The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Anastasis 23491]

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I think it's more that people are throwing poo at you because you've consistently held that there was no valid reason why stone and trump would have possibly be surveiled.

My assessment of Stone has been pretty consistent. He is a reckless buffoon of a person, personification of much that is wrong in American politics, and any testimony he gives should be public. I don't think that I have ever weighed on any surveillance targeting Stone specifically, but I am sure that you can refresh my memory if I did. 

11 minutes ago, Captainant said:

So we can re-re-re-restate our position which has been consistent this whole way through, but it ultimately won't matter. You'll find somewhere to move the goalposts and ignore the evidence for some quasi-intellectual reason. 

Which consistent position is this?  The  one about server transmissions of micro targeting data, or the one about Rosneft brokerage rights, or the one about the lawyer going to prague to coordinate election interference, or the one about the Romanian hackers funded by the Trump campaign operating on orders direct from the Kremlin, or the one about... oh sorry, forgive me for asking somebody to state the new take on the conspiracy that I am suppose to move my goalposts around. 

[Captainant 27826]

22 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Which consistent position is this?  The  one about server transmissions of micro targeting data, or the one about Rosneft brokerage rights, or the one about the lawyer going to prague to coordinate election interference, or the one about the Romanian hackers funded by the Trump campaign operating on orders direct from the Kremlin, or the one about... oh sorry, forgive me for asking somebody to state the new take on the conspiracy that I am suppose to move my goalposts around

Nice whataboutism to peripheral issues and interests as we've been discussing and learning the facts as a group. If you'll spare a moment you'll notice that you're deflecting yet again that the evidence is stacking up that there was NOT a 4th amendment violation in the surveillance against stone and the trump campaign. Which has been a central claim and tentpole in your posting ethos. 

So sure, ill bite. Post me some citations of broad consensus that the DNS logs are hard proof of malfeasance, or any of your whatabouts. Show your work, if that's the standard you expect of us. 

[triplehorn 2664]

9 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Can’t wait to hear Glenn Greenwald’s take on the new Assange revelations. 

 

It kinda looks like Ecuador fucked us since, you know, they’ve been sitting on all this information for three years. 

Re the new surveillance evidence and Ecuador, it's too early to tell with whom it was shared and when.  We know they waited until now to share it with the press.  It's certainly plausible Brit intelligence/Mueller got that information prior to now.  Also, I thought the Stone prosecutors' sealed filing of new evidence a few weeks ago could be related to Andrew Miller testimony, but it's possible it relates to Ecuadorian surveillance.  I got the impression it was a delicate dance for Mueller deciding how to proceed with Assange with him holed up for years in the embassy with Ecuador's hospitality until very recently.  With Assange sitting in UK jail for up to a year, perhaps that has changed the calculus for multiple parties and in part led to the existence of this surveillance evidence being made public.  

[Eskimohorn 5644]

Fuck off dipshit. I will put my contributions to graduate education at the university up against yours any day. Either monetary contributions or indirect contributions to graduate education. Maybe you have served on more dissertation committees. Right, who are we kidding. 

Get a grip, man. You’re making it worse.

[triplehorn 2664]

Judge Amy Berman Jackson hearing over Stone gag order violation is happening now.  Zoe Tillman is live tweeting.

Edited July 16, 2019 by triplehorn

[Anastasis 23491]

54 minutes ago, Captainant said:

the evidence is stacking up that there was NOT a 4th amendment violation in the surveillance against stone and the trump campaign. Which has been a central claim and tentpole in your posting ethos. 

I am not sure that I am aware that there was FISA surveillance targeting Stone?  Can you provide a link?  And then after that, a quote where I have made surveillance of Stone a tentpole in my posting ethos on this thread?

42 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:

Get a grip, man. You’re making it worse.

I know right.  Foolish responding to nonsense personal attacks on this board with a glimpse into reality. 

[David Dennison 18951]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I am not sure that I am aware that there was FISA surveillance targeting Stone?  Can you provide a link?  And then after that, a quote where I have made surveillance of Stone a tentpole in my posting ethos on this thread? 

