The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Pescado_Rojo 19327]

Sheeeeeiiiitttt!!

[Brian Fantana 6654]

10 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

So, just to be clear, you are continuing to go with this angle (and the usual retards are right there with you) that there is existing intel on this that has been out there for over a year now?  Seems unlikely.  Especially considering that the house and senate intel committees, by law, get to see all of that intel and, amazingly, none of them have ever acknowledged it.  Your boy Schiff?  Guy that wrote the rebuttal to Nunes' memo?  Not a word about any of this.  Shocking.  How about Feinstein and Warner and Munchin?  All of them are on the intel committee and none of them have said they have seen any collusion.  The most they will say is that they have think the trump jr meeting was an "attempt" to collude.

So there are only 2 possibilities, 1) the intel agencies have committed crimes by withholding info from the senate and house committees or 2) there is no secret intel that shows collusion and has been out there for over a year.

Go fuck your face with smokey's dick you dissembling, disingenuous bag of cat shit.

[Brian Fantana 6654]

dp

Edited June 22, 2018 by Brian Fantana

[sheeeit 129]

9 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Go fuck your face with smokey's dick you dissembling, disingenuous bag of cat shit.

ROFL.  Inspiring response

[David Dennison 18608]

24 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

So, just to be clear, you are continuing to go with this angle (and the usual retards are right there with you) that there is existing intel on this that has been out there for over a year now?  Seems unlikely.  Especially considering that the house and senate intel committees, by law, get to see all of that intel and, amazingly, none of them have ever acknowledged it.  Your boy Schiff?  Guy that wrote the rebuttal to Nunes' memo?  Not a word about any of this.  Shocking.  How about Feinstein and Warner and Munchin?  All of them are on the intel committee and none of them have said they have seen any collusion.  The most they will say is that they have think the trump jr meeting was an "attempt" to collude.

So there are only 2 possibilities, 1) the intel agencies have committed crimes by withholding info from the senate and house committees or 2) there is no secret intel that shows collusion and has been out there for over a year.

There's loads of evidence of collusion. It's everywhere, starting with the Trump tower meeting and all of the emails about that meeting.

 

[Tuco 5076]

1 hour ago, sheeeit said:

So, just to be clear, you are continuing to go with this angle (and the usual retards are right there with you) that there is existing intel on this that has been out there for over a year now?  Seems unlikely.  Especially considering that the house and senate intel committees, by law, get to see all of that intel and, amazingly, none of them have ever acknowledged it.  Your boy Schiff?  Guy that wrote the rebuttal to Nunes' memo?  Not a word about any of this.  Shocking.  How about Feinstein and Warner and Munchin?  All of them are on the intel committee and none of them have said they have seen any collusion.  The most they will say is that they have think the trump jr meeting was an "attempt" to collude.

So there are only 2 possibilities, 1) the intel agencies have committed crimes by withholding info from the senate and house committees or 2) there is no secret intel that shows collusion and has been out there for over a year.

Wait, your big issue with this is that you think it's impossible to imagine that British intelligence would provide information to US intelligence, and that House/Senate committees wouldn't make it public knowledge?  That's absurd and utterly clownish. 

And going back to the Nunes memo, and the FISA application it selectively pulled from, the idea that British intel were providing US intel with information fits in seamlessly.  The FISA warrant indicates that they didn't think Steele provided information on an article which quoted "Western intel" sources.  They were wrong, but the fact that they thought it could be anyone else than Steele would imply they believed there were other "Western intel" sources which might have provided it. 

[jimmyjazz 45513]

Prepare for sheeeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit to ignore your post and wait a few days before doing an end around.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

[sheeeit 129]

33 minutes ago, Tuco said:

Wait, your big issue with this is that you think it's impossible to imagine that British intelligence would provide information to US intelligence, and that House/Senate committees wouldn't make it public knowledge?  That's absurd and utterly clownish. 

And going back to the Nunes memo, and the FISA application it selectively pulled from, the idea that British intel were providing US intel with information fits in seamlessly.  The FISA warrant indicates that they didn't think Steele provided information on an article which quoted "Western intel" sources.  They were wrong, but the fact that they thought it could be anyone else than Steele would imply they believed there were other "Western intel" sources which might have provided it. 

No.  My issue is that the House (completed) and Senate did their own investigations of the collusion angle.  The members of those intel committees are privy to ALL of the intelligence that is available from the intel community.  That means that Adam Schiff has seen all of the intel compiled from our intel agencies to date.  And yes this would include any intel from the British.  All of it.  So have Nunes (even though retard pods thinks he doesn't have a security clearance) and Gowdy.  They have closed their investigation and have found that there was, essentially, no collusion.  Now I fully realize that these side investigations are pretty worthless in the grand scheme of things.  But the people that conduct them have seen all of the intelligence related to the issue.

