The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13588]

30 minutes ago, Paul Wesley said:

Is Trump ever going to fire back at Avenatti?  

I mean, for years, whenever Trump thinks he's been slighted by a minority (Ken Frazier) or by a woman (Megyn Kelly), he goes after them on twitter within the hour.  But Avenatti just calls Trump out for treason and financial crimes on a daily basis, and.... nothing.  Not a word.  

Avenatti does seem to slap Trump cross-eyed in the middle of the street every other day or so.

Prolly just Trump sneaking up on him. 

[Pods 7586]

12 hours ago, burntorangebongos said:

Dammit, I put the reques in the wrong thread. I cant cut and paste. In pods post above, click on the tweet and go to jed shugermans tweet. He is keeping a timeline of the russia/qatar/trump evidence of quid pro quo and other crimes, they are even color coded. Post it here please. I can't with this phone.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nRvxOO2jo9axeWuf3PsL9N-BC8gY8iiZMIr9qAObJMo/edit

[Anastasis 23492]

Senate committee releases a dump of transcripts.

 

MAY 16, 2018

Materials from Inquiry into Circumstances Surrounding Trump Tower Meeting

As a part of its oversight of the Justice Department’s enforcement of the Foreign Agents Registration Act and federal investigations into potential improper influence during the 2016 presidential election, the Senate Judiciary Committee conducted bipartisan staff interviews with and submitted written questions to witnesses regarding circumstances surrounding the June 9, 2016, Trump Tower meeting. 

 

The following witnesses were interviewed for this portion of the committee’s investigation:

 

Glenn Simpson     (interviewed August 22, 2017)

·        Transcript

·        Exhibits

 

Subsequent letters

·        ClarificationRequest      (sent January 11, 2018)

·        Response      (received January 18, 2018)

 

Donald J. Trump, Jr.     (interviewed September 7, 2017)

·        Transcript

·        Exhibits

 

Irakly “Ike” Kaveladze     (interviewed November 3, 2017)

·        Transcript

·        Exhibits

 

Supplemental Interview     (interviewed March 23, 2018)

·        Transcript

 

Anatoli Samochornov     (interviewed November 8, 2017)

·        Transcript

·        Exhibits

 

Rinat Akhmetshin     (interviewed November 14, 2017)

·        Transcript

·        Exhibits

 

Robert Goldstone     (interviewed December 15, 2017)          

·        Transcript

·        Exhibits

 

Supplemental Interview     (interviewed March 29, 2018)

·        Transcript

·        Exhibits

 

 

The following witnesses declined to be interviewed by the committee, but submitted material relevant to the investigation:

 

Jared Kushner     (material received July 24, 2017)

·        Prepared statement to congressional committees

 

Paul Manafort     (material received July 25, 2017)

·        Notes from June 9, 2016, meeting

 

 

The following witness provided responses to written questions from the committee

 

Natalia Veselnitskaya     (material received November 20, 2017)

·        Written responses to committee questions

·        Exhibits

[sheeeit 129]

15 hours ago, TahoeHorn said:

I live in a strange universe with few people.  My lib friends all think Trump is guilty of more than a mafia don and my GOP friends think it's all a witch hunt.  Where are the people who think it looks suspicious and needs investigation but nothing much about Trump has been proven.  Hell, Mueller hasn't said much anything at all.  He's just filed some indictments.  None on Trump.  But there's lots and lots of smoke.

 

Everybody I meet is triplehorn or sheeit.  No TahoeHorns.

Whatever.  Never once have i suggested that an investigation was not appropriate.  I stated many times that I supported Mueller's appointment and will accept whatever he finds.  I have said that I would support impeachment if any of the following: 1) Collusion/conspiracy with russia 2) Firing mueller without a very good reason and only if a competent replacement was put in charge 3) money laundering 4) tax fraud etc.  Just because I do not believe those things happened does not mean that they shouldn't be investigated.

