The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Biff Tannen 46,069]

6 minutes ago, Brandywine said:

Now Trump wants to have the UK and Australia investigated on whether they were involved in the Russia probe. He is certifiably insane.

Impeachment. Get him out! And the GOP needs to stand up or and be held accountable for all of this.

fixed

[lemonlime 5,503]

[David Dennison 19,442]

1 minute ago, lemonlime said:

 

Oh, I like this. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

12 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

I'm not rehashing that whole thing, but we all know what you were expecting. I realize that you take so many different positions on so many different days that you think it makes you unable to be cornered. But it's literally a board-wide thing. You were the "Mueller report" guy, to the point of turning yourself into a meme. You and people who approach things like you do are hurtful to the cause of getting Trump out. I wish you would just stop.

I’ve always been consistent that it was never Mueller’s job to remove Trump.  I’ve always maintained that the real story was the Russian attack, an event that’s continues to get lost in the Trump bullshit.  I’ve repeatedly said Trump’s biggest criminal liability was obstruction of justice.  This has been my view throughout this entire thing and Mueller came out and said exactly that yesterday. 

Your revisionist history on me is amusing though. 

[triplehorn 2,664]

On why Mueller may have unexpectedly picked yesterday for his public address:

Spoiler

 

Also happening Friday:

- Andrew Miller is scheduled to appear before a grand jury in the Roger Stone case (recall Miller lost his appeal to thwart his subpoena).

- Judge Sullivan ordered release of the redacted Flynn transcripts by 5/31.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

IIRC We’re also supposed to get some of the redactions lifted in the Mueller Report tomorrow via a court order. 

[pyrohornIII 4,845]

36 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

 

Sounds to me that Mueller doing what he is "morally obliged" to do, report a crime, would have put him squarely in the political mess he has tried to stay above.  He was working within the legal boundaries of his office and reported under those same legal restraints.  

She's bitching because he didn't get political, so they can scream: "SEE???  WITCH HUNT! !!"

Besides, I can think of few who have less right to pull the "moral obligation" card than this gang of grifters.

Edited May 30, 2019 by pyrohornIII

[lemonlime 5,503]

3 minutes ago, pyrohornIII said:

Sounds to me that Mueller doing what he is "morally obliged" to do, report a crime, would have put him squarely in the political mess he has tried to stay above.  He was working within the legal boundaries of his office and reported under those same legal restraints.  

She's bitching because he didn't get political, so they can scream: "SEE???  WITCH HUNT! !!"

Besides, I can think of few who have less right to pull the "moral obligation" card than this gang of grifters.

Yup.  But the dems should be calling trump on this.  They should be saying exactly what Katyal's saying, instead of their mealy mouthed crap.

[Grade of D as in David 13,255]

16 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

fair enough.

i still think party line gives them proper cover so the heat won't get too hot.

there's a really good chance that the right supported a criminal and conman all the way til the end and never ends up paying for it.

oh, and absolutely zero chance he resigns.  zero point zero.

If he loses in 2020 I can see him resigning the day before the inauguration so Pence can blanket pardon him for as many federal crimes as he can.  Obviously he will still be on the hook for state crimes, but he will use his fed pardon as "evidence" of his innocence to the state prosecutions.

 

 

Edited May 30, 2019 by Grade of D as in David
Brain fart

[Anastasis 23,705]

25 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

I'm not rehashing that whole thing, but we all know what you were expecting. I realize that you take so many different positions on so many different days that you think it makes you unable to be cornered. But it's literally a board-wide thing. You were the "Mueller report" guy, to the point of turning yourself into a meme. You and people who approach things like you do are hurtful to the cause of getting Trump out. I wish you would just stop.

Hugo thinks that there are lots of stupid people here who do not pay attention.  Unfortunately, there appear to be lots of posters more than willing to oblige that view.

He flung all sorts of stupid twatter shit across this board non stop. Papadopoulos wearing a wire, Dossier road map, Federal prosecutor in Florida being shot in the head and dumped in the ocean (He investigates passport fraud! Prague! Trumps back yard!), conspiracy flow charts, Mueller report going to lay out the crime of the century, etc ad infinitum.  Revisionist history lol. 

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

Just now, Grade of D as in David said:

If he loses in 2020 I can see him resigning the day before the election so Pence can blanket pardon him for as many federal crimes as he can.  Obviously he will still be on the hook for state crimes, but he will use his fed pardon as "evidence" of his innocence to the state prosecutions.

