooms.

Try to imagine yourself as a child, in your classroom, learning long division from a teacher with an AR-15 slung from her shoulder, clips clacking with every chalkmark.

I remember duck and cover at school during the cuban missile crisis. Didn't go on that long, but it's stayed with me for sixty years.

I am relieved my daughter didn't suffer the same undercurrent of dread. She is fearless. Those 15 years younger than she report pervasive anxiety-- in crowded clubs, music festivals, movie theaters, lectures, marches. They don't walk around with assault weapons for self-defense. Because that's stupid. But fear clips their wings.

It's amazing to me that people welcome seatbelt, child-seat, speed-limit, no-texting, and licensing requirements for driving. We demand that baby food, cribs, playground equipment be inspected for safety. We demand that teachers be certified, and educational standards enforced. We must have lifeguards at pools, nurses at schools, safety equipment for sports. We must keep convicted sex offenders from school zones, where speed is reduced to 15-miles-an hour. Our kids' pajamas can't be flammable, they should learn to swim before they walk. . .just in case.

You keep your kids from eating too many sweets, make them brush their teeth before bed, take them to the dentist and pediatrician at least once a year. You get them vaccinated, pay for orthodonture, teach them to pray, take them to worship, make them wear helmets when they ride their bikes and knee-pads when they skate. You soothe them when they're frightened, check under their beds for imaginary monsters, and read them to sleep. Because you want to safeguard their physical, emotional and spiritual health.

What is it about the right to a well-regulated militia makes you willing to subject your children to the growing risk of slaughter at school by people with easy access to weapons of war.

I have to assume you are comforted to know that no one entering REGJB is armed. Or would you prefer that everyone entering be armed as long as automatic weapons and target practice are liberally provided.

Anonymous said...

On the eve of the 1968 US presidential election, while LBJ was still president, the Government of South Viet Nam and the US were involved in secret negotiations with the North Vietnamese to end the war. Nixon had emissaries reach out to the South Vietnamese negotiators, behind the back of the American team, to quietly let them know that if the negotiations stalled or failed, the South would ultimately strike a better deal with the North after the election if he prevailed, because a hawkish Nixon presidency would cause the North to buckle, while a weak Humphrey presidency would embolden the North. LBJ caught wind of this, through illegal wiretaps, and warned Nixon that if what he "heard" was true, it was treasonous.
Nixon professed no knowledge. The negotiations failed.
If, in 2016, emissaries of the Trump campaign informed Russian representatives that a Trump administration would roll back or ameliorate the economic sanctions that the Obama administration had imposed, that contact and message was both collusion and treason.
Let's see what the future brings....

Anonymous said...

Not everyone is a coward like the officer. Your attitude is typical of an intellectual with few street smarts. I can tell you I hate guns but I would have tried to shoot the shooter had I been confronted by him. I think you would have done the same. Going into the school to face the shooter is another matter. This is more a political blog now not a legal blog. Therefore, Just lower my taxes so I can afford my kids private school. Private schools are safe. Vote libertarian.

Anonymous said...


I think it's worth considering the possibility that the collective distaste with Clinton is at least partially a product of a relentless, multi-front, and artful propoganda campaign. It's tempting to believe we are all the authors of our own thoughts. Even someone of your asserted genius can be manipulated by advertising and social pressure. Isn't that why you flaunt your wealth? Your namesake never does.

Re: Trump collusion - when you count the numbers of contacts between his team and sketchy (meaning Kremlin-connected) Russians, his praise of Putin and wikileaks, his slavish fealty to Russia's foreign policy agenda, including the otherwise inexplicable intervention in the GOP platform plank re Ukraine, his reluctance/refusal to enforce sanctions, his efforts to thwart the Flynn investigation, his threats to dismantle the special counsel's investigation, and the countless lies about all things Russian by him and so many in his orbit, don't you see a lot of circumstantial evidence of collusion? Of course, it could be consistent with a hypothesis of narcissism -- the need to show that his wonderfulness alone accounts for his win. BUt the 'fact' that the win was a surprise to him and to Russia doesn't mean they didn't aim for the fences.

Rumpole said...

I am an intellectual. A superior intellectual. The top 1% of the top 1%.
But you have no idea where I came from, and the battles I fought, on streets and battlefields. And unless you've every taken a walk in the sun at midnight (look it up) it's easy to say what you would have done if you were there with your gun. Running towards a shooter with an AR15 is one of the more dangerous things one can do in life

Anonymous said...