People post all kinds of speculation every day.  Wild ass speculation.  Just because I find holes in some of that speculation and present another side to it doesnt mean i am some trumpkin.  I have my own theory on what  has happened and, of course, I am going to argue for my opinion.  Isnt that what this is supposed to be for?

I am also not going to hide from my opinions.  Opinions are not worth anything if they are not shared.  

[Gen. Applewhite 227]

I'm curious as to who sent the email on page 81 of the Ike Kaveladze exhibits.

 

[jimmyjazz 46228]

Well, that's rich.  "I will support impeachment because it's convenient for me to say so, and even do so should it occur, because I know there is no way in hell the Senate would ever follow through".

You're a real patriot.

[Tuco 5084]

7 minutes ago, Gen. Applewhite said:

I'm curious as to who sent the email on page 81 of the Ike Kaveladze exhibits.

 

 

George Kaveladze, Ike's son. 

[Gen. Applewhite 227]

14 minutes ago, Tuco said:

George Kaveladze, Ike's son. 

I see your explanation in the other thread. I can't decide if I need to follow this more closely or take a step back.

[sheeeit 129]

I suggest you guys read Nataliya's testimony specifically and the supporting statements.  You guys keep continually being duped by the media.  There is nothing there at all.  Never was.  

Based on Goldstone's email to Trump Jr the meeting was certainly worth investigating.  But, like everything else so far, when it is actually vetted there is just nothing there.  The media spins it all kinds of ways to keep the public frothing.  You guys froth.

[Chuckie Finster 22753]

11 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

I suggest you guys read Nataliya's testimony specifically and the supporting statements.  You guys keep continually being duped by the media.  There is nothing there at all.  Never was.  

Based on Goldstone's email to Trump Jr the meeting was certainly worth investigating.  But, like everything else so far, when it is actually vetted there is just nothing there.  The media spins it all kinds of ways to keep the public frothing.  You guys froth.

lol

[kevwun 15930]

Don Jr. is going to get popped for lying to the Senate committee if Mueller can prove that the meeting was not about adoptions.

[Stros 153]

There's still no 'there'  there.

[triplehorn 2664]

getting those involved in an investigation on the same page?  What's the textbook legal term for that?

 

[triplehorn 2664]

Identifying the faces of these people in pics taken at a very significant time back in Dec '16 helps tie it together.

Another name to keep an eye on:  Eli Miller 

hint:  Eli Miller was the Trump Campaign’s Chief Financial Officer and he coordinated “campaign finance in conjunction with the RNC”.

click for the tidy little twit thread:

 

Edited May 16, 2018 by triplehorn

[Chooky 13319]

sheeeit'd

[kevwun 15930]

I'm about half way through Jr.'s testimony.  He really should see a doctor about his memory.  It's very poor and I'm worried he may have early onset dementia. Or he could have selective amnesia about incriminating conversations.  Not sure which is more likely.

Edited May 16, 2018 by kevwun

[Jack Burton 35]

2 hours ago, sheeeit said:

Whatever.  Never once have i suggested that an investigation was not appropriate.  I stated many times that I supported Mueller's appointment and will accept whatever he finds.  I have said that I would support impeachment if any of the following: 1) Collusion/conspiracy with russia 2) Firing mueller without a very good reason and only if a competent replacement was put in charge 3) money laundering 4) tax fraud etc.  Just because I do not believe those things happened does not mean that they shouldn't be investigated.

People post all kinds of speculation every day.  Wild ass speculation.  Just because I find holes in some of that speculation and present another side to it doesnt mean i am some trumpkin.  I have my own theory on what  has happened and, of course, I am going to argue for my opinion.  Isnt that what this is supposed to be for?

I am also not going to hide from my opinions.  Opinions are not worth anything if they are not shared.  

How about Obstruction of Justice?

[TahoeHorn 107]

Do you have any thoughts on when Mueller should not release explosive info?

I think it would be terribly bad form to release explosive info between Sept 1 and Election Day.  I think he'll follow good form.

[Gil Bang 26049]

she should completely ignore the election season.  He should release info when he's damn good and ready, regardless of when it falls on the calendar.