He sure liked to talk about FISA surveillance in the press.

 

[triplehorn 2664]

 

Keep fucking that chicken, Stone !

[Biff Tannen 45750]

So Stone's lawyer's argument is BUT THE DEEP STATE!?!!

[triplehorn 2664]

Prosecutor Zelinsky responds: Stone "is trying to backdoor a debunked conspiracy theory."

fuck yes.

[jimmyjazz 46225]

36 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Prosecutor Zelinsky responds: Stone "is trying to backdoor a debunked conspiracy theory."

fuck yes.

Well, that's just not true.  #bothsides

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

So this is going well...

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Continued:

Jackson says Stone "plainly" is seeking attention, and potentially trying to prompt a reaction from the judge: "It seems he is determined to make himself the subject of the story."She will not hold contempt proceedings and will not revoke his bond, however

NOW: Finding a violation of her previous order, the judge has ordered that Roger Stone may no longer post on Instagram, Facebook, or Twitter — at all.

Edited July 16, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[triplehorn 2664]

Movement on a lot of separate but related threads is happening. 

In case you forgot or didn't know about this guy, a Putin oligarch and part owner of Cambridge Analytica wanted for extradition on bribery charges in Chicago.

Extradition approved but perhaps by divine intervention it got delayed for the time being:

 

One by one these fuckers are finding their own unique end.

[suddenly shaggy 929]

6 hours ago, Anastasis said:

I am not sure that I am aware that there was FISA surveillance targeting Stone?  Can you provide a link?  And then after that, a quote where I have made surveillance of Stone a tentpole in my posting ethos on this thread?

I know right.  Foolish responding to nonsense personal attacks on this board with a glimpse into reality. 

Stop the intellectual dishonesty and start discussing things in good faith and I'll stop pointing out that you are intellectually dishonest and arguing in bad faith.

[Anastasis 23491]

1 minute ago, suddenly shaggy said:

Stop the intellectual dishonesty and start discussing things in good faith and I'll stop pointing out that you are intellectually dishonest and arguing in bad faith.

Tell me more about ad hominem. 

[suddenly shaggy 929]

42 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Tell me more about ad hominem. 

I freely admit that I lob ad hominem attacks towards you. You're one of the only posters that I do that to and there's a reason for it. You've proven for years that you are a troll. You are incapable of discussing Russia or Trump honestly and are consistently an argumentative, dishonest asshole. Pointing that out does fit the criteria for an ad hominem attack, but it's also the truth. I'm honestly not sure why anyone tries to seriously discuss these issues with you. 

You also love to bitch about people lobbing ad hominem attacks at you, while you are one of the single biggest perpetrators of ad hominem attacks on this board, many of them completely off topic and in unrelated threads. You love derailing the conversation with tu quoque whataboutisms, strawmen, red herrings, and any other logical fallacy you can work into a post. Your posting style on anything Russia or Trump is one logical fallacy after another. 

You are smart enough that you could choose to be better, but you choose not to. That earns you a special amount of disgust from me and is why I will continue to call you out for it when it is topical.

Be Best. 

Edited July 16, 2019 by suddenly shaggy

[Anastasis 23491]

15 hours ago, suddenly shaggy said:

I freely admit that I lob ad hominem attacks towards you. You're one of the only posters that I do that to and there's a reason for it. You've proven for years that you are a troll. You are incapable of discussing Russia or Trump honestly and are consistently an argumentative, dishonest asshole. Pointing that out does fit the criteria for an ad hominem attack, but it's also the truth. I'm honestly not sure why anyone tries to seriously discuss these issues with you. 

You also love to bitch about people lobbing ad hominem attacks at you, while you are one of the single biggest perpetrators of ad hominem attacks on this board, many of them completely off topic and in unrelated threads. You love derailing the conversation with tu quoque whataboutisms, strawmen, red herrings, and any other logical fallacy you can work into a post. Your posting style on anything Russia or Trump is one logical fallacy after another. 