Private schools are safe? HA! Maybe we haven't had mass shootings in a private school but tell all those young boys (and girls) who were molested how safe they were to be in a private religious school. (and I'm not being anti-Christian or Catholic as these problems have occurred in schools of all faiths)

Anonymous said...


I think it's worth considering the possibility that the collective distaste with Clinton is at least partially a product of a relentless, multi-front, and artful propoganda campaign. It's tempting to believe we are all the authors of our own thoughts. Even someone of your asserted genius can be manipulated by advertising and social pressure. Isn't that why you flaunt your wealth? Your namesake never does.

Re: Trump collusion - when you count the numbers of contacts between his team and sketchy (meaning Kremlin-connected) Russians, his praise of Putin and wikileaks, his slavish fealty to Russia's foreign policy agenda, including the otherwise inexplicable intervention in the GOP platform plank re Ukraine, his reluctance/refusal to enforce sanctions, his efforts to thwart the Flynn investigation, his threats to dismantle the special counsel's investigation, and the countless lies about all things Russian by him and so many in his orbit, don't you see a lot of circumstantial evidence of collusion? Of course, it could be consistent with a hypothesis of narcissism -- the need to show that his wonderfulness alone accounts for his win. BUt the 'fact' that the win was a surprise to him and to Russia doesn't mean they didn't aim for the fences.

Anonymous said...

I love your fiction. But by the time we were get to the events you describe I think you might need to change the lyrics:
"Who locked her up? Trumputin did!"

Anonymous said...

I think we should have Gun-Free Zone Schools and Armed schools and parents can choose where they want their kids to go., I want mine to go to a school with armed gunman on campus who are surveying the place whenever students are on campus. I do not own a gun. I do not like guns, but I think every American should have a right to have them as long as policemen have them. I also think that even if we ban all types of guns, it will take at least 100 years to get them all gone. Meanwhile, it may be easier if the FBI follows up on its leads, if DCF pays more attention to the people it investigates, and if armed police officers on campus have big enough balls to go in and protect the kids.

Anonymous said...

I guess "fantastical" was a little bit of hyperbole, kinda like how someone who doesn't believe in Russian-Trump collusion refers to "Vice President Vladimir Putin," even in jest. But i was tired of all the other adjectives I'm confined to in everyday life. I do also get carried away in anonymous postings.

I have to respectfully disagree about master manipulators. Seeing Mueller indict a bunch of social media trolls with a ridiculously long set of charges made me chuckle, and I'm amazed how the media and perhaps the reverence to Mueller caused anyone to care. I mean, really? The most aggressive prosecutors from the entire country get together to indict Russian Facebook trolls? Who cares?

DMD said...

R--stop this political cr@p and go back to your original law topics--otherwise your once excellent blog has no reason to continue !!! DMD

Anonymous said...


I'll confess I think the Russia collusion narrative was started by HRC, and remains totally bogus. But help me understand your circumstantial case:

1. "the numbers of contacts between his team and sketchy (meaning Kremlin-connected) Russians"

How many contacts? Which Russians? Just the Trump tower meeting? Anything else?

How do those contacts compare to HRC paying Steele to pay kremlin Russians for dirt on Trump?

2. "his praise of Putin and wikileaks"

Could that be better explained as a desire to reset relations and not have his foreign policy on Russia dramatically changed by a lame duck Obama administration on the eve of his inauguration?

3. "His slavish fealty to Russia's foreign policy agenda, including the otherwise inexplicable intervention in the GOP platform plank re Ukraine"

Where do you come up with slavish fealty? Overstatement? You may have a point on the gop platform on Ukraine, though, but that's slim.

4. "his reluctance/refusal to enforce sanctions"

They were never his idea... they were obamas idea to prevent Trump from attempting a reset, which is exactly what he tried to do and failed to do.

5. "his efforts to thwart the Flynn investigation,"

Sure the guy lied, but who cares? Because he talked policy before the inauguration? He violated the never prosecuted Logan act? Who cares? Why was Flynn even asked about the conversation? Seems like a set up to try to catch him lying about something they could have,but never even were going to, charge him with.

6. "his threats to dismantle the special counsel's investigation,"

If he is really innocent of collusion, don't you understand where he is coming from? The whole narrative was started by HRC.

