The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Brisketexan 105093]

11 minutes ago, Jack Burton said:

This account sucks. Whoever is doing it, stop.

 

3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

A bit over the top

Agreed on both counts.  It's not amusing or clever, just annoying.  Stop.

[wildcat09 29349]

24 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.

We also know that they were coordinating their story in June 2017:

 

[Brisketexan 105093]

Just now, Purgatory County said:

I am not your huckleberry.

You're not even my dingleberry.

Seriously, schtick is fine....if it's amusing and/or clever.  Yours is neither.  It's just an annoyance.  You tried, good for you -- but it didn't work. Back to the drawing board.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Sure. It's just that you do it so poorly. 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Mojo Hand

[Brisketexan 105093]

Just now, Purgatory County said:

It's a free (Russian Mafia run) country, and I can do what I want (anonymously).

Nobody says you can't.

But everybody says you shouldn't.

Take the hint -- and the direct instructions -- and take a break.

[Brisketexan 105093]

Just now, Purgatory County said:

Yeah but here is the fucking point. I AM NOT DOING SHTICK.

I'm literally just transcribing present day reality .

Then keep a diary.

This is going to be my last response wasting time by reading or responding to anything you write.  Seriously, you and I are generally in alignment on our view of Trump, and I find your posts nothing better than annoying.  It ain't about what you do.  It's that you do it so crappily.

And, sayonara -- blocking time.

[Hank Kingsley 20914]

PC is the dude that walks in during the last 5 minutes of a screening of Gigli, sits down and watches for ten seconds, stands up and tells everyone how shitty the movie is, and then starts performing a Dane Cook set he memorized. 

[Ten Bears 2481]

He's the Lonestarman of this board.

Except Lonestarman's gibberish was entertaining.

[Hornius Emeritus 12457]

32 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Then keep a diary.

This is going to be my last response wasting time by reading or responding to anything you write.  Seriously, you and I are generally in alignment on our view of Trump, and I find your posts nothing better than annoying.  It ain't about what you do.  It's that you do it so crappily.

And, sayonara -- blocking time.

 

Already have him on ignore. Thought I had blocked mentions of him, too, but apparently not.

Jason Pells impression of himself doing Purg is weak.  

 

[Tuco 5076]

A couple of discrepancies between Ike and Rinat:

Rinat says that he met the rest of the Russian team at lunch.  Ike says they first met 15 minutes prior to the meeting, outside of Trump Towers.  Rinat claims he was first invited to the meeting at that lunch, which would be difficult if he wasn't there.  Veselnitskaya had sent an email at 9:34 that morning saying Rinat had already signed an NDA which would imply that he was invited prior to the lunch. 

Contrary to media reports, Rinat states he had never met Manafort prior to the meeting, nor claimed that he had. Ike said as the meeting was beginning, Rinat walked up to Manafort and indicated they had met at some function in Washington previously.  Manafort was non-responsive to that greeting.   

 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Tuco

[Ted Lange 16084]

6 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.

Are we talking about the lady who has since admitted to lying to Congress about her connections to the Kremlin?

Edited May 16, 2018 by Ted Lange

[Texas73 420]

4 hours 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?  

Simply, they all lied.

And, the FBI should have been notified immediately that a foreign entity, Russia, is contacting us (the Republicans) offering information to impact the election. Treasonous behavior.

[Tuco 5076]

In Ike's transcript, there is some interesting stuff about Preet, based on email exchanged between Ike and Natalia.  It was after Trump had met with Preet and asked him to stay:

Page 142:

Q: On November 30th of this document, it looks like Ms. Veselnitskaya emailed you about President-elect Trump meeting with Preet Bharara.  Could you please translate the message that begins at 17:20 on November 30th?

A. "Maybe that's the reason.  Is that a bad sign?"

Q: And then it looks like you responded at 17:22?

A: "I don't think it's a bad sign." At that point I have no idea who Preet Bhara is. "He left him"-

Q: I'm sorry.  That's Natalia's response.

A: "He left him.  How is that possible?" Continue?

Q: Yes, please.

A. "Or maybe just a game.  Maybe he wants to control him that way, who to crush or who not. Maybe."

....

 

But, sure, Veselnitskaya didn't think there would be any connection between Donald Trump and Preet's case against her client.  Never crossed her fucking mind.