You are smart enough that you could choose to be better, but you choose not to. That earns you a special amount of disgust from me and is why I will continue to call you out for it when it is topical.

 

I think that a balanced accounting over the last few years will show that with extremely rare exception, I have only engaged in ad hominem as a response to repeated ad hominem directed at me. My positions on this topic have been unpopular on this board, granted. And my posting style on this thread in particular can be a beating.  I get that. 

I am not sure what your username on the old site was.  I use to think that you were SPII, but after you punted on the exchange of the social sciences analysis, I don't think that is right  I was under the impression that SPII was an academic researcher.  See when I said "you do peer reviews, right" in the context of the discussion of the First Monday paper you posted, calling me out, that was not a braggadocios reflection. That was my understanding of the level that you were capable of engaging and reviewing the strengths and weaknesses of the study and its findings. I was clearly wrong. You are not capable of engaging with anything other than repeated personal attacks to deflect from a critical review.  Oh professor CVS!

You did the same deflection to ad hominem when I critiqued the WaPo piece you posted regarding the veracity of dossier claims. Spent the next few pages calling me a liar by quoting yourself. But you sure can muster a three mostly redundant paragraph write up about my logical fallacies. You got that one in the tank ready to go. LOL. A fair assessment of your engagement on this topic, and with me in particular, will show who has relied on logical fallacy and ad hominem as the foundation of their posting style on the subject.    

Edited July 17, 2019 by Anastasis

[Nivek 16992]

...they literally did find that evidence. They just weren't able to definitely prove that trump and friends knew it was illegal, likely in part because of the massive obstruction effort by trump and administration.

So ignorance of the law is an excuse? Must be a Republican thing.

Sorry officer, I didn’t know I couldn’t do that. /David Chappelle

[Biff Tannen 45750]

5 minutes ago, Nivek said:

So ignorance of the law is an excuse? Must be a Republican thing.

Sorry officer, I didn’t know I couldn’t do that. /David Chappelle

Yep, Mueller said Junior was too fucking stupid to understand that what he was doing was illegal.  Not sure how that's ok in any way though.  Mueller dropped the fucking ball hard.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yep, Mueller said Junior was too fucking stupid to understand that what he was doing was illegal.  Not sure how that's ok in any way though.  Mueller dropped the fucking ball hard.

Before the Mueller Report was release there were only two logical conclusions based on the information we had.  Either Trump was a full blown Russian asset or an complete fucking moron.  I'm not sure which one is worse but after reading the Mueller Report I'd argue Trump is a combination of asset and moron. A useful idiot that doesn't care if Russia is exploiting him to advance their interests.  The worst part is Russia's primary interest is destroying American democracy and influence.  They are very open about this too in their domestic media. 

[Anastasis 23491]

It is much simpler, and doesn't require assessment of the geopolitical angles at play. He is a severely psychologically damaged narcissist. Every single one of his actions should be viewed through the prism of that psychopathology. It  accounts for everything from his posture wrt Russia to the creepy displays with Ivanka. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

18 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

doesn't require assessment of the geopolitical angles at play.

Yes it does because Putin is clearly exploiting him to advance the interests of Putin.

19 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

He is a severely psychologically damaged narcissist.

Which is why he is so easy for Putin to manipulate.  Trump is a national security liability because he is catastrophically unfit.

How Putin is currently using him is a clear demonstration of it. 

[SmokeyTheBear 5568]

100%, which makes him extremely dangerous as a leader because he can be easily manipulated at the service to his ego. 

*Hugo beat me to it

Edited July 17, 2019 by SmokeyTheBear
hugo

[GRHorn 105]

Could Shaggy Legal team please help me here? Could Trump still be charged for campaign finance violations when he is forcibly removed from office in 12 years?  Are they just sitting on an indictment?

[David Dennison 18951]

9 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Could Shaggy Legal team please help me here? Could Trump still be charged for campaign finance violations when he is forcibly removed from office in 12 years?  Are they just sitting on an indictment?

Yes.