[hobbes2702 13078]

5 minutes ago, TahoeHorn said:

Do you have any thoughts on when Mueller should not release explosive info?

I think it would be terribly bad form to release explosive info between Sept 1 and Election Day.  I think he'll follow good form.

Who fucking cares? When his report is ready he should release it. If it fucks your shitty party then so be it. Don’t get into bed with traitors seems like a lesson that should be learned.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11821]

Those Manafort notes linked above are pretty interesting.

[sheeeit 129]

How about a couple of you read the pages?  Jr, Rinat, nataliya, Kushner, the interpreter, Ike they all tell the exact same story.  This whole episode was nothing.  Yet it has consumed you guys for a year or more.

Do any of you have any objectivity left at all?  Can anyone read these transcripts and still believe that anything illegal/nefarious/conspirational/immoral/unethical or anything like that happened at this meeting?  It is ridiculous.

It is also kind of funny how the russians involved all talk about how the media stories about this and them are total fabrications.

Can any of you just admit that the media played you in this particular case?  

[Chuckie Finster 22753]

25 minutes ago, TahoeHorn said:

Do you have any thoughts on when Mueller should not release explosive info?

I think it would be terribly bad form to release explosive info between Sept 1 and Election Day.  I think he'll follow good form.

LOL, who gives a fuck?

If he truly has "explosive" info, then it should be out there whenever it's goddamn ready.  Arguing otherwise is putting party over country.

[Chuckie Finster 22753]

3 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

How about a couple of you read the pages?  Jr, Rinat, nataliya, Kushner, the interpreter, Ike they all tell the exact same story.  This whole episode was nothing.  Yet it has consumed you guys for a year or more.

Do any of you have any objectivity left at all?  Can anyone read these transcripts and still believe that anything illegal/nefarious/conspirational/immoral/unethical or anything like that happened at this meeting?  It is ridiculous.

It is also kind of funny how the russians involved all talk about how the media stories about this and them are total fabrications.

Can any of you just admit that the media played you in this particular case?  

lol

[SubliminalHorn 6811]

29 minutes ago, TahoeHorn said:

Do you have any thoughts on when Mueller should not release explosive info?

I think it would be terribly bad form to release explosive info between Sept 1 and Election Day.  I think he'll follow good form.

I don’t give a fuck if it’s released 11/1. You support a party of traitors and pieces of shit. Your treacherous party is going down. You’ll have to find another meeting full of fat fuck alabamans to take donuts to. 

[sheeeit 129]

29 minutes ago, Jack Burton said:

How about Obstruction of Justice?

Sure.  That would be a major problem.  But asking Comey to go easy on Flynn and firing Comey is not enough imo.  Rosenstein recommended Comey be fired and had discussions about the firing with Sessions well before Trump ever met with Comey.

If there is evidence that trump fired comey and told sessions or rosenstein to stop the investigation then of course that would be obstruction.  But trump fired comey and then rosenstein immediately announced the Mueller hiring.

 

[sheeeit 129]

35 minutes ago, TahoeHorn said:

Do you have any thoughts on when Mueller should not release explosive info?

I think it would be terribly bad form to release explosive info between Sept 1 and Election Day.  I think he'll follow good form.

If this was directed at me, I think he should release the reports when they are finished.  Bad or good, they should influence the political landscape.  

[retread 2951]

Rs on HPSIC = traitors

 

[Tyler Durden 132]

16 hours ago, Bevo VIII said:

Tahoe is only fair and balanced when it’s his party. If the same shit was going on with a democratic president, House, and senate he’d be going ape shit.

 

 

Also another good time to say that Tahoe is an institutional racist piece of shit.

 

Tahoe is closer to the blue wall of silence under any scenario than he is fair and balanced.  

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13588]

18 minutes ago, retread said:

Rs on HPSIC = traitors

 

Well, as long as Trump doesn't do something completely idiotic like publically state his desire to make the Russia investigation go away factored into his decision to fire Comey, there's no "there" there. You're not going to dupe me, MSM!