 

 

Can he be pardoned before he is charged?

[Anastasis 23,705]

2 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Can he be pardoned before he is charged?

Carter pardoning vietnam draft dodgers. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

17 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Can he be pardoned before he is charged?

Yes

[jimmyjazz 46,990]

17 minutes ago, Grade of D as in David said:

If he loses in 2020 I can see him resigning the day before the election so Pence can blanket pardon him for as many federal crimes as he can.  Obviously he will still be on the hook for state crimes, but he will use his fed pardon as "evidence" of his innocence to the state prosecutions.

How would he know he lost an election that was happening the day after he resigned?  Did you mean inauguration?

 

FondrenRoad:

Quote

Can he be pardoned before he is charged?

Sure, Ford pardoned Nixon for any and all crimes he might have committed in office.

[Grade of D as in David 13,255]

10 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

How would he know he lost an election that was happening the day after he resigned?  Did you mean inauguration?

 

FondrenRoad:

Sure, Ford pardoned Nixon for any and all crimes he might have committed in office.

Yes I meant inauguration. Brain fart, my bad.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

 

Edited May 30, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

5 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Carter pardoning vietnam draft dodgers. 

It would have to be specific though, no? Can't just be a blanket pardon for anything that may have happened. All it would do is give investigators a better hint at what to look for. There are few potential federal charges that are unique and don't have similar state charges. He was never going to get charged with anything like treason anyway. 

[Anastasis 23,705]

1 minute ago, FondrenRoad said:

It would have to be specific though, no?

GRANTING PARDON TO RICHARD NIXON

------

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

Richard Nixon became the thirty-seventh President of the United States on January 20, 1969 and was reelected in 1972 for a second term by the electors of forty-nine of the fifty states. His term in office continued until his resignation on August 9, 1974.

Pursuant to resolutions of the House of Representatives, its Committee on the Judiciary conducted an inquiry and investigation on the impeachment of the President extending over more than eight months. The hearings of the Committee and its deliberations, which received wide national publicity over television, radio, and in printed media, resulted in votes adverse to Richard Nixon on recommended Articles of Impeachment.

As a result of certain acts or omissions occurring before his resignation from the Office of President, Richard Nixon has become liable to possible indictment and trial for offenses against the United States. Whether or not he shall be so prosecuted depends on findings of the appropriate grand jury and on the discretion of the authorized prosecutor. Should an indictment ensue, the accused shall then be entitled to a fair trial by an impartial jury, as guaranteed to every individual by the Constitution.

It is believed that a trial of Richard Nixon, if it became necessary, could not fairly begin until a year or more has elapsed. In the meantime, the tranquility to which this nation has been restored by the events of recent weeks could be irreparably lost by the prospects of bringing to trial a former President of the United States. The prospects of such trial will cause prolonged and divisive debate over the propriety of exposing to further punishment and degradation a man who has already paid the unprecedented penalty of relinquishing the highest elective office of the United States.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GERALD R. FORD, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this eighth day of September, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and seventy-four, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and ninety-ninth.

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

 

But that pardon was never challenged. Doesn't mean it can't be. 

[triplehorn 2,664]

[Steamboat1874 4,287]

Normally when someone is pardoned it means they were guilty of something.

I don't think that will fly as being innocent in the state courts. 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Thank you CNN chyron writer for finally using the word “lies” instead of the usual “misstatements” or “inaccuracies” or whatever other mealymouthed mess that usually gets used so as not to hurt the feelings of the snowflake trumpkins.

[Grade of D as in David 13,255]

It won't fly legally, but after lying that the Mueller report was a complete exoneration, I can see him trying to claim that the pardons were just to end the witch hunt and that he's really innocent.

Also be on the lookout for dual sovereignty doctrine challenges in an effort to thwart state prosecutions.

Edited May 30, 2019 by Grade of D as in David
Reply meant for Steamboat

[henrygandorf 29,223]

he would claim innocence while in shackles after a unanimous jury verdict against him and losing all his appeals.  i'm not worried about his claims.

12 obama-appointed trump-hating jurors...

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Because “both sides”

 

 

Edited May 30, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[suddenly shaggy 929]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Hugo thinks that there are lots of stupid people here who do not pay attention.  Unfortunately, there appear to be lots of posters more than willing to oblige that view.