7. "countless lies about all things Russian by him and so many in his orbit,"

Name 3.

Vladimir Putin

Anonymous said...

Very well said.

Anonymous said...

Incredibly stupid, Rump. We learn now FOUR BSO deputies stayed outside while the murdering was going on inside the school.
And we’re supposed to wait for the police to save people.
A few armed teachers - even cowardly armed teachers fearing for THEIR lives - could have stopped this massacre.

Anonymous said...

I would have most likely killed the kid and been a hero. Or I would have died trying. People that are 1% of 1% intellectual are never street smart.

Rumpole said...

Here's what I know about your comment about street smarts- when I go back to my old neighborhood and see everyone sitting on their stoop complaining about how unlucky they are and that their life turned out bad- their wife left them, their kids don't speak to them, they have health problems. I remember when we were kids and in grade school and high school (there were no middle schools then) I was reading Adam Smith, and Karl Marx, and profiles in courage, and WSC's multi-volume series on WWII, during breaks while we were making a few bucks shooting pool, or playing cards, and I would get shit when I had a book in my hand. I went everywhere with a book Always. Or when I worked in a warehouse and I saw these men twice my age, getting the same pay as some kid in high school, trying to support their family. They all smoked. They all were overweight. No one exercised. Many of them (no surprise) died young. Or became alcoholics. I guess my genius, if you could call it that was seeing the road that lay before me and just saying there had to be a better way. A different way of living life. I never bought into their crap that all those guys driving fancy cars were just lucky because they were born into wealth. I read biographies of self-made people and I believed it possible.
I made MORE than my share of mistakes along the way. I went bust a few times because I wasn't as smart as I thought I was. But- and this is crucial- I always learned from my mistakes. Every dollar I invested and lost was my fault- not the markets'. Every trial I lost was my fault, not the jury or the judge or the other side. I think the most valuable asset of a successful person is owning their mistakes.
I didn't grow up in a time when a kid could go to Stanford for two years, develop and APP while being an intern at Google or a startup, get five million in options and leave school. I needed a degree. And I got it.
I think I have street smarts. I know a grafter and a hustle when I see it. I've seen plenty. I've seen guys beaten bloody with bats for saying the wrong thing at the wrong time in the back of a warehouse. Or because they got into the shylocks for more than they could carry. But it really doesn't matter what kind of smarts I have. I am a great attorney. People pay a lot of money to bring me into their case, and I get to do what I believe I was born to do. And I do it exceptionally well. I help people that need helping and that feels good. Street smarts. School smarts. Book smarts. I win. And along the way, just for kicks, I created the best legal blog there is. So all in all, I'm pretty satisfied. (Although my foot hurts and my hip is creaking and I can't run anymore. Just yesterday I was biking and out of the blue my knew locked up just after climbing the Key Biscayne bridge. Where did that come from???)

Anonymous said...

That cop may be a coward but he's a coward who is now alive. If my options were to A) run into a building where I heard shots being fired or B) live, I choose B. B all the time.

Heroes get memorials. Cowards get to live. I'd rather live.

And to all the morons saying "I would have gone in," woah, slow down there, Rambo. You can't even run 5 blocks without stopping for a breather but yet, you're going to run in there and kill someone shooting an AR-15? Good luck with that.

Anonymous said...

The "Russian troll" indictment is a template that Muller will amend as he gets enough evidence to tie American citizens (i.e., Jarod, Don Jr., etc) to the underlying conspiracy. I doubt that the "Stable Genius" and his attorneys were chuckling when they saw it.

Anonymous said...

LOL! You are going to be so disappointed! I wish we were friends I'd bet you lots of money!

the trialmaster said...

The amazing "Broward Cowards" of the BSO. Pinecrest Police would have done a better job....

Anonymous said...

Obviously, you would not run into the building if you were randomly armed and passing by the school. You might be a pediphile but I digress. However, if you are a cop, that’s your fucking job. Get it, coward?

Anonymous said...

Ohhhhhh you called me a coward. How will I live??? Ughhhh, I'm so sad to be called a coward. But at least I'm a coward who's alive. Keep your plaques and angel ceremonies. What a time to be alive!

Anonymous said...

10:14 here.

Collusion narrative not started by HRC. GOP hired Fusion for oppo research against Trump. Once Trump cinched nomination, research continued under HRC. Fusion contracted with Steele to investigate Trump's Russian ties. Steele continued under the contract with Fusion. Steele is former MI6, known to be reliable to our intelligence community. Steele went to IC with his findings about Russia/Trump. Evidence of Russian interference in election in favor of Trump corroborated Steele's findings.