 

 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Tuco

[hobbes2702 13032]

3 hours ago, sheeeit said:

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.

No way they would do that right? Cuz that makes it conspiracy. They wouldn’t conspire to defraud the United States would they?

You’re a fucking troll who lacks the honesty and intelligence to have a rational discussion. Go back to being concerned with how the Dotard’s dick tastes and let three adults have a conversation.

[shnsajax 3591]

So according to Giuliani, Mueller's team as told Trump's team that they can not indict a sitting President. Not that I believe anything Rudy has to say. And if true, it would fun to test that thought in court, based on actions taken before becoming President that involve conspiracy to become President.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/16/politics/rudy-giuliani-robert-mueller-indictment/index.html

[Pods 7552]

10 minutes ago, shnsajax said:

So according to Giuliani, Mueller's team as told Trump's team that they can not indict a sitting President. Not that I believe anything Rudy has to say. And if true, it would fun to test that thought in court, based on actions taken before becoming President that involve conspiracy to become President.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/16/politics/rudy-giuliani-robert-mueller-indictment/index.html

He can indict him, there are avenues he can use, but it would mean an elaborate court case that plays right into Trump's hands by playing things out. Mueller wants to keep things under wraps until he's done with his investigation, then release everything at once and scoop up the cockroaches as they scurry. 

The evidence is going to be odiferous and there's going to be an Indiana Jones warehouse full of it. It's damning if dropped at once, which is why Trump friendly sources have constantly leaked their favorable version out to try to get in front of it. They'll also commonly lie about some of the details when they leak it. That way the media has to retract part of the story and it loses it's impact. This frequently occurs when it would be an impeachable event in any other administration. It's swamped by the next Trump leak later. 

This causes Trump scandal fatigue. This technique is highly effective. It desensitizes even those of us following this relatively closely. It's difficult to stay vigilant for long stretches. Trump is counting on it. It's up to the American people to not let it work. 

Stay pissed my friends.  

[Jhawk 1075]

First off, it’s Giuliani so take it with a grain of salt.

But i am interested in How would that play out? Are you suggesting someone would file a suit against the DOJ to try and force them to indict trump? How would someone do that without evidence proving trump needed to be indicted? A judge would probably ask for evidence and because it is secret then they wouldn’t be able to present anything for their case which would probably not get far.

It would seem that mueller would have to be the one to file the suit to allow him to indict the president.  If he has the evidence to do that and he is bullish enough to try and get trump in court then his evidence is probably overwhelming. In that case presenting it to congress would probably be enough to move republicans to impeach. That would be a far more prudent move, especially if the house and senate are as tightly contested as they appear to be This year. Convincing evidence would definitely flip some repubs in the house and senate. Remember that there are still plenty of never trump people in the Republican Party. 

[Jhawk 1075]

5 minutes ago, Pods said:

He can indict him, there are avenues he can use, but it would mean an elaborate court case that plays right into Trump's hands by playing things out. Mueller wants to keep things under wraps until he's done with his investigation, then release everything at once and scoop up the cockroaches as they scurry. 

The evidence is going to be odiferous and there's going to be an Indiana Jones warehouse full of it. It's damning if dropped at once, which is why Trump friendly sources have constantly leaked their favorable version out to try to get in front of it. They'll also commonly lie about some of the details when they leak it. That way the media has to retract part of the story and it loses it's impact. This frequently occurs when it would be an impeachable event in any other administration. It's swamped by the next Trump leak later. 

This causes Trump scandal fatigue. This technique is highly effective. It desensitizes even those of us following this relatively closely. It's difficult to stay vigilant for long stretches. Trump is counting on it. It's up to the American people to not let it work. 

Stay pissed my friends.  

Better be careful with all that speculation. Hugo might come in here and tell you to wait and let things play out. 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Jhawk

[Pods 7552]

9 minutes ago, Jhawk said:

Better be careful with all that speculation. Hugo might come in here and tell you to wait and let things play out. 

Hugo has consistently been saying almost the exact same thing I just did. It's pretty clearly the consensus view of "the Left" posters on here. 

 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Pods

[Pods 7552]

It's up to Congress to impeach him. Failing that, it's up to the voters to get him out in 2020. Failing that, charges for anything where the statute hasn't expired can then be brought in January 2025. 

