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

Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30,104

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Bruh Man said:

If Barr is truly bastardizing Mueller's report, why hasn't Mueller spoken up about it? He denounced the BuzzFeed Trump/Cohen story within a few days.

He is about to be subpoenaed to testify to Congress, and as a Prosecutor knows he will soon have his say, and he does not want to supply needless political attack fodder until then?

Also, before the report he had no way to convey what was really happening.   Now, he has already said it.  The report said it.  It just needs to be released, as I'm sure it is filled with bread crumbs and Easter eggs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
notre dame joe

notre dame joe 172

Posted
Posted (edited)

Here's a nice idea for revealing the unredacted file

 

Quote

They walked past Capitol Police officers guarding room 217. Inside, on a rectangular conference table sat a 46-page FBI report on allegations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Once inside, senators scooted chairs up to that table to read the highly anticipated documents.

 

 

Edited by notre dame joe
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/10/04/senators-go-secure-room-capitol-read-fbi-report/1527460002/
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29,399

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Enchubben said:

Interesting; I see 0 people voting for not releasing it.

Quote

 

Don't more than half of the republicans want the full report released?  I don’t think I’ve seen one person on here say they don’t want the report released.

 

1

Oh, I agree. It IS interesting. I mean, who wouldn't want the full report released to someone other than Barr and Trump?

What could their motivations for not wanting others to see the report, in its entirety, possibly be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Enchubben

Enchubben 5,509

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Oh, I agree. It IS interesting. I mean, who wouldn't want the full report released to someone other than Barr and Trump?

What could their motivations for not wanting others to see the report, in its entirety, possibly be?

Motivations being not breaking the law by releasing grand jury testimony or other compromising information. For starters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChiTownDoc

ChiTownDoc 21,101

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Crusher said:

Oh...So he's telling the truth? No collusion. Not enough evidence to charge on obstruction?

Lol.  You can’t really be this dumb.  Trump is the quintessential definition of grifter.  What about Mueller says grifter?  

Maybe you were drunk?  High?  Both?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29,399

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Motivations being not breaking the law by releasing grand jury testimony or other compromising information. For starters. 

Are not the Gang of Eight and other Congress critters, who have access to highly classified information, empowered to also see the full report?

Look, the two sentences I quoted from you suggest you don't think the full report should be released to anyone outside of Trump and Barr. Moreover, your vote confirms that opinion.

That opinion puts you in the extreme minority.

It's fine. You can have any opinion you wish, but you need to own up to the fact that you're opposed to transparency and that I'm allowed to question your motivations for not wanting other parties to see the unvarnished report.

Edited by bolverk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grade of D as in David

Grade of D as in David 13,253

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, elguapo said:

The POTUS gets far to much credit/blame for.the economy. Trump better hope the next recession is after 2020 after all the crowing he’s been doing.

Why he will simply stop talking about it and taking undue credit. Remember how he was responsible for zero airplane injuries or deaths in 2017?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GW Hayduke

GW Hayduke 1,952

Posted
Posted
Quote

When the Eleventh Circuit later considered whether the grand jury materials could be provided to the House Judiciary Committee, the parties then agreed that impeachment was a “judicial proceeding” within the meaning of Rule 6(e) and that therefore a court could order disclosure under the terms of that Rule. The Eleventh Circuit found that disclosure to the Judiciary Committee was warranted for essentially the same reasons it allowed disclosure to the Investigating Committee. The court found, however, that it could not order the Judiciary Committee to maintain confidentiality, as this would impinge on Congress’s constitutional authorities, and noted that while the Committee said that confidentiality rules would apply to the documents, the Committee was free to change its mind and make them public.  In re Request for Access to Grand Jury Materials Grand Jury No. 81-1, Miami, 833 F2d 1438 (11th Cir. 1987). In sum, therefore, the Eleventh Circuit suggested two separate legal bases to order disclosure of grand jury materials to a congressional body considering impeachment, relying either on the court’s inherent authority or on the “judicial proceeding” exception of Rule 6(e). And the Eleventh Circuit recognized that the Congress may subsequently choose to make that material public.

Method for grand jury evidence to be made available to Congress and then to the public.

https://www.justsecurity.org/44191/mueller-grand-jury-report-public-hand-congress/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GW Hayduke

GW Hayduke 1,952

Posted
Posted

Engaging discussion on a wide range of theories about where we are and what is going to happen.  I recommend for folks that have lingering questions.  Question and answer session at end provides insight about what happened to Corsi and how Rosenstein is still around.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,356

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Trump pulled the old third world dictator trick of appointing his own cop to publicly declare him innocent.  

