Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 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

jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45898

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

tenor.gif

No, it's not.  I'll admit, I don't keep a fucking journal of what dozens of surlys post like some do.  

Can you prove you were posting about FISA in the last, oh I don't know, 3 days?  I honestly don't recall it being one of your pet subjects.  Maybe your "points" don't stick as well as you think they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

No, it's not.  I'll admit, I don't keep a fucking journal of what dozens of surlys post like some do.  

Can you prove you were posting about FISA in the last, oh I don't know, 3 days?  I honestly don't recall it being one of your pet subjects.  Maybe your "points" don't stick as well as you think they do.

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TexArcher

TexArcher 37774

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, pwinger said:

I know people want to talk about Trump but we should be talking about the FBI and the cesspool that enabled this fiasco.

What fiasco?

We still know, for a fact, that Russians interefered in our election to benefit Donald Trump.

The fact that Trump was cleared of involvement doesn't mean he never should have been investigated.  

  • Like 2
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EuroHorn

EuroHorn 3260

Posted
Posted
Just now, TexArcher said:

What fiasco?

We still know, for a fact, that Russians interefered in our election to benefit Donald Trump.

The fact that Trump was cleared of involvement doesn't mean he never should have been investigated.  

Well maybe Obama should have been more serious about the Russians. It was under his watch...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

So that's a "no".  Thanks.

I know right. I have never registered my ongoing criticism of the intelligence apparatus in this country, it's unconstitutional overreach, nor the lack of transparency wrt the FISA process and its oversight. It's all trumpkin #bothsides nonsense. Come on man. Once again, I thought at least you were better than that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Anastasis has been staunchly opposed to FISA and other intelligence community abuses for about as long as I can remember him posting. I dunno he was on hornfans but I know he’s bee doing it at least since the skat site.

My rep button is out of commission, but I do appreciate a good attempt at honesty from time to time on this thread. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is key section of Barr's letter.  It's got some interesting language (bolded)

 

"In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference, and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President's intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding. In cataloguing the President's actions, many of which took place in public View, the report identifes no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of- justice offense."

1) "does not establish", "not determinative" ; "absence of such evidence bears upon the President's intent with respect to obstruction." 

This language is NOT exonerating of "collusion". 

And wrt obstruction, he's neglecting that obstruction in many cases boils down to state of mind.  State of mind in obstruction can occur by lying to create an "absence of evidence of collusion".  Perjury (Trump never testified in person) and obstruction are used to prevent a determination of a more serious crime.  Barr seems to be attempting to play it backwards.

2) "to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding."  

So Barr is now "a jury of their peers."  

And what is this language "with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding."  Any attys able to clarify ?

 

 

Edited by triplehorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thetexashammer

Thetexashammer 1062

Posted
Posted

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/byron-york-five-things-that-didnt-happen-in-the-mueller-investigation

 

Quote

1. Mueller did not indict Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, or other people whose purported legal jeopardy was the subject of intense media speculation in the last year.

2. Mueller did not charge anyone in the Trump campaign or circle with conspiring with Russia to fix the 2016 election, as was the subject of intense media speculation in the last year.

3. Mueller did not subpoena the president, as was the subject of intense media speculation in the last year.

4. The president did not fire Mueller, as was the subject of intense media speculation in the last year.

5. The president did not interfere with the Mueller investigation, as was the subject of intense media speculation in the last year. In his letter to Congress, Barr noted the requirement that he notify lawmakers if top Justice Department officials ever interfered with the Mueller investigation. "There were no such instances," Barr wrote.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChickenSandwich

ChickenSandwich 9832

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ChiTownDoc said:

LOL, I'm benefitting greatly from this dipshit and his policies.  Morons like you can keep your guns and protect babies so I can buy another vacation house.  Keep checking straight R, it really hurts me, I promise.  Oh, and where did you think I was cheerleading some crazy charges on this thread?  I never was...go back and look.  But if you're not cheerleading some far right victory propaganda, that automatically puts you on the left/libz side, right?  

You see, I'm one of the millions of Republicans that left the party because of this bigoted piece of trash.  

And Sooner?  What bragging rights do you have?  LOL, the Sooner line really burns in the politics forum where you have a pic in your av of a couple guys who would slap the shit out of you if they had to listen to your views on politics.  You just love owning yourself, don't you? 

 

So you will gladly give away your vacation home and luxury toy money for the good of the country, but only if the government makes you?

This makes zero fucking sense,  with all that extra money from the government you should be able to help even more! Double your employee salaries!  Or you could buy a vacation home......why does the government need to force you to do what you believe?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45898

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I know right. I have never registered my ongoing criticism of the intelligence apparatus in this country, it's unconstitutional overreach, nor the lack of transparency wrt the FISA process and its oversight. It's all trumpkin #bothsides nonsense. Come on man. Once again, I thought at least you were better than that. 

Good lord.  Be better than that.  I'm talking about recently, and more specifically this thread.  Have you been on this rant recently?  If not, can you explain why you suddenly brought it up coincident with the same tack some our boot-licking friends did?

You know what I'm saying.  Stop playing stupid.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Good lord.  Be better than that.  I'm talking about recently, and more specifically this thread.  Have you been on this rant recently?  If not, can you explain why you suddenly brought it up coincident with the same tack some our boot-licking friends did?

 You know what I'm saying.  Stop playing stupid.  

4161d0ca283858eac4c761664092c8fa.gif

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UpperWestside

UpperWestside 6162

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TexArcher said:

Agreed.

