Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89787

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, babysdaddy said:

yeah, and two posters account for over 12% of the total posts on the politics board.  This is not 'just for discussion' for them.  

At least one of them is apparently getting paid to research and post here.  Unless his parents are supporting him, and he has nothing better to do with his time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 34.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    3238

  • Anastasis

    2088

  • David Dennison

    1559

  • triplehorn

    1384

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Goredho
Goredho

Just to make sure I have the alternative facts straight...  Our government -- but I'm guessing only the deep state part of it --- is now guilty of torturing a poor, naive Russian exchange student who

Incredulity
Incredulity

liberals suddenly being terrified of Russia and manic for election integrity is just pure comedy gold.

Chooky
Chooky

I don't believe for a moment that any of this is entertaining to you.  I think it gives you a bit of anxiety knowing that your best weapon against a group who you despise is a bumbling fraud as a busi

Posted Images

Thetexashammer

Thetexashammer 1062

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, bolverk said:

I can fully explain it: You refuse to acknowledge the mountain of publicly available direct and circumstantial evidence that either Trump, his campaign chairmen and advisors, or all of the above, conspired to win the 2016 election. You know that this occurred but seemingly don't give a shit.

Yet again, Theboxofhammers proves himself to be wrong about everything - even analogies.  

Alright. Is it fair to say you believe Trump is a Russian agent? Is that what you believe? And you believe that the evidence is so overwhelming, that one would have to be an idiot or a moron to fail to understand it? 

I have not followed this in as great detail as you have. Please provide the factual basis for your conclusions. I mean, there's 300 pages, you could just link a post that provides the evidentiary support.

I would certainly stipulate to your statement above, that they conspired to win an election. That was the entire purpose of the campaign. I'm mostly interested why "indictments are pending".

Edited by Thetexashammer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thetexashammer

Thetexashammer 1062

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

Why should he do your homework for you?  It's all over this thread.  Go find it yourself, if you're interested (which you clearly aren't).

Short version:  fuck off, troll.

I'm asking for evidence. That isn't trolling. 

Bolvery has stated that the evidence (for what, I'm not sure, but let's say Trump is a Russian agent) is so overwhelming you'd have to be a moron to disagree. I haven't seen that evidence. I'd like to see it.

Edited by Thetexashammer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thetexashammer

Thetexashammer 1062

Posted
Posted

Here's some evidence.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-has-uncovered-no-direct-evidence-conspiracy-between-trump-campaign-n970536

Quote

After two years and 200 interviews, the Senate Intelligence Committee is approaching the end of its investigationinto the 2016 election, having uncovered no direct evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, according to both Democrats and Republicans on the committee.

 

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yuk

Yuk 1556

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

Here's some evidence.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-has-uncovered-no-direct-evidence-conspiracy-between-trump-campaign-n970536

 

Even if you suppose that to be correct, that refers to "direct evidence".  There is a mountain of circumstantial evidence which our system of justice gives equal weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Come on guys, don’t bite.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/boyfriends-email-butina-manipulated-russian-spy-agency-for-nra-trip

Erickson began the email, sent to then-incoming NRA President Pete Brownell, with florid language. 

“Dear International Man of Mystery or should we just start calling you “Austin Powers” to your face??” he wrote, with a smiley face. 

“Miss Butina has (apparently) moved heaven and earth and manipulated the Russian FSB (the current incarnation of the old KGB) and gotten you cleared for a tour of one (1) Russian arms factory the day before the NRA delegation arrives in Moscow,” he continued. “She found a way to shrink a normally 3-week process into about 3-days (probably because most of the FSB agents ‘assigned’ to her want to marry her).”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thetexashammer

Thetexashammer 1062

Posted
Posted
On 2/12/2019 at 2:18 PM, deech said:

Wow - no surprise -- not a single person is caught on tape saying "Let's conspire to defraud the American public in the upcoming election"  or "Hey - Treason?  Sure - sounds great."  There was never going to be a smoking gun.  Obviously.  

In general, the legislature is spineless.  They can't even pass a bill requesting the President allow the special counsel finish his investigation - so sure let's trust their most recent non-collusion conclusions.  Putting aside the R-run Senate v. the D-run House, both are spineless. 

