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

notre dame joe

notre dame joe 198

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Come on.  Mueller himself accused Trump of actual perjury 2 days ago.  Do your own homework.

"The evidence proves Trump committee a crime."

What Evidence?

"It's in the evidence file."

That he did what?

"What the evidence says"

Says that he ___?

"Did what he did and therefore a criminal."

What was the crime?

"The one proven by the evidence, why are you too lazy to look up the evidence"

 

Rinse, Wash, Repeat.  

 

#notherethere

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29,824

Posted
Posted

Just went over to the Atlantic to follow up on a headline regarding a separate issue and saw this op/ed on the homepage:

Quote

 

Why We’re Moving Forward With Impeachment
Our Constitution requires it. Our democracy depends on it.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/why-were-moving-forward-impeachment/594931/

5:51 PM ET
Mary Gay Scanlon
Vice Chair of the House Judiciary Committee
David Cicilline
U.S. representative from Rhode Island
Pramila Jayapal
U.S. representative from Washington
Veronica Escobar
U.S. representative from Texas

Three months ago, Special Counsel Robert Mueller completed his investigation into Russian election interference and President Donald Trump’s obstruction of justice. When the redacted report finally became available to Congress and the American people, it painted a damning picture of a corrupt president who welcomed and encouraged an attack on our country, capitalized on it, and then tried to cover up what he had done.

During his press conference announcing the end of his investigation, Mueller pointed out that the Department of Justice believes “the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal-justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing.” He was referring, without using the word, to impeachment—a process by which the U.S. House indicts, and the Senate convicts, a sitting president.

Congress has patiently tried to work within traditional means to get to the bottom of this extraordinary situation. Committees have called witnesses and requested evidence, only to be stonewalled by Trump and his associates. The president’s refusal to comply with the Constitution, statutes, and established congressional oversight defies the rule of law.

Mueller’s testimony before the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees was a watershed moment. At this point, it is up to Congress to act on the evidence of multiple counts of obstruction of justice committed by the president, and to continue our investigation into whether he has committed other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Despite assertions to the contrary by the president and his allies, the special counsel’s report and testimony are not the end of our investigations. We have now filed a petition in court to obtain the grand-jury documents referenced in the special counsel’s report. In that filing, we have made clear that we will utilize our Article I powers to obtain the additional underlying evidence, as well as enforce subpoenas for key witness testimony, and broaden our investigations to include conflicts of interest and financial misconduct.

While many people believe that beginning an impeachment investigation can begin only with a vote of the full House of Representatives, this is not true. Article I authorizes the House Judiciary Committee to begin this process.

As members of the House Judiciary Committee, we understand the gravity of this moment that we find ourselves in. We wake up every morning with the understanding of the oath that binds us as members of Congress, and the trust that our constituents placed in us to uphold that oath. We will move forward with the impeachment process. Our investigation will seriously examine all the evidence as we consider whether to bring articles of impeachment or other remedies under our Article I powers.

Our Constitution requires it. Our democracy depends on it.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46,479

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

"The evidence proves Trump committee a crime."

What Evidence?

"It's in the evidence file."

That he did what?

"What the evidence says"

Says that he ___?

"Did what he did and therefore a criminal."

What was the crime?

"The one proven by the evidence, why are you too lazy to look up the evidence"

 

Rinse, Wash, Repeat.  

 

#notherethere

 

 

Did you pay any attention to Michael Cohen's testimony?  Does it not give you pause that Cohen says Trump lied to Mueller and Mueller says Trump lied as well?

He fucking denied knowing about the Trump Tower meeting and subsequently ADMITTED KNOWING ABOUT THE MEETING PRIOR TO IT HAPPENING.

That's for starters.

There's also a lot of shady disconnected statements about Wikileaks. 

But sure, Cohen and Mueller have nothing.  It's all a nothingburger.

Edited by jimmyjazz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, David Dennison said:

That might be the plan. There's not much else for them to do for the next 15 months.

Well, they could go about the business of running the country. You know what we pay them to do. 