Trump is stuck in the Julius Caesar quandary. Once he's out, he can be prosecuted, which is why he will never step down willingly. He'd be stepping into a jail cell. 

Before you say that I'm talking crazy, read what I just posted and think it through critically. Trump is clearly going to have massive criminal liabilities and they will also be for state crimes.

He can't be pardoned for state crimes and the state AG's will pursue him when they can. Trump does not want to spend the rest of his life in Rykers, or even in court arguing about it. The day he steps down, he will be served with papers and or arrested if he steps foot in Maryland, VA, NY and possibly others. 

He's already facing the dictator's dilemma. He's also aware of it. He's made several references now to staying past eight years. Each of them 'jokes'.

Spoiler alert - Trump NEVER makes jokes unless they are at someone's expense. That joke is at the American people and the Constitution's expense. 

Orange Julius

Edited May 16, 2018 by Pods

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 hour ago, Ted Lange said:

Are we talking about the lady who has since admitted to lying to Congress about her connections to the Kremlin?

Yes but according to sheeit we should take her written answers sent from somewhere safely in Russia as the gospel truth about what happened at that meeting. Those answers aren’t fit to be used as toilet paper. They are that worthless. Unless you apply the opposite principal and believe as true the opposite of everything she says. Then they have some value. 

[Pods 7552]

4 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Yes but according to sheeit we should take her written answers sent from somewhere safely in Russia as the gospel truth about what happened at that meeting. Those answers aren’t fit to be used as toilet paper. They are that worthless. Unless you apply the opposite principal and believe as true the opposite of everything she says. Then they have some value. 

Yes, but he read every single word of them within a few hours of them being released. The same guy who always has to ask questions about everything else, is suddenly devoting hours to voraciously speed reading these documents.

It seems like such a miraculous improvement. I guess sheeit had a head injury that is clearing up or something.

Congrats Dude! 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Pods

[FUBAR 4]

Can we just stick to High Crimes and Misdemeanors and get on with it?  

There’s a country to run here  I wish I was a lawyer on a Special Counsel gig.  Unlimited license to bill with little to no oversight or accountability (see Ken Starr, etc).  You are judged by the indictments you produce - not whether there were actual crimes (that mean anything) committed.

Everybody is probably guilty of something here, but at the end of the day, This is all bread and circus for the media and ratings.  Trump and Co., the DOJ and FBI all have their issues and there are plenty of bad actors on both sides.  

Burn ‘em all.  

[Jhawk 1075]

11 minutes ago, Pods said:

Hugo has consistently been saying almost the exact same thing I just did. It's pretty clearly the consensus view of "the Left" posters on here. 

 

You must not be reading other threads closely.  I think it was either the iran or korea thread where Hugo warns everyone about speculation.  It was comical because of his many threads based on his opinion and his speculation.  Was busting your balls a little there.

8 minutes ago, Pods said:

It's up to Congress to impeach him. Failing that, it's up to the voters to get him out in 2020. Failing that, charges for anything where the statute hasn't expired can then be brought in January 2025. 

Trump is stuck in the Julius Caesar quandary. Once he's out, he can be prosecuted, which is why he will never step down willingly. He'd be stepping into a jail cell. 

Before you say that I'm talking crazy, read what I just posted and think it through critically. Trump is clearly going to have massive criminal liabilities and they will also be for state crimes.

He can't be pardoned for state crimes and the state AG's will pursue him when they can. The day he steps down, he will be served with papers and or arrested if he steps foot in Maryland, VA, NY and possibly others. 

He's already facing the dictator's dilemma. 

Orange Julius

If there are serious crimes that have been committed by Trump then he will go down.  I don't have any doubt about that and I believe he should.  If there are serious crimes then there are more than enough people in the republican party that are more than willing to vote for impeachment and removal from office.  If Rudy is not lying about indicting the president then mueller will have to go through congress (which is what we want him to do anyway to bring even more legitimacy to any claims that might be made).  If the evidence isn't there for congress to move then I wouldn't count on the voters to be the last line of defense. 