1. Russian contacts before inauguration: Sessions, Flynn - Kislyak re relaxation of sanctions. Kushner - Russian banker. Kushner and Flynn - discussion with Kislyak about secured communications access to Kremlin at Russian embassy in DC. Page - Moscow trip during campaign. Papadopolous - Russian agent prof. Mifsud and two Russian nationals, one introduced as Putin's niece. Manafort - offer to give Deripaska private briefing re Trump campaign.

2. Reset narrative plausible but for conclusive evidence of Russian attack on our election. That was reason for Obama's sanctions before leaving office. Magnitsky Act sanctions I believe passed by Congress not EO by Obama.

3. In addition to platform change to benefit Russia (only platform change made by team Trump), he routinely praises Putin, and has tried to cover-up or create confusion about Russian attack on our election. As of last week, Trump hadn't even asked about let alone done anything to protect against interference in 2018 elections. Just last week, a large group of Russians attacked our soldiers in Syria. Described as mercenaries, they were employed by an oligarch close to Putin, who had spoken with both Kremlin and Assad just before attack. Haven't heard word one from Trump about that.

4. His own Congress passed sanctions against Russia. He has refused to execute them.

5. Flynn spoke to Kislyak about relaxing sanctions, imposed for Russia's attack on our election which was intended to benefit Trump. That is not a technical Logan Act violation. Nor was his lie to FBI (and VP and American public) insignificant. As then-acting DOJ head Yates explained, the lie made Flynn susceptible to blackmail from Russia. Head of NSA shouldn't be susceptible to blackmail from a country that just attacked us.

6. Obstruction of justice is against the law, regardless of the reason for obstruction. What would you say if Bill Clinton had told Monica Lewinsky to burn that blue dress.

7. Lies about Russian contacts or nature of same: Flynn, Papadopolous, Sessions, Kushner, DJT Jr. Kushner and Flynn asked Kislyak for secret access to Kremlin from Russian Embassy. Kushner tried to borrow from Russian banker close to Putin. Sessions lied about meetings with Kislyak. Papadopolous lied about meetings with Russians. Flynn lied about sanctions talks with Kislyak. DJT Jr. lied about subject of meeting at Trump Tower.

Anonymous said...


First off, thanks for the substantive reply. I appreciate trying to understand more where you are coming from. I'll respond on a few points, but perhaps we shall continue to disagree.

The Russia-Trump collusion narrative, by my memory, did start with HRC. I believe it started around the time she demanded the release of trump's taxes, suggesting their revelation would show shady ties with Russia. Admittedly, can't find proof of that online, but that's how I remember it.

The fact that gop originally hired fusion is irrelevant. No one has reported gop hired fusion to look into trump-Russia collusion-- the only thing we know is they were hired to obtain dirt. Importantly, the one who hired steele to go to Russia to pay Kremlin- Russians fo dirt was hrc -- not the gop. That's a big freaking distinction.

1. The Trump-elect team was preparing to take over. I'd expect extensive contacts with Russia, China, and others. You wouldn't? Our strategic relationships with Russia and China are probably the two most importantly for our entire foreign policy agenda. The manafort private briefing thing is troubling, but the guy is a dirty lobbyist on board the Trump team for just a few months. I don't find it all that damning to Trump. When his shady past came up, he was fired.

3. Who bombed the Syrians after they used chemical weapons? Not Obama. Pretty big move at the time to openly engage an ally of Russia.

4. Wasn't the expulsion of the Russia diplomats immediate under obama? What do you mean he hasn't executed them?

5. He talked about something the administration had full authority to do. Remember, Obama knew about Russia interference long ago and did nothing. If hrc was elected there would be no sanctions. Only after Trump won and Obama was lame duck did he suddenly embark on huge shift wrt russia. It shouldn't have been his call. He had his 8 years. It was trump's turn to decide what to do.

Logan act is not prosecuted. It's like laws outlawing adultery. So if the FBI suddenly wanted to dust it off for a Republican they could have just inducted Flynn. They didn't. It was a set up. I agree lying made him susceptible to blackmail, but AGAIN, why interview him about the conversation unless it was a perjury trap? They already had audio of the call and the transcript. It clearly was a set up. Strzok knew exactly what he said on the phone call already!!! Come on man, wtf?