Maybe negotiate some immigration reform for DACA path to citizenship? Really do something about the border crisis and amnesty laws instead using these people as political bombs to throw at each other.

Most people aren't that political.They will get tired of the gridlock. For them it is not about Dems or Reps winning. It's about who is really going to do something for me and my situation? 

What ever happened to infrastructure rebuilding?  What about a realistic plan for climate change? What about the Norks and the Iraqis nuclear ambitions? There is a lot of shit going on in the world and all we are talking about is the Dems trying to undo an election they lost 3 fucking years ago!!! Get over it!!! Beat Trump in 2020. If you can...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Jim Tom Pinch said:

While they’re asking for all the redacted info from the “Mueller” Report, maybe they can ask who, you know, actually ran the investigation, wrote the report and signed off on it.

Based on Mueller's performance in front of the House I would find it hard to believe that it was actually Mueller. Can we go back and change the title of a thread that was started over a year ago and has 600+ pages? He was lost most of the time about things he should have known if it were his report. 

Maybe we could change it to the Weismann report?

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/454185-how-mueller-deputy-andrew-weissmanns-offer-to-an-oligarch-could-boomerang

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19,121

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Crusher said:

Well, they could go about the business of running the country. You know what we pay them to do. 

Maybe negotiate some immigration reform for DACA path to citizenship? Really do something about the border crisis and amnesty laws instead using these people as political bombs to throw at each other.

Most people aren't that political.They will get tired of the gridlock. For them it is not about Dems or Reps winning. It's about who is really going to do something for me and my situation? 

What ever happened to infrastructure rebuilding?  What about a realistic plan for climate change? What about the Norks and the Iraqis nuclear ambitions? There is a lot of shit going on in the world and all we are talking about is the Dems trying to undo an election they lost 3 fucking years ago!!! Get over it!!! Beat Trump in 2020. If you can...

 

Republicans don't want to do a thing to help Democrats govern. They don't care.

Edited by David Dennison
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Republicans don't want to do a thing to help Democrats govern.

Vice versa...

Although I do believe that Trump would have negotiated a deal for DACA citizenship a year or so ago in exchange for the wall. The progressives on the left killed that.

Trump used to be a Democrat. I think he would work with the Dems if they hadn't gone total TDS.

Edited by Crusher
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19,121

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Crusher said:

Vice versa...

Although I do believe that Trump would have negotiated a deal for DACA citizenship a year or so ago in exchange for the wall. The progressives on the left killed that.

Trump used to be a Democrat. I think he would work with the Dems if they hadn't gone total TDS.

Um, Donald Trump killed the DACA deal because Republicans howled. The bill included $25 billion for border security. 

The Republican Party does not give a fuck about governing this country.

Edited by David Dennison
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Um, Donald Trump killed the DACA deal because Republicans howled. The bill included $25 billion for border security. 

The Republican Party does not give a fuck about governing this country.

Bullshit. It was Pelosi and Schumer in their bow to the resistance that killed that deal. No wall!!!

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/09/daca-deal-or-no-deal-trump-democrats-dreamers/539784/

In exchange for securing protections for the “Dreamers,” (the popular term for DACA recipients among immigration activists), Schumer and Pelosi said they would back a legislative package bolstering border security but “excluding the wall”—Trump’s prized proposal that Democrats have declared a nonstarter since before he took office. DACA for border security, no wall. That was the deal.

It could have been done. Pelosi and Schumer had supported a wall in the past and refused to give in for the Dreamers over the resistance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tchookem

tchookem 3,922

Posted
Posted
Bullshit. It was Pelosi and Schumer in their bow to the resistance that killed that deal. No wall!!!
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/09/daca-deal-or-no-deal-trump-democrats-dreamers/539784/
In exchange for securing protections for the “Dreamers,” (the popular term for DACA recipients among immigration activists), Schumer and Pelosi said they would back a legislative package bolstering border security but “excluding the wall”—Trump’s prized proposal that Democrats have declared a nonstarter since before he took office. DACA for border security, no wall. That was the deal.
It could have been done. Pelosi and Schumer had supported a wall in the past and refused to give in for the Dreamers over the resistance.
So Trump could have had more money, but given up on the wasteful wall. The Dems were giving up more money, but getting something for DACA.