To address your Caesar comment, the simplest answer is often the right one.  If he gets reelected then he can resign on the last day in office and have Pence (or whoever his VP is) pardon him from any potential crimes he might possibly be exposed to.  However, that likely won't be needed because regardless of any crimes being committed, our elected leaders are not going to start going after anyone AFTER they have held office (just like Trump was never going to indict hillary and obama was never going to go after bush and clinton was never going to go to court for perjury).  It just isn't going to happen, just like proving obama is kenyan and all of his laws automatically being repealed was never going to happen.  That is entering the arena of de-legitimizing the entire election and service foundation and if there is one thing that protects the politicians it is this foundation that they have built to put themselves above the law.  That is asking politicians to cut off their own arm and inviting accountability within their ranks.  That will never happen.

[lemonlime 5503]

1 minute ago, FUBAR said:

 

Everybody is probably guilty of something here, but at the end of the day, This is all bread and circus for the media and ratings.  Trump and Co., the DOJ and FBI all have their issues and there are plenty of bad actors on both sides.  

 

I can't recall all those times I accidentally laundered over $ 30 million.

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3868]

4 minutes ago, FUBAR said:

There’s a country to run here  I wish I was a lawyer on a Special Counsel gig.  Unlimited license to bill with little to no oversight or accountability (see Ken Starr, etc).  You are judged by the indictments you produce - not whether there were actual crimes (that mean anything) committed.

Everybody is probably guilty of something here, but at the end of the day, This is all bread and circus for the media and ratings.  Trump and Co., the DOJ and FBI all have their issues and there are plenty of bad actors on both sides.  

Burn ‘em all.  

Only one of those is trying to destroy our system of checks and balances.

Edited May 16, 2018 by ShaggyBevo RIP

[Pods 7552]

5 minutes ago, Jhawk said:

You must not be reading other threads closely.  I think it was either the iran or korea thread where Hugo warns everyone about speculation.  It was comical because of his many threads based on his opinion and his speculation.  Was busting your balls a little there.

That's exactly my point, there is almost zero speculation in what I posted. It's based on media reports and what other prosecutors and FBI agents do. The only weird thing about this investigation is the suspect.  

5 minutes ago, Jhawk said:

To address your Caesar comment, the simplest answer is often the right one.  If he gets reelected then he can resign on the last day in office and have Pence (or whoever his VP is) pardon him from any potential crimes he might possibly be exposed to.  However, that likely won't be needed because regardless of any crimes being committed, our elected leaders are not going to start going after anyone AFTER they have held office (just like Trump was never going to indict hillary and obama was never going to go after bush and clinton was never going to go to court for perjury).  It just isn't going to happen, just like proving obama is kenyan and all of his laws automatically being repealed was never going to happen.  That is entering the arena of de-legitimizing the entire election and service foundation and if there is one thing that protects the politicians it is this foundation that they have built to put themselves above the law.  That is asking politicians to cut off their own arm and inviting accountability within their ranks.  That will never happen.

For Federal crimes. State AG's are already after him and would be even more so if he skates on the Federal crimes. He will be stepping out of the White House into a state AG investigation. 

Spending time in Rykers is a considerably worse option than any Federal prison. 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Pods

[Jhawk 1075]

1 minute ago, Pods said:

For Federal crimes. State AG's are already after him and would be even more so if he skates on the Federal crimes. He will be stepping out of the White House into a state AG investigation. 

Spending time in Rykers is a considerably worse option than any Federal prison. 

Dude... Read what you wrote.  The president of the united states is going to Rykers.  If what you are saying to ridiculous then it probably won't happen.  In your heart of hearts, do you actually think that the former president will go to jail at a pound the ass prison? 

[Pods 7552]

8 minutes ago, Jhawk said:

Dude... Read what you wrote.  The president of the united states is going to Rykers.  If what you are saying to ridiculous then it probably won't happen.  In your heart of hearts, do you actually think that the former president will go to jail at a pound the ass prison? 

Not while he is President, no.

Afterwards, I don't know what NY is going to do and what evidence they have. I don't know what crimes they can bring. Neither do you. Neither does Trump. There is zero doubt he is guilty. The only questions are 'What can they prove?' and 'what are the Statute of Limitations?'. 

I don't know the answers to those questions either. Neither do you. Neither does Trump. The only one any of us can answer is the Statute of Limitations question. 

Our opinions don't matter. Trump's does. If he doesn't know, he has to assume worst case on what they can prove. 

If Trump skates on Federal charges due to a last minute Pence pardon, I think the states will bring charges if they can bring and successfully prosecute significant, multiple felony charges. It's the entire point of the Feds working with the state investigators, which they are currently doing. 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Pods

[Jhawk 1075]

2 minutes ago, Pods said:

Not while he is President, no.

