Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

David Dennison

David Dennison 18646

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I asked because Nancy Pelosi doesn’t seem to think there’s enough there, or it’s not worth it. If it were a slam dunk she’d be angling for it. Just curious what y’all are expecting to see that will finally get Trump. 

Nothing will get him politically except losing an election. 

The greatest threat to him legally is the SDNY and the New York AG.

  • Like 1
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

JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I asked because Nancy Pelosi doesn’t seem to think there’s enough there, or it’s not worth it. If it were a slam dunk she’d be angling for it. Just curious what y’all are expecting to see that will finally get Trump. 

She isn’t gonna impeach him because of people like you (or that you pretend to be) who don’t care that he’s a criminal scumbag. Simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted

They should impeach trump because while playing golf with people, not only does he cheat with his own ball (of course he does nobody ever thought otherwise and that’s not a surprise), but he actually goes out of his way to throw other people’s balls into sand traps and into the water!

I could not believe it when I read that. Not because I would put it past trump to do that, I don’t, but because I had never even thought of someone actually doing that in a million fucking years. It had never even crossed my mind that someone would be such a piece of shit. It’s the first I’ve ever heard of that being done by anyone in the history of the planet. Hitler is looking up from hell and watching trump do that and going, “damn, at least I never did that!”

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30083

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, GRHorn said:

What will they impeach him for?

For the 20th time - when his kid(s) gets indicted, he will obstruct that process in a way that is so ham-handed and juvenile and obvious and odious - that even the Dems kept on a leash by Nancy will not be able to prevent impeachment proceedings. 

Donald can't not intervene.  It is genetic.   All we need is a Trump kid indictment, and a reason for impeachment is a fait accompli

Edited by Gatorubet
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

"Just curious".  It's been posted on this thread probably hundreds of times.

I haven’t been an ardent follower of this thread. Most of my contributions over the last two years have been along the lines of, “Don’t get your hopes up.” 

 

8 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

For the 20th time - when his kid(s) gets indicted, he will obstruct that process in a way that is so ham-handed and juvenile and obvious and odious - that even the Dems kept on a leash by Nancy will not be able to prevent impeachment proceedings. 

Donald can't not intervene.  It is genetic.   All we need is a Trump kid indictment, and a reason for impeachment is a fait accompli

This is fanciful thinking. Don’t get your hopes up. 

19 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

She isn’t gonna impeach him because of people like you (or that you pretend to be) who don’t care that he’s a criminal scumbag. Simple as that.

What does that have to do with it?  There’s not enough Trump supporters this time around to win in 2020. What is she waiting for? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, GRHorn said:

I haven’t been an ardent follower of this thread. Most of my contributions over the last two years have been along the lines of, “Don’t get your hopes up.” 

 

This is fanciful thinking. Don’t get your hopes up. 

What does that have to do with it?  There’s not enough Trump supporters this time around to win in 2020. What is she waiting for? 

You just answered your own question. Trump can’t win in 2020 without the dems helping him. They would help him if they impeach him without the backing of the clear majority of Americans. Since people like you don’t back impeachment even though its obvious the president is unfit and a worthless human being, that clear majority is unlikely to materialize.  So there’s no point. Again thanks to people such as yourself. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

You just answered your own question. Trump can’t win in 2020 without the dems helping him. They would help him if they impeach him without the backing of the clear majority of Americans. Since people like you don’t back impeachment even though its obvious the president is unfit and a worthless human being, that clear majority is unlikely to materialize.  So there’s no point. Again thanks to people such as yourself. 

So what do you make of the fact that after two years of investigation and subsequent reporting by the mainstream media, that a clear majority of Americans don’t back impeachment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30083

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

This is fanciful thinking. Don’t get your hopes up.

That is rock solid prognostication based upon dozens of Trump responses to any threat to his kids or business.   One money laundering or tax evasion indictment, and he will be wading through a sea of fired DOJ bodies in order to protect his shit stain offspring. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28703

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

They should impeach trump because while playing golf with people, not only does he cheat with his own ball (of course he does nobody ever thought otherwise and that’s not a surprise), but he actually goes out of his way to throw other people’s balls into sand traps and into the water!

I could not believe it when I read that. Not because I would put it past trump to do that, I don’t, but because I had never even thought of someone actually doing that in a million fucking years. It had never even crossed my mind that someone would be such a piece of shit. It’s the first I’ve ever heard of that being done by anyone in the history of the planet. Hitler is looking up from hell and watching trump do that and going, “damn, at least I never did that!”