I guess I don't understand what more an American would need to see on this one?  I mean the President has admitted to obstruction.  He's done shit no President has ever done before in terms of walking into meetings with Putin/Russians without others.  There are multiple references to setting up back-channel communications between the Russians and the campaign outside the realm of the US intelligence community.  He actively on national TV asked for assistance to hack Hillary's emails.  Throw in just about every person interviewed lying about:  their meetings with Russians during the campaign, communications with Russians.  The emails in the public domain about the Trump tower meeting with Don Jr.  Throw in Trump and Cohen lying about how long the Trump tower discussions were ongoing about Trump Tower Moscow.  Throw in the NRA/Butina side-show.  Compare that to past foreign election interference in other countries by the Russians.  Then see Trump's actions with NATO or long-term allies by comparison to Russia, his impact on Magnitsky Act sanctions against Russians, his pulling out of the battle against ISIS.  

I get that none of this matters or it all can be explained away because HIllary is the Devil, tax cuts, abortion is murder, anti-socialism.

    

Good that you start off by saying that. I agree.

Turley has discussed the "obstruction". Didn't matter when Obama did it, doesn't matter now. https://jonathanturley.org/2018/10/16/three-reasons-mueller-may-not-charge-on-obstruction/

The "asking Russia to hack her emails" is interesting until you realize her server had been offline for some time. He was obviously just throwing a bomb, but in any case, I mean, what do you get from that?

There have been hundreds of interviews and fewer than 10 perjury charges I think. Anyway, politicians lie is not breaking news.

The Veselnitskaya meeting is nothing. Four investigations have looked at it, if you disagree take it up with them.

Butina has nothing to do with Trump.

I agree it all looks suspicious, and if you asked my if it were suspicious, I would agree. I supported obtaining the special counsel. But to argue that you cannot disagree when you don't have airtight evidence is wrong.

I still don't understand why Putin would want to do a deal with Trump, who was 10-15 point behind in the polls. And what did Putin have to offer?

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Come on guys, don’t bite.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/boyfriends-email-butina-manipulated-russian-spy-agency-for-nra-trip

Erickson began the email, sent to then-incoming NRA President Pete Brownell, with florid language. 

“Dear International Man of Mystery or should we just start calling you “Austin Powers” to your face??” he wrote, with a smiley face. 

“Miss Butina has (apparently) moved heaven and earth and manipulated the Russian FSB (the current incarnation of the old KGB) and gotten you cleared for a tour of one (1) Russian arms factory the day before the NRA delegation arrives in Moscow,” he continued. “She found a way to shrink a normally 3-week process into about 3-days (probably because most of the FSB agents ‘assigned’ to her want to marry her).”

 

I just lost a lot of respect for “most of the FSB agents” assigned to Miss Butina.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EMAWesome

EMAWesome 101

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Yuk said:

Even if you suppose that to be correct, that refers to "direct evidence".  There is a mountain of circumstantial evidence which our system of justice gives equal weight.

You really need to go back and retake a high school civics class.  Circumstantial evidence is normally not allowed as presentable evidence in a court of law.  This board is more out of touch with reality than the Flat Earth Society.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites
horncyclist

horncyclist 1391

Posted
Posted
Just now, EMAWesome said:

You really need to go back and retake a high school civics class.  Circumstantial evidence is normally not allowed as presentable evidence in a court of law.  This board is more out of touch with reality than the Flat Earth Society.

Wow. You're a moron. 

 

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lurch

Lurch 5931

Posted
Posted
You really need to go back and retake a high school civics class.  Circumstantial evidence is normally not allowed as presentable evidence in a court of law.  This board is more out of touch with reality than the Flat Earth Society.


Are you serious, Clark? Holy shit this is an epic bad post
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

You really need to go back and retake a high school civics class.  Circumstantial evidence is normally not allowed as presentable evidence in a court of law.  This board is more out of touch with reality than the Flat Earth Society.

Are you Swam? Because that’s some epic stupidity you’re displaying right here.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29378

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

You really need to go back and retake a high school civics class.  Circumstantial evidence is normally not allowed as presentable evidence in a court of law.  This board is more out of touch with reality than the Flat Earth Society.

Oh, wow, you must be a lawyer! Tell me, sir, what rule of evidence bars the admission of circumstantial evidence?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18946

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

You really need to go back and retake a high school civics class.  Circumstantial evidence is normally not allowed as presentable evidence in a court of law.  This board is more out of touch with reality than the Flat Earth Society.