[suddenly shaggy 929]

4 hours ago, Anastasis said:

 

I think that a balanced accounting over the last few years will show that with extremely rare exception, I have only engaged in ad hominem as a response to repeated ad hominem directed at me. My positions on this topic have been unpopular on this board, granted. And my posting style on this thread in particular can be a beating.  I get that. 

I am not sure what your username on the old site was.  I use to think that you were SPII, but after you punted on the exchange of the social sciences analysis, I don't think that is right  I was under the impression that SPII was an academic researcher.  See when I said "you do peer reviews, right" in the context of the discussion of the First Monday paper you posted, calling me out, that was not a braggadocios reflection. That was my understanding of the level that you were capable of engaging and reviewing the strengths and weaknesses of the study and its findings. I was clearly wrong. You are not capable of engaging with anything other than repeated personal attacks to deflect from a critical review.  Oh professor CVS!

You did the same deflection to ad hominem when I critiqued the WaPo piece you posted regarding the veracity of dossier claims. Spent the next few pages calling me a liar by quoting yourself. But you sure can muster a three mostly redundant paragraph write up about my logical fallacies. You got that one in the tank ready to go. LOL. A fair assessment of your engagement on this topic, and with me in particular, will show who has relied on logical fallacy and ad hominem as the foundation of their posting style on the subject.    

Yeah, that's not what happened at all, but go on believing yourself. Nobody else does. 

[Anastasis 23491]

What's funny is that your posting ethos, at least judging by the first page of your posting history, is nothing but ad hominem.  Shit, a good measure of the first page is you apologizing for misdirected ad hominem attacks at another poster. And you write three paragraphs here about me.  The psychological term is projection.  

Edited July 17, 2019 by Anastasis

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Yes.

An isolated indictment against Trump and nothing against anyone else in his circle?

Unlikely imo. 

[Anastasis 23491]

Looks like the search warrants used against cohen will get released by tomorrow morning, unsealed with the conclusion of the campaign finance investigation. 

[Zavala 1384]

Does anyone know why the Mueller testimony was delayed for a week?

I didn't get the memo

[DDD Dad 14352]

6 minutes ago, Zavala said:

Does anyone know why the Mueller testimony was delayed for a week?

I didn't get the memo

I thought I saw somewhere that the schedule wouldn't have permitted full questioning by all representatives on the committee so they were going to reschedule to address.

Edit:

NY Times article link

Hearing now 3 hours instead of 2 for the judiciary committee.  Original schedule was 4 hours, with 2 hours for each committee (judiciary and intelligence).  Intelligence is smaller so 2 hours was sufficient but judiciary needed 3 to afford sufficient number of representatives to ask questions (per the article).

 

Edited July 17, 2019 by DDD Dad

[suddenly shaggy 929]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

What's funny is that your posting ethos, at least judging by the first page of your posting history, is nothing but ad hominem.  Shit, a good measure of the first page is you apologizing for misdirected ad hominem attacks at another poster. And you write three paragraphs here about me.  The psychological term is projection.  

That is also a lie, but you've never let truth get in your way. 

I mistook two very similar avatars.

LongestHorn

and Zavala, one of the shittiest trolls on here. Zavala fucking sucks and is a blatant troll in nearly every post he has ever made on this board. You want to call that an ad hominem, go for it, it's the truth.

I apologized in exactly in one post and a PM to Longest Horn, who understood why I mistook the two avatars and accepted the apology. That would be 1 out of 25 posts, or a grand total of 4% of my posts on that page. 

I then quoted and responded to ChiTownDoc saying "Jesus, go edit it.  Being mixed up with Zavala will leave a mark" and hg saying he'd made the same mistake. Even if you count both of those as apologies, which they weren't, that's 3 total posts apologizing, out of 25 on the first page for a grand total of 12% of my posts on that page.

That's either a blatant lie by you, or a smaller lie combined with a statistics error, but that would be a pretty basic statistics error and you're a self-proclaimed statistics expert. 

 

 

[David Dennison 18951]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

An isolated indictment against Trump and nothing against anyone else in his circle?

Unlikely imo. 