I'm honestly glad that the Trump campaign didn't collude with the Russians.  It's a relief.  I hope this means it didn't happen and not just that the tracks were very well-covered.  But given Mueller's reputation for thoroughness, I think we can all rest a little easier tonight.

But those of you yelling "exoneration!" seem to be forgetting how many stones are left to overturn with this guy.  Obstruction is still in play, his tax returns can be subpoeaned, he's been in violation of the emoluments clause the whole time, etc.  And, oh yeah, he's probably a rapist.

You are backing a bad man and you cannot deny that.  Doesn't that bother you at all?  As much as you disliked Obama and I disliked W, we couldn't say that they weren't decent men, honorable men.  We just disagreed with their policies.  

Donald Trump is, objectively, a bad person on multiple levels.

Why don't you care?

 

Because owning the libs is the most important thing with that subset of the American population. It's somewhat incredible how Dotard has completely brainwashed millions of our fellow citizens and that includes some posters on here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EuroHorn

EuroHorn 3260

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, UpperWestside said:

Because owning the libs is the most important thing with that subset of the American population. It's somewhat incredible how Dotard has completely brainwashed millions of our fellow citizens and that includes some posters on here. 

The libs owned the libs...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tantric superman

tantric superman 4667

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Which is why no one is going to be satisfied until Mueller's report is released to the public.

The longer it takes, the more it looks like there's something to hide.

It would behoove the White House to get it out to the public as soon as possible. 

To me that sounds right.  To most of America, however, the more the Dems scream about something being hidden, the more it benefits the White House. 

The White House benefits greatly from slow playing this, because then they can slow play and stretch out making the Dems looking bitter, and ineffective, and snowflakey.

The Dems need to select a very few of their numbers to do due diligence on this, to keep investigating other crimes, and then have everyone move on to policy arguments.

Anyway, that's my first take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45898

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

In all seriousness, I got no problem with you jimmy. But you are on full tilt. 

No, not really.  It's just disappointing to see one of the smarter guys around here spouting the force-fed lines.  Maybe you brought up FISA out of the blue all on your own -- I say you got it from the same bullshit talking points source that the idiots parrot.

It's mighty coincidental.

Have a nice work week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45898

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

To me that sounds right.  To most of America, however, the more the Dems scream about something being hidden, the more it benefits the White House. 

The White House benefits greatly from slow playing this, because then they can slow play and stretch out making the Dems looking bitter, and ineffective, and snowflakey.

The Dems need to select a very few of their numbers to do due diligence on this, to keep investigating other crimes, and then have everyone move on to policy arguments.

Anyway, that's my first take.

I'm not sure it really matters.  Everyone is in their foxhole, nobody's mind is being changed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

No, not really.  It's just disappointing to see one of the smarter guys around here spouting the force-fed lines.  Maybe you brought up FISA out of the blue all on your own -- I say you got it from the same bullshit talking points source that the idiots parrot.

 It's mighty coincidental.

Have a nice work week.

giphy.gif

You too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 13032

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

No, not really.  It's just disappointing to see one of the smarter guys around here spouting the force-fed lines.  Maybe you brought up FISA out of the blue all on your own -- I say you got it from the same bullshit talking points source that the idiots parrot.

It's mighty coincidental.

Have a nice work week.

Dude come on man. It’s Anastasis. Where have you been for the past decade

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45898

Posted
Posted
Just now, hobbes2702 said:

Dude come on man. It’s Anastasis. Where have you been for the past decade

Good lord, I'm not denying that FISA etc. has been an angle of his.  I'm saying he hasn't said dick about it for a while, and certainly not on this thread.  If i'm wrong, I'm wrong.  It should be easy for him to prove. 

Enough, it's not important.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted

"A source with direct knowledge of the investigation told The Daily Beast that Mueller intended to make a case to Congress, believing that legislators, and not the DOJ, are 'empowered to weigh the lawfulness of a president’s conduct.'"

Justice interrupted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 13032

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Good lord, I'm not denying that FISA etc. has been an angle of his.  I'm saying he hasn't said dick about it for a while, and certainly not on this thread.  If i'm wrong, I'm wrong.  It should be easy for him to prove. 

Enough, it's not important.

 

No shit it’s not important. Why do you have such a hard on when you know he has been banging the fisa drum for fucking ever. Who cares

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45898

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, tantric superman said:

It does really matter.  Not because you're going to convince anyone.  Because you could focus your efforts on more important things.

Well sure, if you're talking about legislators.  As far as individuals go, we have long since passed the point where anyone with an opinion is going to change their mind.  Old America is fucked.  It's now just a cage match, last man wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45898

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

No shit it’s not important. Why do you have such a hard on when you know he has been banging the fisa drum for fucking ever. Who cares

Well, at least I laughed.  We're 398 pages in and suddenly brevity and focusness are paramount.

Edited by jimmyjazz
grammer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18854

Posted
Posted
Just now, jimmyjazz said:

Well sure, if you're talking about legislators.  As far as individuals go, we have long since passed the point where anyone with an opinion is going to change their mind.  Old America is fucked.  It's now just a cage match, last man wins.

American governance is going to cycle between parties like it has since the beginning. Donald Trump will be gone before you know it and more likely than not, a Democrat will replace him.

The Democrats will then go on to lose seats in Congress.

Then a Republican will replace a Democrat in the White House.

You get the idea. Today's winner is tomorrow's loser. Yay, politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EuroHorn

EuroHorn 3260

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

"A source with direct knowledge of the investigation told The Daily Beast that Mueller intended to make a case to Congress, believing that legislators, and not the DOJ, are 'empowered to weigh the lawfulness of a president’s conduct.'"

Justice interrupted.

Who’s the source? Is that like the situation?

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...