But people on here are arguing that there is direct, smoking gun type evidence of collusion provided by foreign govts from as early as 2016.  The only thing that is "absurd and utterly clownish" is that people believe this.  You think it is possible that a guy like Trey Gowdy has been shown foreign intel that shows irrefutable collusion between trump co and the russians and that he just disregarded it and co-authored the House memo with Nunes?  That is absurd and utterly clownish.

[Dolemite 143]

 

[Tuco 5076]

2 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

But people on here are arguing that there is direct, smoking gun type evidence of collusion provided by foreign govts from as early as 2016. 

I wasn't aware that anyone was arguing that there is "direct, smoking gun type evidence of collusion."  You'll need to point that out. 

 

[hayden_horn 11360]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

Prepare for sheeeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit to ignore your post and wait a few days before doing an end around.

he's just asking questions

[triplehorn 2664]

"My issue is that the House (completed) and Senate did their own investigations of the collusion angle.  The members of those intel committees are privy to ALL of the intelligence that is available from the intel community.  That means that Adam Schiff has seen all of the intel compiled from our intel agencies to date. "

false.

Nunes and Gowdy believe they are privy to it, but they haven't seen all of it by any stretch.  That's what this deal is all about re considering holding the DAG Rosenstein in contempt - they're not getting to see all of what the OSC has, and they shouldn't as it relates to an ongoing investigation.  Rosenstein has been very clear about this.  What Nunes is attempting is unprecedented and is occurring for corrupt purposes.  What they seek is the smoking gun evidence OSC has possessed from its inception.

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

3 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

Go fuck your face with smokey's dick you dissembling, disingenuous bag of cat shit.

Ugh, yeah, could we not?

[Brian Fantana 6654]

52 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

Ugh, yeah, could we not?

Nah. People like him deserve nothing but scorn and ridicule. Treating them with kid gloves serves no one.

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

Nah. People like him deserve nothing but scorn and ridicule. Treating them with kid gloves serves no one.

I do believe you missed my point

[Brian Fantana 6654]

Lol oh shit my bad. Of course I meant the bad smokey but I gotcha.

[sheeeit 129]

2 hours ago, Tuco said:

I wasn't aware that anyone was arguing that there is "direct, smoking gun type evidence of collusion."  You'll need to point that out. 

 

You serious?  You can start with the post I was responding too and search for any one of hundreds of posts on here that claim there is foreign intel that will bring everyone down.

But you asserted yourself into this argument by mis-representing my point, which I have now made clear.  So how about you answer.  Do you believe that there is intel, foreign or otherwise, that the intel community has not shared with the various political committees that are investigating collusion?  That there is supposedly explosive intel that proves collusion on the part of trumpco?  Either it doesn't exist, or it does exist and either Gowdy read it and ignored it (which is impossible) or the intel community has broken the law by not sharing it.

[Jester 382]

2 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

You serious?  You can start with the post I was responding too and search for any one of hundreds of posts on here that claim there is foreign intel that will bring everyone down.

But you asserted yourself into this argument by mis-representing my point, which I have now made clear.  So how about you answer.  Do you believe that there is intel, foreign or otherwise, that the intel community has not shared with the various political committees that are investigating collusion?  That there is supposedly explosive intel that proves collusion on the part of trumpco?  Either it doesn't exist, or it does exist and either Gowdy read it and ignored it (which is impossible) or the intel community has broken the law by not sharing it.

Found you a new avatar.

[Captainant 27311]

Hey now, take that sort of shitposting back to the old site

[NWBuck 8543]

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Hey now, take that sort of sheeeitposting back to the old site

FIFY

[Pods 7522]

Anyone trying to interact seriously with sheeeit at this point need to consider changing their avatar to this. 

 

[Ten Bears 2478]

1 hour ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

I do believe you missed my point

[sheeeit 129]

1 hour ago, triplehorn said:

"My issue is that the House (completed) and Senate did their own investigations of the collusion angle.  The members of those intel committees are privy to ALL of the intelligence that is available from the intel community.  That means that Adam Schiff has seen all of the intel compiled from our intel agencies to date. "

false.

Nunes and Gowdy believe they are privy to it, but they haven't seen all of it by any stretch.  That's what this deal is all about re considering holding the DAG Rosenstein in contempt - they're not getting to see all of what the OSC has, and they shouldn't as it relates to an ongoing investigation.  Rosenstein has been very clear about this.  What Nunes is attempting is unprecedented and is occurring for corrupt purposes.  What they seek is the smoking gun evidence OSC has possessed from its inception.