How 'bout we wait until he's not president anymore and see what happens.

[suddenly shaggy 929]

This is the topic Trump and right-wing posters on this thread are trying to distract from. Their Seth Rich conspiracy mongering has been shown to be nothing, but lies. The ex-president of Ecuador who had granted Assange asylum confirmed that Assange interfered with the 2016 election from inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. 

https://us.cnn.com/2019/07/16/politics/ecuador-response-assange-wikileaks/index.html

Ex-Ecuadorian president confirms Assange meddled in US election from London embassy

"We did notice that he was interfering in the elections and we do not allow that because we have principles, very clear values, as we would not like anyone to interfere in our elections," he said. "We are not going to allow that to happen with a foreign country and friend like the US." ...

...

The report cited hundreds of surveillance documents detailing Assange's time inside the embassy. The documents describe how Assange met with Russians and world-class hackers at critical moments and acquired powerful new computing and network hardware to facilitate data transfers just weeks before WikiLeaks received hacked materials from Russian operatives.

"WikiLeaks' justification was that they were providing truthful information," Correa told CNN. "Sure, but (it) was just about Hillary Clinton. Not about (Donald) Trump. So, they were not saying all the truth. And not saying all the truth is called manipulation. And we are not going to allow that."

 

[suddenly shaggy 929]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

Looks like the search warrants used against cohen will get released by tomorrow morning, unsealed with the conclusion of the campaign finance investigation. 

Should be some good stuff. SDNY can't indict Trump due to the Office of Legal Counsel rule and Weisselberg had immunity, but Jr has to be breathing a lot easier. Trump installing Bill Barr as AG to cover for him and be his personal fixer continues to pay off bigly.

Edited July 17, 2019 by suddenly shaggy

[EuroHorn 3271]

So the table is set ?

[Anastasis 23491]

8 hours ago, suddenly shaggy said:

That is also a lie, but you've never let truth get in your way. 

I mistook two very similar avatars.

LongestHorn

and Zavala, one of the shittiest trolls on here. Zavala fucking sucks and is a blatant troll in nearly every post he has ever made on this board. You want to call that an ad hominem, go for it, it's the truth.

I apologized in exactly in one post and a PM to Longest Horn, who understood why I mistook the two avatars and accepted the apology. That would be 1 out of 25 posts, or a grand total of 4% of my posts on that page. 

I then quoted and responded to ChiTownDoc saying "Jesus, go edit it.  Being mixed up with Zavala will leave a mark" and hg saying he'd made the same mistake. Even if you count both of those as apologies, which they weren't, that's 3 total posts apologizing, out of 25 on the first page for a grand total of 12% of my posts on that page.

That's either a blatant lie by you, or a smaller lie combined with a statistics error, but that would be a pretty basic statistics error and you're a self-proclaimed statistics expert. 

 

 

This post is awesome. Thank you. 

[suddenly shaggy 929]

NP, happy to point out your dishonesty from time to time. 

[Anastasis 23491]

Twelve percent of my recent posts are related to a misdirected personal attack.  Actually 16% if you count the actual  personal attack.  This demonstrates the superiority of my posting style as it relates to ad hominem. 

Edited July 18, 2019 by Anastasis

[zork 629]

Is there a feeling or more  with greater certainty than just after the report was released as to what the continuing investigations are now, and how many are left to be decided?   For instance: was the Rosneft dealing conspiracy that Trump was to make gazillions on still out there?  What is the current scorecard on that or the others?  Sure, just asking questions but maybe after all of this a summary of post Mueller report, pre-testimony is in order?  

[Fudge Nuggets 19227]

11 hours ago, suddenly shaggy said:

That is also a lie, but you've never let truth get in your way. 

I mistook two very similar avatars.

LongestHorn

and Zavala, one of the shittiest trolls on here. Zavala fucking sucks and is a blatant troll in nearly every post he has ever made on this board. You want to call that an ad hominem, go for it, it's the truth.

I apologized in exactly in one post and a PM to Longest Horn, who understood why I mistook the two avatars and accepted the apology. That would be 1 out of 25 posts, or a grand total of 4% of my posts on that page. 

