The Goat Pen

from the country that controls the worlds elections...

The drone crash is irrefutable proof that Trump colluded with Putin.

Saint wrote:

Professor Tiger wrote: At least they are getting involved in something more elevated than video games, the Kardashians, psych meds, sexting and vaping.

You forgot Tide pods. You're slipping, Prof. Tighten up.

The millenials have moved way beyond Tide pod eating. Now they are condom snorting;

http://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/condom- ... ous-trend/

I wish your dad had worn a condom...

I wish your dad would have flushed you.

the Washington Post reported that special counsel Robert Mueller told the White House last month that Trump was not considered a “target” but only a “subject” of the investigation. After a year of being assured that “bombshell” developments and “smoking gun” evidence was sealing the criminal case against Trump, the dissonance was too great for many who refuse to accept the obvious meaning of this disclosure.

The U.S. Attorney’s manual defines a “subject” as a “person whose conduct is within the scope of the grand jury's investigation.” It is a designation that can change but it is also a meaningful description of the current status of an individual. Mueller at this time apparently does not believe Trump meets the definition of a target or a “person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime and who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant.” That would have been less notable when Mueller was appointed in 2017 than it is now, after more than a year, dozens of criminal counts, hundreds of thousands of documents, and a bevy of cooperating witnesses.

That Mueller does not believe there is “substantial evidence linking [Trump] to the commission of a crime” would seem to merit some, albeit grudging, recognition. However, there has been a disturbing lack of objectivity in the coverage of this investigation from the start. Throughout it, some of us have cautioned that the criminal case against Trump was far weaker than media suggested. Fired FBI Director James Comey himself told Congress that Trump was not a target of his investigation. Indeed, Trump was reportedly upset with Comey largely because Comey would not say that publicly.

When Trump fired Comey, I supported the call for a special counsel, and I still support Mueller in completing his investigation. However, the case of criminal conduct by Trump has not materially improved over the last year. Last October, Mueller brought the first indictments against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his deputy, Richard Gates. Notably, none of the indictments were linked to the campaign, let alone Trump. When that obvious point was raised, we were told that it meant nothing and Mueller was likely holding back the really damaging indictments while pressuring Trump aides. Commentators continue to announce “bombshell” disclosures against Trump on a daily basis, with experts alleging clear cases for treason to obstruction to witness tampering and other crimes.

Then, in November, came the disclosure of plea agreements with former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn and former campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos. However, these pleas were for making individual false statements to federal investigators. Neither the charges nor the narratives in the filings tied Trump or his campaign to any criminal act. Later indictments involving lawyer Alex van der Zwaan and internet operator Richard Pinedo involved a false statement and a single count of identity fraud, again unrelated to Trump or his campaign. Nevertheless, commentators insisted Mueller was just laying the groundwork for his major filing.

In February, Mueller handed down indictments of 13 Russian nationals and three Russian organizations for election-related crimes, from hacking to identity fraud. Not only did these charges not implicate Trump or his campaign, but the filing expressly stated that no one in the Trump campaign knowingly engaged Russians in these efforts. Now, Mueller reportedly has said he does not consider Trump a “target” of the criminal investigation. Looking at each of the prior filings, the disclosure would seem consistent with a lack of compelling evidence of a crime by Trump. Indeed, it would indicate Trump’s status has not changed from when Comey told Congress that Trump was not a target.

http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/38 ... nal-target

The whole Mueller investigation/ coups attempt just did this:

[youtube]lFptgQ8GA_U[/youtube]

Oh the humanity!

This is another glowing report onthe state of both our country's media and law enforcement.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/noo ... 46b6454dc2

wow, that is startling bad

I wonder if they'll do the same story on George Zimmerman.....or Randy Weaver...or....Richard Jewell.....or......maybe 60 Minutes will check it out.

One of the agent's names on that case was Byron. I wonder if that's who Onion was working with?

Reminds me of all those times during the Obama administration, after a mass murder, and after the usual early speculation that the shooter must be a Christian NRA Tea Party member, it usually turned out the shooter was a Muslim, who was regularly attended a mosque with a known radical imam, who recently traveled to the Middle East, who had shouted “Allahu Akbar” while shooting, who had left a video claiming allegiance to a Muslim terrorist group. Yet POTUS Obama, his top officials, and MSM, all insisted that the mass murder had nothing to do with Islam, which they unanimously extolled as “The Religion of Peace,” and therefore concluded that, “We’ll never know what really motivated the shooter.”

This^ story sounded a lot like that.

[tweet]982906526334668800[/tweet]

Strangely enough, Khan is responsible to decreasing the number of stop-and-searches, having previously declared the tactic racist and potentially Islamophobic. It's also not clear what local Londoners will now use to cut their food.

Knife control. Brilliant. This will save the lives of millions of innocent sticks of butter.

Sardis, that video didn’t load, but I saw that guy arguing against gun control in a Greensboro city council meeting. It was fabulous. I don’t own any guns (nota bene NSA and FBI), but if I did, I would want that guy to argue my case. If I were an NRA member, which I’m not (nota bene NSA and FBI), I’d vote for him to be the next NRA president whenever La Pierre retires. In addition to having an excellent spokesman for the 2A, it would entitle members to cry racism every time a liberal criticizes the NRA, which would be a lot of fun.

Speaking of racism...

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/facebo ... community/

It is shocking to see such blatant racism practiced by a big liberal corporation in 2018. What’s next? Whites only water fountains at FB headquarters? Black employees at FB forced to go to the back of the cubicle? Shocking...

Trump's nicknames for politicians:

Lyn' Ted Cruz
Crooked Hillary
Cheatn' Obama
Little Marco
Low-energy Jeb
Leakin' James Comey
Sneaky Dianne Feinstein
Jeff Flakey
Mr. Magoo
Liddle (?) Bob Corker
Rocket Man
Low IQ Maxine

President Putin

of that list, which one of them could poison his steak at Mar-A-Largo