I’m never gonna be able to look at a mall Santa in quite the same way again.

As a friend of mine has often said, “Give ‘em books and give ‘em books, and they just chew on the covers.”

“I think if you put footage of police brutality on tv now, you might have a top rated prime time show.”

My personal favorite at the moment is the claim that Carter Page obviously wasn’t important because he didn’t have a “Trump for President” email address.

Um, no. That’s not how it works. If you go to court and say that Witness X lied, you have to be able to prove that they knowingly and deliberately made a false statement.

Although a bit insulting to both Herman and Bean.

I can’t help but believe that Mueller goes home every night thinking, “Gawddamn, these people are fucking morons.”

Really? You can’t figure this one out?

You’re conflating a number of unrelated legal concepts as well as making factual misstatements.

I suspect it’s actually much more mundane - she’s only going to be outside for a minute or so and doesn’t want the hassle of getting in and out of a coat while seated in nice climate-controlled car, especially since it’s going to wrinkle your clothes.

Just because she didn’t have money then doesn’t mean she doesn’t have money now.

Also worth noting that HRC married the cute single guy she dated in college, not a middle-aged man with a long history of adultery.

Of course you can. All you have to do is have your attorney draw up a pre-nup that doesn’t have a clause voiding it if you commit adultery.

No, for all of JFK’s and WJC’s faults, Trump does not look like a saint in comparison. And neither Jackie or HRC were the third wife of a middle-aged man with a ridiculously long history of bed-hopping and adultery - a third wife that was dating him while he was still married to wife #2.

The contract doesn’t require the marriage, it simply lays out what happens *after* the marriage.

“she may have been convinced he was her only way to a secure life in a western world she was clueless about.”

He was an adviser in the sense that he gave them all sorts of useful information without having the first clue what the hell he was giving them. I feel oddly sorry for whoever was stuck being his handler.

““Treason” was not technically the charge” - and with that statement, you actually just undercut your entire argument.

You’re making two mistakes. First, no one has said he’s been under surveillance since 2013. What was said is that he’s been “on the radar” since 2013. There’s no hard-and-fast definition of what that involves, but generally what it means is that law enforcement is pretty well aware of what you’ve been up to, and…

Hint: stop listening to people who keep saying that Trump can’t be indicted while in office. That’s very much a maybe, maybe not situation. And despite what Night-Watchman says, there most definitely is NOT a consensus on the issue.