6. You are suggesting that a presidential decision to shut down a bogus investigation is obstruction. It's not. Destruction of physical evidence is hardy an appropriate comparison.

7. There is no there there.

Anonymous said...

10:14 here,

You may be right about whether GOP/Dems asked Fusion to look at Russia-Trump ties. But anyone seriously vetting Trump as a candidate would want to know: 1) why, as his sons said, so much of his money came from Russians, after American banks refused to lend to him; 2) why the Russian who bought his PB property paid twice what it was worth; 3) why he chose as a campaign manager someone who had spent the last 10 years working for Russian interests; and 4) why one of his five foreign policy advisers was already under surveillance as a suspected Russian asset. Failing to oppo research this connection would have been political malpractice.

1. The problem isn't so much the numerous Russian contacts. I agree it makes sense to consider a reset of all troubling relationships, especially where the relationship is with a powerful country. But if the contacts were so ordinary, why did everyone lie about them-- Flynn, Sessions, Kushner, Jr., Sr. Also, Manafort wasn't fired because Trump learned of his shady past. He wasn't fired until NYT reported secret payments from Ukraine's Russia party. Same with Flynn: wasn't fired until papers reported the lie. Trump knew of it for nearly 3 weeks, then said he fired Flynn for lying to Pence.

3. Right, Obama didn't bomb Syria for chemical weapons use. But Trump's "bomb" didn't affect Assad. As I recall (could be wrong), bombing target was a Russian-held airfield, and Trump warned Putin beforehand. There have been many subsequent chemical attacks, most recently sarin in a village. 500 people have been killed in the last week or two. Only action reported since bombing Russian airfield was our forces' defeat of Russians who tried to take them out.

4. Heavy financial sanctions were imposed by Congress after torture/murder of Magnitsky, during Obama's presidency but long before he left office. Sanctions imposed just before Obama left were expulsion of diplomats and shuttering of two properties used for spying on us. The first set of sanctions were a big deal to Putin, the second not so much. Russia had been trying for years to get the Magnitsky sanctions lifted. That's why Veselnitskaya was here. That's what Trump's team discussed with Kislyak. There was a third set of sanctions passed by Congress after Trump came into office. It's those sanctions Trump has not enforced, and I think his deadline for doing so has passed.

5. wrt Logan Act, we have only one president at a time. S/he represents us in foreign and domestic policy till the term ends. How would you feel if, BEFORE taking office, Trump negotiated a new agreement allowing Iran to ramp up its nuclear weapons program? Or had ICE begin arresting DACA recipients? Or had DOJ take HRC into custody? They all knew that their contacts with Russia were illegal. That's why they all lied about it.

If HRC had won, she would most certainly have sought sanctions for Russia's attack on our election. It is a shocking event, an attack on democracy itself. If Trump had not won, the GOP would say that whatever HRC did, it wasn't nearly enough to punish this enemy. Then it would investigate her ties to Russia.

6. Will you think the investigation 'bogus' if it uncovers a quid pro quo for election interference? Or Trump's susceptibility to corruption by Russia? On some level, I kind of agree that obstruction charges, alone, seem incommensurate with the extent of the investigation. But why obstruct justice if you have nothing substantive to hide?

7. I think there may be a there there. It's too early to know.

Anonymous said...

Thanks again for the interesting debate. I never thought why was manafort hired to begin with...I assumed it was because no one at the time in foreign policy wanted to associate with Trump because all thought he'd lose. But you're right they must have known he was questionable from the get go.

I have argued to others that I will change my position if page is indicted, or we learn he has been cooperating with mueller. Given the lengthy fisa surveillance, and the claims about him from the dossier, him walking on the street doesn't make sense to me.

Anonymous said...

10:14 here,

Completely understand your position re: Page. Can't explain why he's walking around. Seems too bizarre and chatty to be a cooperating witness. But Papadopolous also seemed wrong for the role.

Page looks like Rick Scott's brother that the family never talks about.

Anonymous said...

Sadly, Rumpole, your blog has become bogged down in the political, and has for at least a year, ceased being about law or even REG goings-on. And the commentators, mostly anonymous, have also been co-opted into the Trump matters. Too bad; I used to enjoy the blog. I looked in today hoping to see something relevant to criminal law practice in Miami: no such luck.