How people can’t see what is going on here is kind of disturbing.   Our dogshit media needs to be treating this for what it is, “A coverup in progress.”

  • Like 4
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Born to Run

Born to Run 6,567

Posted
Posted
Trump pulled the old third world dictator trick of appointing his own cop to publicly declare him innocent.  

How people can’t see what is going on here is kind of disturbing.   Our dogshit media needs to be treating this for what it is, “A coverup in progress.”

 

CNN headline: Mueller Report Ends With a Whimper not a Bang.

 

Wtf it has Not even been released yet. Maybe that’s true; maybe not. Why fuel Trumps narrative of lies until we actually know more?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

Method for grand jury evidence to be made available to Congress and then to the public.

https://www.justsecurity.org/44191/mueller-grand-jury-report-public-hand-congress/

Per rule 6(e) Congress (and Chair of HSCI in particular) are entitled to access grand jury evidence.  

And evidently by definition, any information Mueller prosecutors obtained means there has been a waiver of Executive Privilege.

---> I can only imagine that over the past 2 years Mueller crafted his work in such a way that the report is wrapped and ready for immediate delivery to Congress.  Any rationale conjured up by Barr to redact, exclude, or assess for material subject to claims of EP is specious and simply an attempt by a political appointee to protect the individual for whom he auditioned.

Good on Nadler, Schiff, and Pelosi to call out Barr's conduct and refuse to acquiesce to his attempts to whitewash and delay the truth and facts coming out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Red Five

Red Five 40,663

Posted
Posted
I see we still haven’t moved past the “denial” phase yet.
It’s over. Dead. Everyone go home. The party is over.

Man, their plan is going so well. There are actually idiots like you saying things like this without even knowing what’s in the report.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

You hear anyone who wrote it disagreeing with Barr’s summary?

I’m not aware of any public comment from the SCO on Barr’s actions.  I wouldn’t take that to mean anything supporting or against it.

SCO has spoken with their report.  That has to get delivered to Congress in unadulterated form immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30,104

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, Chrispy said:

Some do and some don’t. It’s smart to err on the side of caution when it concerns classified information. 

That the evidence they currently possess does not rise to an obstruction charge. 

You have absolutely no clue what evidence they currently possess.   Nobody does but Mueller and Barr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30,104

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, XingTheRubicon said:

and the same amount of Russian collusion

Why is it anyone's fault that his inner circle all lied about their Russia contacts and many of them were convicted of improperly lobbying for foreign governments, including governments pushing Russian agendas?

Why did Donald and his kid lie about the purpose of the Tower meeting?   

Would any person with a brain not want to investigate the whole thing in light of the two sentences above?

Why does the retard right traitor club still disbelieve that Russia attacked our election, like the traitor-in-chief does?

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,275

Posted
Posted
On 3/29/2019 at 6:36 PM, TwiceHorn said:

I really think their ought to be something more definitive than Federal Regulations governing it.  There were a lot of legitimate criticisms of the old law, and it was revised a couple of times.  And any of them are probably going to raise separation of powers concerns.

Under I think all iterations of the old law, the Independent Counsel answered to a panel of judges and had to clear changes of scope with them.  The judges also decided whether and how much of the report to make public.

And on the Starr Report, they chose to let it all hang out, which was a decision subject to much criticism, both partisan and objective.  It's one of the reasons the current rule does not require full disclosure of the report, according to Neal Katyal.

It seems to me that maybe some laws addressing the periphery of it, like who gets the report and under what circumstances, could be done without a bunch of constitutional concerns.  But of course Congress would have to pass it and would probably try to overreach.

Also left one thing out of this, and that is that, yes, the current scheme is not the best at avoiding the conflict of interest between the leadership and the executive branch.  But when you start giving oversight to another branch is when the separation of powers issue is a problem. 

The current scheme does at least appoint someone whose professional livelihood is not dependent on staying in the good graces of the AG or President.

You can read the case on the constitutionality of the old law here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30,104

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

So Trump survived "grab em by the pussy" but you think this report is gonna take him down. Alrighty. More nothingburgers for everyone.

As long as there are folks like you and the GOP Senate,  it will be hard.   And you will be screaming witch hunt when the spin off tax and money laundering and perjury indictments come down.   Trump may never be impeached, but he and/or his family will be indicted.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted

 

Why is Barr walking back his use of "summary" as representative of his memo ?

Because he likely purposely omitted accounting for evidence of other crimes manifest in the full report.  If his memo were a summary, the expectation is that other criminal conduct documented by Mueller would have been referenced by Barr.  

 There were 'things' Barr didn't include in his memo - things they're trying to edit, withhold, and hide.  And now Barr is being careful not to get caught being a part of it.

  • Like 1
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...