Sounds like Trump refused to compromise. Art of the Deal indeed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19,121

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Crusher said:

Bullshit. It was Pelosi and Schumer in their bow to the resistance that killed that deal. No wall!!!

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/09/daca-deal-or-no-deal-trump-democrats-dreamers/539784/

In exchange for securing protections for the “Dreamers,” (the popular term for DACA recipients among immigration activists), Schumer and Pelosi said they would back a legislative package bolstering border security but “excluding the wall”—Trump’s prized proposal that Democrats have declared a nonstarter since before he took office. DACA for border security, no wall. That was the deal.

It could have been done. Pelosi and Schumer had supported a wall in the past and refused to give in for the Dreamers over the resistance.

The bill had bipartisan support and would have passed.

DOTUS killed it when Ann Coulter yelled at him.

Edited by David Dennison
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, tchookem said:

So Trump could have had more money, but given up on the wasteful wall. The Dems were giving up more money, but getting something for DACA.

Sounds like Trump refused to compromise. Art of the Deal indeed.

It wasn't even a deal on the Dems part. It was just doing what they claimed to believe in the past. 

Trump was ready. Give me the wall and you get Dreamer citizenship. Like Dennis said there was bi-partisan support. Did Trump Veto Dreamers for wall? No. He did not. It was never presented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19,121

Posted
Posted
Just now, Crusher said:

It wasn't even a deal on the Dems part. It was just doing what they claimed to believe in the past. 

Trump was ready. Give me the wall and you get Dreamer citizenship. Like Dennis said there was bi-partisan support. Did Trump Veto Dreamers for wall? No. He did not. It was never presented.

There was a deal. He backed away.

We can do this all night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

There was a deal. He backed away.

We can do this all night.

Yes we can. You'll be wrong all night and I will be right all night.

Show me something that supports your position and I will read , listen or watch it. But you haven't shown me shit.

It was a slam dunk that would have given Trump and the Dems a win!!! Wall and Dreamers ...Hell I would be all USA..USA...USA... But...

The Dems fucked it up because they would not be a part of giving Trump any thing that looked like he was Presidential and keeping campaign promises.

Edited by Crusher
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cactusflinthead

cactusflinthead 27,615

Posted
Posted

Whoa hey it's the WSJ

Did anyone tell Mr. Trump what’s in that amendment? It legalizes as many as 1.8 million Dreamer immigrant adults who were brought here illegally as children on Mr. Trump’s terms. But it also goes a long way to meeting the President’s other priorities. That includes authorizing $25 billion over 10 years for Mr. Trump’s wall on the Mexico-U.S. border. That’s a huge political victory on one of his main campaign promises.

 

done being wrong yet?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/president-millers-immigration-veto-1518740527

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

Whoa hey it's the WSJ

Did anyone tell Mr. Trump what’s in that amendment? It legalizes as many as 1.8 million Dreamer immigrant adults who were brought here illegally as children on Mr. Trump’s terms. But it also goes a long way to meeting the President’s other priorities. That includes authorizing $25 billion over 10 years for Mr. Trump’s wall on the Mexico-U.S. border. That’s a huge political victory on one of his main campaign promises.

 

done being wrong yet?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/president-millers-immigration-veto-1518740527

That is pretty amazing. I had not read those articles. 

But, someone is telling a fib? He said she said?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cactusflinthead

cactusflinthead 27,615

Posted
Posted (edited)

There's two sources. Go look up why the government got shut down around Christmas last year. 

Or Google 'Stephen Miller killed the deal'

Because that's what happened. Let's not forget John Kelly's role. Now he's making bank locking up asylum seekers. So fuck him too.

Edited by cactusflinthead
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
notre dame joe

notre dame joe 198

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Did you pay any attention to Michael Cohen's testimony?  Does it not give you pause that Cohen says Trump lied to Mueller and Mueller says Trump lied as well?