And he did it to Mike Tirico, a sports broadcaster. Sure, he did it when Tirico couldn't see him and didn't know his caddy would rat him out. (How much do you want to bet that Trump's a shitty tipper?) But that's the last person you want to cheat because, if they find out, it's definitely getting out that you cheat at golf. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

And he did it to Mike Tirico, a sports broadcaster. Sure, he did it when Tirico couldn't see him and didn't know his caddy would rat him out. (How much do you want to bet that Trump's a shitty tipper?) But that's the last person you want to cheat because, if they find out, it's definitely getting out that you cheat at golf. 

You just know that trump couldn’t stand the thought of a black sportscaster beating him at golf. Guy is pathetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28703

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

You just know that trump couldn’t stand the thought of a black sportscaster beating him at golf. Guy is pathetic.

I hadn't considered that angle. But I'll bet Trump will cheat anyone even if they're not likely to beat him if he plays fair. He wants to beat them worse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2951

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I hadn't considered that angle. But I'll bet Trump will cheat anyone even if they're not likely to beat him if he plays fair. He wants to beat them worse. 

It's almost like he gets a thrill out of cheating or lying. He wants to prove that he can get away with grabbing women, telling pointless lies, declaring false emergencies, etc. Makes him feel in control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

That you suck.

Great point. 

31 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

You just know that trump couldn’t stand the thought of a black sportscaster beating him at golf. Guy is pathetic.

You’re quite the mind reader. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
troph

troph 24560

Posted
Posted
So what do you make of the fact that after two years of investigation and subsequent reporting by the mainstream media, that a clear majority of Americans don’t back impeachment?

What to make of it? An election is about 18 months away, impeachment is an unnecessary circus. Those people will regret their views if he’s re-elected.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28703

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, retread said:

It's almost like he gets a thrill out of cheating or lying. He wants to prove that he can get away with grabbing women, telling pointless lies, declaring false emergencies, etc. Makes him feel in control.

He's not just a narcissist. He's also a sociopath. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

That is rock solid prognostication based upon dozens of Trump responses to any threat to his kids or business.   One money laundering or tax evasion indictment, and he will be wading through a sea of fired DOJ bodies in order to protect his shit stain offspring. 

None of Trump’s kids will be touched. You can bet the farm on that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31240

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

None of Trump’s kids will be touched. You can bet the farm on that. 

Why?  I am not quite as convinced of their criminality as their venality, but if they stepped on their collective dick, why wouldn't they be charged?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Why?  I am not quite as convinced of their criminality as their venality, but if they stepped on their collective dick, why wouldn't they be charged?

I’m basing it off the cynical view that powerful people and the people closely connected to them are almost never held accountable. Even if they did something illegal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27403

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, shnsajax said:

 

That's a really interesting read, there's a number of parallels in tactics and even verbiage between 1989 and 2019. And when the facts and actual documents came out in 1993, it became known that Barr selectively cherry picked info from the opinion, and withheld the worst of it. All in service of increasing executive authority and reducing legislative oversight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GW Hayduke

GW Hayduke 1951

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Captainant said:

That's a really interesting read, there's a number of parallels in tactics and even verbiage between 1989 and 2019. And when the facts and actual documents came out in 1993, it became known that Barr selectively cherry picked info from the opinion, and withheld the worst of it. All in service of increasing executive authority and reducing legislative oversight. 

I don’t recall. Did this come up in his recent confirmation hearing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, shnsajax said:

 

"When the OLC opinion was finally made public long after Barr left office, it was clear that Barr’s summary had failed to fully disclose the opinion’s principal conclusions. It is better to think of Barr’s summary as a redacted version of the full OLC opinion. That’s because the “summary” took the form of 13 pages of written testimony. The document was replete with quotations from court cases, legal citations, and the language of the OLC opinion itself. Despite its highly detailed analysis, this 13-page version omitted some of the most consequential and incendiary conclusions from the actual opinion. And there was evidently no justifiable reason for having withheld those parts from Congress or the public."

Fool me once...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatorubet

Gatorubet 30083

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, GRHorn said:

I’m basing it off the cynical view that powerful people and the people closely connected to them are almost never held accountable. Even if they did something illegal. 

And that is more than fair.    But my hypothetical also includes the possibility of the State of New York bringing charges.    You have to admit the possibility of political justifications to not let powerful people and the people closely connected to them off, when there is actual proof of criminality and an ulterior motive not to overlook it like normal.