Afterwards, I don't know what NY is going to do and what evidence they have. I don't know what crimes they can bring. Neither do you. Neither does Trump.

If Trump skates on Federal charges due to Pence pardon, I think the states will bring charges if they can. 

But you said in your post that state AG's are already after him and that he would be stepping out of the white house and into a state AG investigation. You said that "The day he steps down, he will be served with papers and or arrested if he steps foot in Maryland, VA, NY and possibly others."

You were so sure just minutes ago.  Why the about face of "I think".  You wrote it, step up and own it.  You believe that trump is going to go to Rykers because there is already investigations started even though you have zero knowledge of any investigation or evidence.  You even admit that you don't know what crimes are there.  You mean to tell us that you've followed this thing closely enough to state without a doubt that you know "He'd be stepping into a jail cell" the second he leaves office and that "Trump is clearly going to have massive criminal liabilities" but you can't tell us what they are, what they might be, what AG is currently investigating him, or what evidence has shown there to be "massive criminal liabilities?"

So what is it?  What do you know of?  Are you being intellectually dishonest in your caesar post or in the last 2 or 3 posts?  

[RayDog 682]

I do not buy the automatic Pence pardon argument. Pence wants to win a presidential election and pardoning Trump would make him unelectable in much the same way it was with Ford.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

2 minutes ago, RayDog said:

I do not buy the automatic Pence pardon argument. Pence wants to win a presidential election and pardoning Trump would make him unelectable in much the same way it was with Ford.

Pence can’t win UNLESS he pardons Trump.

all about that base.

[Jhawk 1075]

1 minute ago, RayDog said:

I do not buy the automatic Pence pardon argument. Pence wants to win a presidential election and pardoning Trump would make him unelectable in much the same way it was with Ford.

I was just firing back a very simple solution to a completely asinine post.  The point is, it won't ever get to that point.  If there is a major crime that is going to put Trump in jail then you bet your ass he isn't going to complete his term.  That would completely destroy the office of the president, not just trump.  The elected elite need us to believe that the office of the president is what directs the country.  It keeps us distracted while they collectively fleece the citizenry.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13580]

...plus Pence is getting busted is getting busted in a bath house scandal eventually. 

[TahoeHorn 107]

I come to this site to be amused, and I'm not disappointed.

[Pods 7552]

Jesus dude, take a lap around the house and chill the fuck out. I haven't changed my position a bit. You need to adjust your reading comprehension and stop trying to assume things people didn't write. 

I'll type it out for you more clearly below. 

30 minutes ago, Pods said:

That's exactly my point, there is almost zero speculation in what I posted. It's based on media reports and what other prosecutors and FBI agents do. The only weird thing about this investigation is the suspect.  

For Federal crimes. State AG's are already after him and would be even more so if he skates on the Federal crimes. He will be stepping out of the White House into a state AG investigation. 

Spending time in Rykers is a considerably worse option than any Federal prison. 

Pence can pardon him for Federal crimes, but not for state ones. Several state AG's are currently pursuing Trump for multiple felony violations of state law. You can include at least New York, Virginia, Maryland and I believe CA to the this list. There will likely be others joining that list. 

Trump cannot be prosecuted for state crimes while he is President. He is criminally liable for his crimes if he is not President. The only thing protecting him is the office. He cannot be pardoned for state crimes. 

Trump is currently under criminal investigation. The day Trump steps down, he will almost still certainly be stepping down into multiple criminal investigations by state AG's. The current ones are a safe bet, plus there will be more. 

This is the part you jump to me saying they state can prove it, but I didn't say that.

Trump knows he is guilty, but not what they can prove. He knows they have a lot. He must assume the worst case due to the consequences. The worst case is Rikers, which is zero better than Federal charges and unarguably substantially worse than the worst Federal option. Spending time in Rykers is a considerably worse option than any Federal prison. 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Pods

[Jhawk 1075]

6 minutes ago, RayDog said:

I do not buy the automatic Pence pardon argument. Pence wants to win a presidential election and pardoning Trump would make him unelectable in much the same way it was with Ford.

Sidenote: Do you really think pence wants to be president? I figure he is just cruising into retirement and getting a nice little bump in pay to be the VP.  He gets security for quite some time, better pension, and other benefits by being VP.  His low profile tells me he wants nothing to do with the presidency.  Biden on the other hand was a very prominent figure and you could tell he wanted to be at the top.