[retread 2951]

I'm sure that there are some in the IC who are working to thwart Russian meddling in this year's election, but what have we really done to address this problem. How do attack a problem if you won't publicly admit that it exists?

Seems like the State Dept. had a wad of cash to spend on preventative measures, and, as of March, they hadn't spent a dime of it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/04/world/europe/state-department-russia-global-engagement-center.html

Edited May 16, 2018 by retread

[Tuco 5084]

1 hour ago, sheeeit said:

How about a couple of you read the pages?  Jr, Rinat, nataliya, Kushner, the interpreter, Ike they all tell the exact same story.  This whole episode was nothing.  Yet it has consumed you guys for a year or more.

 

You've read all of their transcripts?  Rinat's is like 248 pages (granted, heavily spaced).  I must say, that's impressive.

And, yeah, that mother fucker is lying through his teeth. 

[hobbes2702 13078]

8 minutes ago, retread said:

I'm sure that there are some in the IC who are working to thwart Russian meddling in this year's election, but what have we really done to address this problem. How do attack a problem if you won't publicly admit that it exists?

Seems like the State Dept. had a wad of cash to spend on preventative measures, and, as of March, they hadn't spent a dime of it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/04/world/europe/state-department-russia-global-engagement-center.html

Because the dotard doesn’t want to. I dunno why some people still can’t figure this out. He’s a wannabe authoritarian and isn’t going to act to prevent attacks on our electoral process. He cares about money and power. Protecting elections isn’t his concern. Staying in power is

[Tuco 5084]

In Rinat's testimony he mentions an old ambassador to the USSR (under Reagan) who was at a meal with him, Veselnitskaya, Simpson, a few others a couple of days after the Trump Tower meeting, but he couldn't remember the name.  My guess is he is actually talking about Richard Burt who served under Reagan in Germany, but worked on the arms negotiations.  (The Reagan-era ambassadors to the USSR have both been dead for a while.) Burt made the news a while ago in that he was lobbying for a Russian energy company (or affiliate) and had attended dinners with Sessions.  So, just more adoptions stuff.  

[JimmyJames 12271]

3 hours ago, sheeeit said:

I suggest you guys read Nataliya's testimony specifically and the supporting statements.  You guys keep continually being duped by the media.  There is nothing there at all.  Never was.  

Based on Goldstone's email to Trump Jr the meeting was certainly worth investigating.  But, like everything else so far, when it is actually vetted there is just nothing there.  The media spins it all kinds of ways to keep the public frothing.  You guys froth.

That isn’t “testimony “ you dupe. Those are written answers to written questions. Putin himself probably edited and approved the answers before they were sent back. Stop being stupid. 

[sheeeit 129]

5 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

That isn’t “testimony “ you dupe. Those are written answers to written questions. Putin himself probably edited and approved the answers before they were sent back. Stop being stupid. 

Well considering that the US Senate titled the document:

"Testimony of NATALIA VESELNITSKAYA Before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary"

You can take it up with those dupes.  

[kevwun 15930]

If you had actually read it, you would have realized they were written answers by the end of the 1st page.  Back to ignoring your concerns.

Edited May 16, 2018 by kevwun

[sheeeit 129]

1 minute ago, kevwun said:

If you had actually read it, you would have realized they were written answers by the end of the 1st page.

Uh...where did I ever indicate it wasnt written answers?  I did read it.  I suppose the next line from you dorks is that somehow the bumbling idiot trumps got every single person at the meeting, including an interpreter, to all make up the same lie and stick to it through multiple interviews.

[Anastasis 23492]

Come on guys.  Testimony can be either written or oral. I'll let one of the lawyers chime on whether this particular documents achieves the requirements of written testimony since I am not qualified to make that determination. 

[jimmyjazz 46228]

26 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

Well considering that the US Senate titled the document:

"Testimony of NATALIA VESELNITSKAYA Before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary"

You can take it up with those dupes.  

I would have thought an expert on big deals and negotiations would be a little more thorough.  Funny how that works.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

perhaps i'm naive, but i think trump is going to jail.