I then quoted and responded to ChiTownDoc saying "Jesus, go edit it.  Being mixed up with Zavala will leave a mark" and hg saying he'd made the same mistake. Even if you count both of those as apologies, which they weren't, that's 3 total posts apologizing, out of 25 on the first page for a grand total of 12% of my posts on that page.

That's either a blatant lie by you, or a smaller lie combined with a statistics error, but that would be a pretty basic statistics error and you're a self-proclaimed statistics expert. 

 

 

Less about you two cunts and more about Mueller.

[triplehorn 2664]

7 hours ago, zork said:

Is there a feeling or more  with greater certainty than just after the report was released as to what the continuing investigations are now, and how many are left to be decided?   For instance: was the Rosneft dealing conspiracy that Trump was to make gazillions on still out there?  What is the current scorecard on that or the others?  Sure, just asking questions but maybe after all of this a summary of post Mueller report, pre-testimony is in order?  

 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11821]

30 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

 

Needs trump down there grabbing her pussy.

[Anastasis 23491]

Anything good in the Cohen search warrants?

[David Dennison 18951]

7 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Anything good in the Cohen search warrants?

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.499666/gov.uscourts.nysd.499666.48.1_1.pdf

[tantric superman 4668]

Decided to have someone read the Mueller Report to me before Mr. Excitement testifies.  I thought this guy did a pretty decent job.  

 

I originally skimmed the second part and then lightly skimmed the first part.  If you listen to it, it does drone on but it is interesting how it does build to a pretty hard indictment of President Fuckface.  

Come away from it with the conclusion that the biggest takeaway from this is the utter abrogation by the House of their responsibility to seek impeachment.

Also was wondering whether there were any hotheads in Mueller's team who wanted to throw the book at everyone.  Kept thinking that if I were reviewing the record or the even tempered drafts of the report, I would have been all like the angry detective in Something About Mary, dabbing my anger spittle every few seconds....

[suddenly shaggy 929]

2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.499666/gov.uscourts.nysd.499666.48.1_1.pdf

Excerpt from Natasha Bertrand article in Politico. More at the link. 

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/18/trump-cohen-hush-money-negotiations-1421394

Trump regularly talked to Cohen during hush-money negotiations

New court documents show how Michael Cohen kept his boss in the know as he hammered out a deal with Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election.

...

On October 8, 2016, the day the tape was released, Trump campaign press secretary Hope Hicks called Cohen and then, 16 seconds later, Trump himself was dialed into the call, which continued for over four minutes. It was the first call Cohen had received or made to Hicks in at least multiple weeks, and Cohen and Trump had only spoken about once a month prior to that, according to the FBI. Cohen and Hicks spoke again for about two minutes after the call with Trump ended. 

Over the next few weeks, Cohen worked to flesh out a deal with Davidson and American Media, Inc., the parent organization of the National Enquirer. The plan was to have AMI purchase and bury the story, a practice known as “catch and kill,” and Cohen would then reimburse AMI for their expenses. Cohen and Davidson worked on the arrangements with Dylan Howard, the chief content officer at AMI. 

During this period, Cohen connected with Trump several times. Cohen was particularly frantic on October 17, a day when he incorporated an LLC called Essential Consultants in Delaware to funnel the money to Daniels. It’s also when Davidson threatened to cancel the deal by the end of the day if Cohen didn’t pay up. Cohen’s first call after he spoke to Davidson at the end of the day was an eight-second call to Trump, though it’s unclear if they spoke.

Edited July 18, 2019 by suddenly shaggy

[jimmyjazz 46225]

FYI for those trying to put things together in this story --^     "Davidson" is Stormy Daniels' attorney.

[triplehorn 2664]

Quote

Trump regularly talked to Cohen during hush-money negotiations

Thanks to his fixer AG Barr, at least we won't have to hear from Trump when questioned about this "I can't comment on an ongoing investigation."   

Our country is in deep shit with these two fuckers.  Barr is arguably more dangerous.