He snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

'Jackman, whose call sign was “Snatch,”'

Trump started losing my support when he decided not to build the wall. That is - the wall he said he was going to do. I'll even pony up and pay for it. We hired a builder to build, not politic. If we wanted a pol, we would have picked someone else. Now that we have a Dem congress we will never, ever get a budget with money for the wall. Trump said he would never ever sign another spending bill without funds for his wall. Then - 5 months later he DID sign another spending bill with no money for the wall.

I had about 14 people to choose from if I wanted a slimy politician. I did NOT choose them. I chose the guy who putatively knows how to built stuff. Like a big-ass wall.

Whistleblower protections come with a requirement of full disclosure. It would appear that either the investigators, or the whistleblower withheld evidence. At least that's what the prosecutor would have to present to a judge for this kind of sweeping warrant. From the discussion in the article, it sounds like they found additional materials not disclosed voluntarily. However, I see your point about the deep state being a bit zealous where one side is concerned.

"What are these documents? According to The Daily Caller, some of the documents detail that federal officials neglected to investigate Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, and the Russian company that purchased Uranium One (Rosatom).

Other seized documents allegedly show that Robert Mueller, then the FBI director and now the special counsel investigating the Trump campaign,. failed to investigate Rosatom and other Russian companies connected to Uranium One for potential criminal activity"

One cannot play politics in the judiciary not not expect to get away with it. At least not supposed to have it that way.

I will opine that the emoluments clause is like getting a fed conviction for fraud. The elements for a fed fraud are quite high, which is why it is so rare. Sadly, a huge mistake was made with the RICO laws which have been badly abused. But - they came out of frustration with inability to prove a fraud. Emoluments is such a wickedly gray area that it is one part of law, rife for partisan dis-ingenuity.

5 Elements of Fraud

    a false representation of fact. an element of fraud.
    knowledge of the falsity by party making false representation. an element of fraud.
    intent to deceive the party by making false representation. an element of fraud.
    reasonable reliance by the innocent party. an element of fraud.
    actual loss suffered by the innocent party.

Having said that, given the extensive use made of Trump properties by people doing business with this admin, it would be interesting to see how it all falls out. I will guess(but pretty sure) that an emolument must have actual cash value, and must be directly affecting the person(s) which gain financially. If those are the elements, then we would need to see a cash/equivalent payment made directly to Trump, or a fiduciary which is under the control of Trump. As he has given fiduciary completely to his family while in office, this is an impossible bar to reach. Even with liberal judges allowing civil lawsuits to proceed. They will reach a list of standards for a civil award that will be impossible to meet. Again, sadly, if it stays within a liberal court there is the possibility that it could go to trial, and a preponderance is enough for 7 votes to find for the plaintiff, all due to partisan dislike of this prez. Then - it would be appealed, and eventually overturned, but by then the civil damage is done. Ingenious, if a bit underhanded.

Whew, read it all. The question remains though - can one get a good hot cup of Black Rifle coffee on N Sentinel Island?

Who is he?

Does anyone really care that he got drunk and copped a feel?

Around #15 - 25 smartest guys on the planet.

someone did. What makes me wonder is why no one is accusing guys like Clooney, or some other hulky man's man of the same thing. I'm dead-dog SURE that the good looking guys have done the same thing, but for some reason - it's not made the headlines.

When was the last time a president did NOT leave office with a net worth less then when they started?
No one in congress would ever go there.(well maybe a few would) If they did I am sure it would open a can of worms no ones looked at.  When did any elected official leave office with a net worth less then when they started?

Um. Hillary did not 'leave office'. She never held the office of president.

Seriously, you can't see that the Clinton Global Initiative was a slush fund pay for play? (or access, as is more accurate)

Just,,, wow. The rest of the planet figured out on Nov 9th 2016, about 2am.