Ukraine is saying they faked his assassination as a sting operation to catch a Russian aided contract-killer/assassin. Ukraine said an arrest was made but i don't think any name was mentioned. Ukraine said their was a $30,000 hit out on the dissident journalist.

Russia benefits from U.S.'s Iran Sanctions, shocker.



http://www.newsweek.com/2018/06/08/irans-loss-will-be-putins-unexpected-present-us-sanctions-drive-oil-prices-948173.html

What the Russian propaganda ministry has to say is all well and good, but besides them being very pro-Iran Deal and Iran's ally, there are far greater geopolitical factors that go into oil prices than just the Iran Deal. Though it was a part of the recent spike. But Russia and a lot of the rest of the world was hit badly when the saudis decided to overproduce years ago, which is what tanked the russian economy, destroy venezeula, etc. We're still in the gently sloping upswing in oil prices since the saudis have eased up on production. We went from $110/bbl in 2014 to $30/bbl in 2015, and the saudis firing all their quarrels was what left Obama free to pursue the Iran Deal in the first place, or else they'd threaten him with overproduction. Can't make a threat of open warfare and oil overproduction when you're already doing both. Since 2017 we've steadily risen from $40/bbl to $70/bbl, that was before the Iran Deal withdrawal, its kind of just a blip. The break-even point for fracking in the bakken fields meanwhile dropped from ~70-80 to ~50-60, making US domestic production more profitable again.

Mueller probe spent $4.5 million from October to March: Justice Department

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-mueller/mueller-probe-spent-4-5-million-from-october-to-march-justice-department-idUSKCN1IW2XW





I love how these guys add. Title says 4.5 mill, BUT other components added 5.4 mill to the cost. Why don't they just say 9.9 mill.


/e




I guess if they said 9.9 mill it would look MORE like Trump had the estimate correct.

This post was edited by Ghot on May 31 2018 07:33pm

What's the argument that Trump did not obstruct justice?

Demonstrating intent isn't difficult, but the best defense I've seen is that an obstruction of justice charge could be less likely if the derivative offense is not unlawful.

It started out to prove Trump colluded with Russia.

I think intent is the difficult part... and whether the original crime can be proven is irrelevant. "It's not the crime, it's the cover-up."

Edit - I misunderstood your point. You're saying if the original "crime" isn't really a crime, such as collusion, an obstruction charge is less likely. I'm not sure I've heard that argument before... but from what I've read there could be charges of conspiracy.

This post was edited by IceMage on Jun 1 2018 07:38am

I think it’s just that Comey deserved to be fired for other reasons. Even though there’s recordings of trump saying he was fired over the Russia investigation, I’m sure his lawyers will argue that’s not why he was fired. Comey has also been smeared a lot by the right to help this argument.

Comey was also smeared ‘a lot’ by the left, who also wanted him fired. Something conveniently left out when talking about this.

What is the argument that he did?

The president has the right to fire Comey, Comey's duplicity and serial leaking nonwithstanding.