He flung all sorts of stupid twatter shit across this board non stop. Papadopoulos wearing a wire, Dossier road map, Federal prosecutor in Florida being shot in the head and dumped in the ocean (He investigates passport fraud! Prague! Trumps back yard!), conspiracy flow charts, Mueller report going to lay out the crime of the century, etc ad infinitum.  Revisionist history lol. 

 

You have mislead, lied and flung feces every page of this thread. You are the biggest liar and character smearer on this entire board, while constantly complaining about others.

You will continue to gaslight and post shitty gifs every day until this thread no longer exists, but you've been exposed and no one believes a word you post anymore. 

[Anastasis 23,705]

Ah, here comes suddenly to white knight for a fellow wingnut.  Very cute.

 

And you project.  You are the one running around smearing people with baseless claims, slithering off when challenged to defend them.

[jimmyjazz 46,990]

I can only assume Gorkamelon, Dan Bon Jovi, Sean Hasnthadditinalongtime, Fucker, Laura Wingraham and the others were equally incensed about the relentless pursuit of Hillary Clinton without charges.

[Js1 87,017]

 

[henrygandorf 29,223]

42 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I can only assume Gorkamelon, Dan Bon Jovi, Sean Hasnthadditinalongtime, Fucker, Laura Wingraham and the others were equally incensed about the relentless pursuit of Hillary Clinton without charges.

mueller - "my report speaks for itself."

trump - "nothing new, still innocent."

fox news - "holy shit mueller is a fucking liar!"

hmmm.

[triplehorn 2,664]

Stone back in court today.  good thread on the ongoings with Judge Amy Berman Jackson:

 

VVV

 

[triplehorn 2,664]

I agree with this

VVV

 

Initiating impeachment would instantly alter the lens through which people would understand Trump's actions and help reveal his underlying criminal intent to obstruct justice.

 

[Guest]

Obstruct justice for something that has never been proven to have occurred.

 

Trump sucks at everything he does, but has this part of his world sealed up ship shape without a hint of a leak?

 

LOLz.  Ain't any politicians without fault.   Trump is not remotely approaching perfection.

 This whole exercise has been a huge waste of resources.

Edited May 30, 2019 by slorch

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

35 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

mueller - "my report speaks for itself."

trump - "nothing new, still innocent."

fox news - "holy shit mueller is a fucking liar!"

hmmm.

 

[hobbes2702 13,355]

It’s been proven that Russia interfered in our election and Trump obstructed the investigation into that. 

Even still it wouldn’t matter. You don’t need an underlying crime to be charged with obstruction.

 

@slorch

Edited May 30, 2019 by hobbes2702

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

2 minutes ago, slorch said:

Obstruct justice for something that has never been proven to have occurred.

 

Trump sucks at everything he does, but has this part of his world sealed up ship shape without a hint of a leak?

 

LOLz.

You know why people obstruct justice right? 

[Chad Fuck 18,098]

18 minutes ago, slorch said:

Obstruct justice for something that has never been proven to have occurred.

 

Trump sucks at everything he does, but has this part of his world sealed up ship shape without a hint of a leak?

 

LOLz.  Ain't any politicians without fault.   Trump is not remotely approaching perfection.

 This whole exercise has been a huge waste of resources.

Two points here:

1.  You don't have to have a proven underlying crime in order to obstruct justice.  You just have to interfere with the government seeking the truth.

2.  Why would someone ever want to do 1.?

 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

1 minute ago, Chad Fuck said:

Two points here:

1.  You don't have to have a proven underlying crime in order to obstruct justice.  You just have to interfere with the government seeking the truth.

2.  Why would someone ever want to do 1.?

 

 

I think I Trumps case it was at the very least to hide business dealings.

[Chad Fuck 18,098]

2 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I think I Trumps case it was at the very least to hide business dealings.

That may be true.  At the very least.  And I know you aren't arguing against it, but for some of the others whose synapses aren't quite firing on this, even if it WAS to hide his business dealings, it would still be a crime.  Because the reason you obstructed is immaterial to the fact of actual obstruction.  

And oh yeah, even then he would be covering up for what are most likely his business crimes.  

Bottom line, there's a very, very strong chance the President committed a felony.  Regardless of whether he conspired with the Russians to help him win. 