[Gil Bang 25933]

1 minute ago, Jhawk said:

Sidenote: Do you really think pence wants to be president? I figure he is just cruising into retirement and getting a nice little bump in pay to be the VP.  He gets security for quite some time, better pension, and other benefits by being VP.  His low profile tells me he wants nothing to do with the presidency.  Biden on the other hand was a very prominent figure and you could tell he wanted to be at the top.

Everybody wants to be POTUS

[Pods 7552]

Pence absolutely wants to be President. Keeping a low profile and obsequiously praising Trump is how he keeps his job. Trump fires anyone that gets too much attention and doesn't immediately kick it back in Trump's direction. 

[Pods 7552]

Holy shit. This seems huge. Could be a few high crimes and misdemeanors involved. 

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/missing-files-motivated-the-leak-of-michael-cohens-financial-records

Edited May 16, 2018 by Pods

[hobbes2702 13032]

1 hour ago, FUBAR said:

Can we just stick to High Crimes and Misdemeanors and get on with it?  

There’s a country to run here  I wish I was a lawyer on a Special Counsel gig.  Unlimited license to bill with little to no oversight or accountability (see Ken Starr, etc).  You are judged by the indictments you produce - not whether there were actual crimes (that mean anything) committed.

Everybody is probably guilty of something here, but at the end of the day, This is all bread and circus for the media and ratings.  Trump and Co., the DOJ and FBI all have their issues and there are plenty of bad actors on both sides.  

Burn ‘em all.  

This is such a stupid post.

[TahoeHorn 107]

24 minutes ago, Pods said:

This seems huge. 

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/missing-files-motivated-the-leak-of-michael-cohens-financial-records

Somebody needs to go to jail.  It will be very interesting to see if the removal of the reports was legal.

[Lurch 5930]

Somebody needs to go to jail.  It will be very interesting to see if the removal of the reports was legal.

It was not. He says he knew as much.

[deech 2273]

20 minutes ago, TahoeHorn said:

Somebody needs to go to jail.  It will be very interesting to see if the removal of the reports was legal.

Jesus fucking Christ - Cohen had someone pull the SARS from Treasury.   It better have been Mueller pulling it for the investigation.  

 Holy fucking shit.  I'm going to guess it's this guy:

Edited May 17, 2018 by deech

[lemonlime 5503]

27 minutes ago, TahoeHorn said:

Somebody needs to go to jail.  It will be very interesting to see if the removal of the reports was legal.

It wasn't.  But I give it minutes to hours till the GOP start quoting Dershowitz or Giuliani saying that Trump as head of the executive branch has authority to remove whatever documents belonging to executive branch agencies he chooses.  And you and 40% of the country will nod along.

[Pods 7552]

9 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

It wasn't.  But I give it minutes to hours till the GOP start quoting Dershowitz or Giuliani saying that Trump as head of the executive branch has authority to remove whatever documents belonging to executive branch agencies he chooses.  And you and 40% of the country will nod along.

But then Rosenstein and the FBI need to turn over unreacted information on all the investigations, because 'Oversight'. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

The leaker is going to get caught fast, now that he's revealed what searches he ran. 

[kevwun 15773]

Someone has seen them or he wouldn't have known that they were submitted and to search for them.  You can't know something is missing without knowing that it existed in the database or should be in it because it was submitted.  The only way this isn't a smoking cannon is if Mueller had them pulled to protect his investigation.

Edited May 17, 2018 by kevwun

[TahoeHorn 107]

It's very plausible that somebody at the heart of the investigation (in this case Mueller) wanted to investigate the problem confidentially, and had the pull to take it out of a database with 10,000 LEO looking at it who did not need to know about it for their investigations.  I'm sure there is a formal procedure for doing such a thing.  It either happened that way or it didn't (e.g. somebody up to no good did something illegal to protest Trump).  I'll wait for the facts.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

14 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Someone has seen them or he wouldn't have known that they were submitted and to search for them.  You can't know something is missing without knowing that it existed in the database or should be in it because it was submitted.  The only way this isn't a smoking cannon is if Mueller had them pulled to protect his investigation.

Doesn't the article say that he knew of the previous two because they are mentioned in the third, which is still in the system?