This is it. This is the greatest post in the history of the internet.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
J.R.

J.R. 150

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
33 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

This is it. This is the greatest post in the history of the internet.

I wrote him back and said no, he did not make the greatest post in the history of the internet, because he didn’t say anything about Hillary, her emails, or locking her up. 

We’ll see if he writes another verse to that post. 

  • Like 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45726

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, J.R. said:

I wrote him back and said no, he did not make the greatest post in the history of the internet, because he didn’t say anything about Hillary, her emails, or locking her up. 

We’ll see if he writes another verse to that post. 

I still think "mama" should make an appearance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105309

Posted
Posted
You really need to go back and retake a high school civics class.  Circumstantial evidence is normally not allowed as presentable evidence in a court of law.  This board is more out of touch with reality than the Flat Earth Society.

This is it. This is the greatest post in the history of the internet.

Yep.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 13061

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, EMAWesome said:

You really need to go back and retake a high school civics class.  Circumstantial evidence is normally not allowed as presentable evidence in a court of law.  This board is more out of touch with reality than the Flat Earth Society.

I’m not a lawyer but that seems wrong.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chad Fuck

Chad Fuck 17755

Posted
Posted
You really need to go back and retake a high school civics class.  Circumstantial evidence is normally not allowed as presentable evidence in a court of law.  This board is more out of touch with reality than the Flat Earth Society.


You need to ask for your law school tuition back. This is horristupid.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46118

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Thetexashammer said:

I still don't understand why Putin would want to do a deal with Trump, who was 10-15 point behind in the polls. And what did Putin have to offer?

I'm going to regret this, but on the off chance you'll use whatever gray matter you possess to actually read and respond:  what if Putin knew the polls were wrong?

P.S.  Fuck off, troll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thetexashammer

Thetexashammer 1062

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm going to regret this, but on the off chance you'll use whatever gray matter you possess to actually read and respond:  what if Putin knew the polls were wrong?

P.S.  Fuck off, troll.

The obvious answer is that Putin didn't know any more that anyone else did. Everybody was convinced Hillary would win, including Trump by all reports.

The more interesting question is whether Putin had anything to offer. Some people are saying he hacked the DNC, but I find that improbable, or at least not a Trump favor. First, there were attacks on both the RNC and the DNC. The DNC hack worked probably because the DNC was bankrupt. Second, the DNC emails were basicallly irrelevant. They showed that the DNC hated Bernie Sanders and Hillary gave them money for control. I mean not good but par for the course. The election changed as a result of the Hillary server, not DNC emails.

If Trump did a deal with Putin he got nothing in return. Though there is no evidence he paid for anything either. Nor is their evidence of any contact between the two, despite four investigations.

I'm told the evidence is overwhelming. Maybe Bolverk will be along to clarify this.

  • Fuck You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18946

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

The obvious answer is that Putin didn't know any more that anyone else did. Everybody was convinced Hillary would win, including Trump by all reports.

The more interesting question is whether Putin had anything to offer. Some people are saying he hacked the DNC, but I find that improbable, or at least not a Trump favor. First, there were attacks on both the RNC and the DNC. The DNC hack worked probably because the DNC was bankrupt. Second, the DNC emails were basicallly irrelevant. They showed that the DNC hated Bernie Sanders and Hillary gave them money for control. I mean not good but par for the course. The election changed as a result of the Hillary server, not DNC emails.

If Trump did a deal with Putin he got nothing in return. Though there is no evidence he paid for anything either. Nor is their evidence of any contact between the two, despite four investigations.

I'm told the evidence is overwhelming. Maybe Bolverk will be along to clarify this.

You mean other than winning the election?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46118

Posted
Posted

Amazing bullshit given that Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million yet swung the Electoral College by 80,000 votes.

Do you think we're actually that stupid?

The overwhelmingly likely play was that Russia used internal polling data handed to them by Trump's campaign to formulate a targeted social media attack (and perhaps worse) on the swing states that would bend the EC towards Trump.  But hey, you're just asking questions.

Oh, yeah:  fuck off, troll.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31534

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

This place has gotten so weird now that CR has 2/3 the number of posts as football.

This was in response to the sPurg outburst that is now deleted.  Among other sporadic bouts of insanity here and there.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...