[JimmyJames 12271]

If someone writes me a letter asking me some questions, and I write a letter back answering them. In no way would that ever be considered “testimony “ in any legitimate court. I don’t care what the title of the document says, it’s a document written by Russian agents and lawyers that putin approved and that the  Russian lawyer probably glanced over at some point in time. It’s also hilariously over the top false, which is why our resident troll likes it. 

[TahoeHorn 107]

5 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

perhaps i'm naive, but i think trump is going to jail.

Perhaps you're pulling our leg.

[Brisketexan 105444]

I would have thought an expert on big deals and negotiations would be a little more thorough.  Funny how that works.

Its testimony given under oath.

 

Now, written, pre-packaged testimony can absolutely be coordinated with your other buddies. It is NOT the product of real cross-examination.

 

And...here’s the big thing: testimony does not PROVE anything. It is evidence, which a finder of fact can decide is credible or bullshit. Which is considered in light of other evidence.

 

For example, one of these folks may testify “I wasn’t at Trump Tower that day.” To Sheeit and Trumpkins, that PROVES that she wasn’t there. But...there’s a photo of her in the Trump Tower lobby that day. So, as the finder of fact, tell me: was she there, or not? She says no, the photo says yes.

 

If you believe the photo, then you necessarily conclude that she was lying. This happens. It happens a lot. Like, all the time. Folks lie, not knowing that there’s other evidence out there that will bust them.

 

So, what we know is that several folks who have a mutual interest in explaining away the meeting tried to do so via written statements under oath that have not been subjected to cross-examination or counter-evidence from objective/third party sources. In short, we know what these people have said. That’s it.

[triplehorn 2664]

happy wednesday:

1)  Senate intelligence panel agrees with US intel agencies that Russia intervened in 2016 election to help Trump.

2)  Documents suggest Moscow funneled money to Trump through the NRA, according to the judiciary committee.

[Brian Fantana 6691]

Tahoe already forgot about it. Nothing has been shown to him, you see.

[texas08 1599]

Fuck the NRA, traitors.

[TwiceHorn 31562]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Its testimony given under oath.

 

Now, written, pre-packaged testimony can absolutely be coordinated with your other buddies. It is NOT the product of real cross-examination.

 

And...here’s the big thing: testimony does not PROVE anything. It is evidence, which a finder of fact can decide is credible or bullshit. Which is considered in light of other evidence.

 

For example, one of these folks may testify “I wasn’t at Trump Tower that day.” To Sheeit and Trumpkins, that PROVES that she wasn’t there. But...there’s a photo of her in the Trump Tower lobby that day. So, as the finder of fact, tell me: was she there, or not? She says no, the photo says yes.

 

If you believe the photo, then you necessarily conclude that she was lying. This happens. It happens a lot. Like, all the time. Folks lie, not knowing that there’s other evidence out there that will bust them.

 

So, what we know is that several folks who have a mutual interest in explaining away the meeting tried to do so via written statements under oath that have not been subjected to cross-examination or counter-evidence from objective/third party sources. In short, we know what these people have said. That’s it.

And the flip-side of it is that it's often harder to back away from written answers than oral testimony, so you have to be accurate with it in most instances.  Maybe not candid, but accurate.

[Jack Burton 35]

7 minutes ago, Purgatory County said:

How could Hillary be the crooked crooked one??

What she'd do again? Delete two emails?! What does that even mean!!

You wanna not get hacked by Russian cyber terrorists?? Here's what you do. You delete suspicious emails. That's what you do!

Gmail auto deletes emails. lock google up!! Crooked crooked GOOGLE!

I don't understand that two email shit. It's not like she's being bribed by a Chinese phone company or nothing. Which = Trump's latest crime, in a list of thousands.

I betya Hillary NEVER piss party fucked a gaggle of russian porn starlets. I seriously seriously SERIOUSLY doubt it. 

This account sucks. Whoever is doing it, stop.

[Biff Tannen 45750]

A bit over the top