[notre dame joe 202]

7 hours ago, Anastasis said:

The tragedy is people building up mueller to be a Super hero figure who was going to swoop in and destroy their enemies and restore the order of the republic. Pure fantasy. 

Which bit part in The Last Jedi is Mueller?  I'll go with the noble Aunt Virginia who crashes the investigation cruiser into the DOJ's credibility.

6 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s almost like the Dems are trying to lose.  Nothing screams “out of touch” like what they’re doing now.  Playing politics and always calculating towards the next election is part of the reason Trump won. 

One of the original rumors was that Mueller's team was just going to get dirt on Trump and leak it out bit by bit whenever he had a good week in the news.  This rumor is bolstered by the revelation that they already figured out the Trump campaign hadn't colluded with the Russians before the SC was appointed.

[jimmyjazz 46,990]

27 minutes ago, slorch said:

Obstruct justice for something that has never been proven to have occurred.

WTF does this even mean?  He tried on many occasions to interfere with a law enforcement investigation.  That investigation could have been into the accusation that the Oompa Loompas fucked with the flow valves at Willy Wonka's factory leading to Augstus Gloop's ignominious ride up the chocolate pipe (oh dear) and obstruction would still be obstruction.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

I think a more important part is Trump didn’t obstruct justice in an investigation of a fruit stand robbery.

Trump repeatedly obstructed justice into the investigation of Russia’s ongoing attack on American democracy.  That puts everyone at risk and makes Trump a national security liability. 

 

Edited May 30, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[notre dame joe 202]

on history: no reasonable historian will treat this as anything other than a Roman Empire type political plot between the upstart and the establishment. I say reasonable because it will be probably be two generations before historians can talk intelligently about Trump.

[suddenly shaggy 929]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Ah, here comes suddenly to white knight for a fellow wingnut.  Very cute.

 

And you project.  You are the one running around smearing people with baseless claims, slithering off when challenged to defend them.

Lulz. You accusing anyone of projecting or smearing other posters is hilarious. 

[hobbes2702 13,355]

 

on history: no reasonable historian will treat this as anything other than a Roman Empire type political plot between the upstart and the establishment. I say reasonable because it will be probably be two generations before historians can talk intelligently about Trump.

Crazy people are the best entertainment 

Edited May 30, 2019 by hobbes2702

[Guest]

47 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I think a more important part is Trump didn’t obstruct justice in an investigation of a fruit stand robbery.

Trump repeatedly obstructed justice into the investigation of Russia’s ongoing attack on American democracy.  That puts everyone at risk and makes Trump a national security liability. 

 

Prove it .

 

For crisakes, the evidence should be oozing from everything.

 

The whole investigation is either dumber than the Hawaii chick... or  there should be some fucking meat by now.

Edited May 30, 2019 by slorch

[jimmyjazz 46,990]

5 minutes ago, slorch said:

Prove it .

Jesus Christ, man.  Bob Mueller said as much.  "If there had been no evidence of obstruction, we would have told you.  We didn't do that."

WTF is it with you in your obsessive need for Trump to never be guilty of anything?

DO.  YOUR.  HOMEWORK.  It's there in the report.  If you struggle to read, he said it live on TV just yesterday.

[hobbes2702 13,355]

8 minutes ago, slorch said:

Prove it .

 

For crisakes, the evidence should be oozing from everything.

 

The whole investigation is either dumber than the Hawaii chick... or  there should be some fucking meat by now.

The evidence is oozing from everything.

The investigation is basically a Brazilian steakhouse unless you’re choosing ignorance.

[Biff Tannen 46,069]

Just now, hobbes2702 said:

The evidence is oozing from everything.

The investigation is basically a Brazilian steakhouse unless you’re choosing ignorance.

That's the crazy thing to me about people like Slorch.  The evidence IS everywhere.  Even if you don't do your homework, all of the reliable news sources (no, not CNN you tards) have shown this.  Anyone with two functioning brain cells can connect the dots, but these people just bury their heads in the sand, or worse, crow about fake news and refuse to believe their lying eyes.  What a world.

[JimmyHoffa 1,188]

4 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

That's the crazy thing to me about people like Slorch.  The evidence IS everywhere.  Even if you don't do your homework, all of the reliable news sources (no, not CNN you tards) have shown this.  Anyone with two functioning brain cells can connect the dots, but these people just bury their heads in the sand, or worse, crow about fake news and refuse to believe their lying eyes.  What a world.

 

Impeachment-