Edited by Gatorubet
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt

DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, triplehorn said:

"When the OLC opinion was finally made public long after Barr left office, it was clear that Barr’s summary had failed to fully disclose the opinion’s principal conclusions. It is better to think of Barr’s summary as a redacted version of the full OLC opinion. That’s because the “summary” took the form of 13 pages of written testimony. The document was replete with quotations from court cases, legal citations, and the language of the OLC opinion itself. Despite its highly detailed analysis, this 13-page version omitted some of the most consequential and incendiary conclusions from the actual opinion. And there was evidently no justifiable reason for having withheld those parts from Congress or the public."

Fool me once...

that's a terrifying article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GW Hayduke

GW Hayduke 1951

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Because there is literately nothing that will ever make you change your mind about anything having to do with Trump or the investigation?

All you have to do is accept that an empty vault is the same thing as the trump tower meeting to get dirt from Russia, sharing polling data with Russia, the secret trump Moscow project, firing fbi Director cause of Russia thing, and setting up backchannels with Russia. It makes perfect sense when you do that

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29213

Posted
Posted

Sane people: "We have shitloads of evidence that Donald Trump shot someone on 5th Avenue. We have emails among Trump's family and campaign staff discussing Trump's desire to shoot the victim. There's a picture of him standing in the middle of 5th Avenue pointing a gun at the victim seconds before the victim was shot. There's him telling a reporter in a live interview that he fired the FBI Director because the FBI Director was investigating whether he shot the victim on 5th Avenue. There's him firing all of the FBI staff involved in the decision to investigate whether he shot the victim on 5th Avenue. There's him coordinating a cover story with Vladimir Putin to explain how actually he didn't shoot the victim on 5th Avenue." etc.

Onboard: "NO EVIDENCE NO SHOOTING YOU'RE ALL BUTTHURT LOSERS!"

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Chooky

Chooky 13296

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
4 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Why does this feel like Geraldo and Capones vault ?

Because only a jabbering lummox thoroughly incapable of deciphering transitive logic would find a similarity in a tabloid journalist with a fake name pulling a stunt during sweeps week and a massive investigation spanning government, finance, obstruction and foreign policy.  And even the tacky tabloid journalist was forthright enough to let others see what was in the vault.  It doesn't at all feel like Geraldo and Capone's vault, but one could understand why it would feel that way to you.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lemonlime

lemonlime 5503

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Sane people: "We have shitloads of evidence that Donald Trump shot someone on 5th Avenue. We have emails among Trump's family and campaign staff discussing Trump's desire to shoot the victim. There's a picture of him standing in the middle of 5th Avenue pointing a gun at the victim seconds before the victim was shot. There's him telling a reporter in a live interview that he fired the FBI Director because the FBI Director was investigating whether he shot the victim on 5th Avenue. There's him firing all of the FBI staff involved in the decision to investigate whether he shot the victim on 5th Avenue. There's him coordinating a cover story with Vladimir Putin to explain how actually he didn't shoot the victim on 5th Avenue." etc.

Onboard: "NO EVIDENCE NO SHOOTING YOU'RE ALL BUTTHURT LOSERS!"

But all the sane people's evidence is circumstantial, and therefore not admissible in a court of law, and so none of it matters as to his fitness to be president.  Signed, Trumpkins.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted (edited)
51 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Sweet.  Can't wait until they get convicted in a decade as we stand on the ashes of the country.

yeah, it's not sustainable to wait a decade. 

Barr's 4 page letter creates the impression that the Mueller report is very narrow in scope, and by extension that there was nothing else to see or consider.  We now know from Barr's past playbook that the worst, most incendiary things get omitted from his non-summaries. 

As a sign of avoiding an endless wait, I'm looking for the redacted report to provide an umbrella of context and meaning to support the various (and likely numerous) forthcoming indictments from multiple associated prosecutorial bodies as well as to render the notion of pardons politically radioactive.

Most helpful could be the extent to which the redacted report ties together the interface between foreign involvement, finance, corruption, and obstruction.  Not only could that be more important overall, but also harder for Barr to disrupt compared to sidelining some number of select crimes or events to be gleaned from the report.  

Per above, it's conceivable that a lot of prosecutorial action has been ready to go, waiting for the Mueller report to be completed and released.

 

Edited by triplehorn
  • Like 2
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...