He fucking denied knowing about the Trump Tower meeting and subsequently ADMITTED KNOWING ABOUT THE MEETING PRIOR TO IT HAPPENING.

That's for starters.

There's also a lot of shady disconnected statements about Wikileaks. 

But sure, Cohen and Mueller have nothing.  It's all a nothingburger.

If you like your Cohen story you can keep it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29,199

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Crusher said:

What ever happened to infrastructure rebuilding?

trump said he was refusing to negotiate until the dems stopped investigating him.

it was a spur-of-the-moment decision he made right as they walked into the room.  then he had placards made up for a presser in the rose garden, presumably in the 3-4 minutes it took him to walk out.

 

4 hours ago, Crusher said:

Well, they could go about the business of running the country. You know what we pay them to do.

just like trump when he had a republican congress for 2 years?  he got so much done.  that list of acchompleshments is placard-worthy.

 

4 hours ago, Crusher said:

There is a lot of shit going on in the world and all we are talking about is the Dems trying to undo an election they lost 3 fucking years ago!!!

republican talking points aside, no one is actually challenging the election results.  you know that, right?

the dems are trying to move forward on the multitude of crimes trump has been involved with since election day.  the very same crimes dozens of people have been charged with and convicted for.

in fact, the only person i've seen repeatedly trying to relitigate the election results...is trump, who still thinks he won the popular vote.

he didn't

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23,514

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

People screaming, "all they have is obstruction" need to ask themselves (spoiler: they won't) why a completely innocent person would obstruct justice.  

I think there is financial dirt he didn’t want uncovered, but we must also account for a large dose of narcissism in answering your question. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CO Horn

CO Horn 167

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Crusher said:

That is pretty amazing. I had not read those articles. 

But, someone is telling a fib? He said she said?

The article you posted initially, was from 2017. The 25 billion offer was in 2018. If you really had no idea that this offer was made given the press that it received, your posting privileges should be revoked. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28,596

Posted
Posted

Ya know y’all are right about messaging and framing being important. More so than the actual truth these days.

So let’s do a little of our own within our own circles.

I’m sick of seeing “The incompetent Democrats won’t impeach because they’re gutless and/or playing politics.”

It’s likely a true statement. But the following is also true.

“The Republicans are are obstructionists who are blocking the Democrats while also failing to uphold the constitution and hold their own president accountable. If they can’t lead their own party, how can we trust them to lead the country?”

No, it won’t matter to the 43% of deplorables and obviously the 40% for impeachment don’t need convincing.

But for the 17% on the fence, it’s a good message. It’s much easier to move someone to action when you give them a narrative with corruption at its core.

That bunch has heard for 2 1/2 years that Trump is evil/awful/terrible etc. Now they’re hearing “Why won’t the DEMOCRATS impeach?”. We’re not telling that 17% a persuasive story.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28,596

Posted
Posted
WTF dude?  You've been proven wrong.  Just admit it.


Just like when he so confidently asserted Alex Acosta had no role in giving Jeffrey Epstein an illegal sweetheart plea deal by “just asking a question”. And arrogantly stating I couldn’t back up the claim.

So I linked him to the year old Miami Herald article that blew the whole sordid thing open.
@Crusher hasn’t shown his purple ass in that thread since. He’s very certain in his wrongness.
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted (edited)

------> Remember Rosneft stock sale and Steele Dossier ????? 

Found this on a random search.  I'm linking the guy because he created a sound thread that distills what Natasha Bertrand is highlighting.  Reading Bertrand's word choice, it's easy to miss.  Not sure how this wasn't picked up a couple weeks ago on a broader scale

NOT a one-off :

 

 

Edited by triplehorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28,596

Posted
Posted
So I guess they don’t teach logic at Notre Dame. Ya’ll should definitely go SEC.


Just goes to show ya, school’s can only do so much.

(And this Alabama gal got a perfect score on the logic section of the GRE. So, suck that Notre Dame. Whipping your ass in football AND book learning!)
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...