JFC.  You have no clue what you are talking about.  The intel community must, by law, give the various intel committees any evidence they have.  Nunes and others are questioning the SOURCE of certain intel and wanting access to the investigative files that show means and procedures for the investigation and the DOJ does not want to provide that info.  I can see both sides of that argument.  But, there is zero argument that when the heads of the various intel agencies and agents who work in those agencies are made to testify to members of the intel committees in hearings that they can not withhold ANY intelligence they have found.  They can claim they do not want to name where the evidence came from or how they got it, butt hey have to disclose the evidence.

Just go back yourself and read the questioning the house and senate investigators asked the members of the intel community under oath.  You seem to actually think they could be asked direct questions about collusion evidence and just lie.  

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

[retread 2951]

1 hour ago, Pods said:

Anyone trying to interact seriously with sheeeit at this point need to consider changing their avatar to this. 

 

The sky's bluer and the air's cleaner once you make ^ that change.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5781]

2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

 

 

Swalwell added that he and other committee Democrats, led by Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the ranking member on the panel, have pushed to have transcripts of closed door testimony of Stone and Caputo sent to special counsel Robert Mueller, but they have been blocked from doing so by the committee chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif.

 

 

Nunes needs to get hammered so hard for his bullshit 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13537]

Nunes going hard in the paint with a montage-worthy burn for integrity only one with a weird upper lip overbite can muster. 

[Ted Lange 15991]

Witch Hunt!  But hide testimony.....

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Can’t Mueller subpoena Congressional testimony if he wants to? 

[Tuco 5076]

You serious?  You can start with the post I was responding too and search for any one of hundreds of posts on here that claim there is foreign intel that will bring everyone down.
But you asserted yourself into this argument by mis-representing my point, which I have now made clear.  So how about you answer.  Do you believe that there is intel, foreign or otherwise, that the intel community has not shared with the various political committees that are investigating collusion?  That there is supposedly explosive intel that proves collusion on the part of trumpco?  Either it doesn't exist, or it does exist and either Gowdy read it and ignored it (which is impossible) or the intel community has broken the law by not sharing it.

Seems like you could have saved a lot of typing, but been more convincing, had you simply quoted someone claiming there was smoking gun evidence provided by the British in 2016.

[Pods 7522]

1 minute ago, Tuco said:

Seems like you could have saved a lot of typing, but been more convincing, had you simply quoted someone claiming there was smoking gun evidence provided by the British in 2016.

A troll has to have his idiom. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

Whomp Whomp

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Attorneys for former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort asked a judge to bar any mention of President Trump from Manafort's upcoming trial, according to new court filings. 

According to court filings obtained by CBS News, Manafort's lawyers argue that his alleged crimes occurred before joining the Trump campaign, meaning any mention of the president would be irrelevant. The lawyers wrote that mention of Trump during Manafort's trial could taint jurors' perception of him, influencing their decision in his case.

"[T]here is a very real risk that the jurors in this case - most of whom likely have strong views about President Trump, or have likely formed strong opinions as to the well-publicized allegations that the campaign colluded with Russian officials - will be unable to separate their opinions and beliefs about those matters from the tax and bank fraud matters to be tried before them in this case," they wrote.

News of Manafort's request comes after the judge in the case, Judge T.S. Ellis III, questioned federal prosecutorsworking for special counsel Robert Mueller's office on their indictment of Manafort. Ellis, at times, lost his temper as he pressed one of Mueller's lawyers on whether the indictment was being used as leverage against Trump.

Prosecutors fired back in a court filing, arguing the question was inconsequential.

"The government's reasons for initiating a prosecution have nothing to do with whether the evidence at trial proves the elements of the charged offenses, which is the sole question that the jury must answer," prosecutors wrote, according to CBS.

Manafort was ordered to jail earlier this month after a judge found him to be in violation of his bail agreement, accusing him of attempting to tamper with a witness.

The former Trump campaign chairman is accused of bank fraud, money laundering and failing to register as a foreign agent with the Justice Department, regarding his lobbying work for pro-Russia political parties in Ukraine prior to the 2016 election.

He has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Edited June 24, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[TwiceHorn 31184]

Quote

"The government's reasons for initiating a prosecution have nothing to do with whether the evidence at trial proves the elements of the charged offenses, which is the sole question that the jury must answer," prosecutors wrote, according to CBS.

While this is, ultimately true, judges should be more aggressive than they are in questioning the prosecution's motives, especially in the context of a plea bargain.  It's a check on prosecutorial discretion, which is run amok in the US.

/not relevant to anything on this thread, really, except the quoted portion

[Washpark 176]

[jimmyjazz 45513]

50 minutes ago, Washpark said:

 

Well, this could be a big nothingburger, but I'm gonna take a guess and say it's more like this:

[David Dennison 18608]

I literally love Michael Avenatti.

[Bruh Man 3160]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

What would surprise anyone at this point? 

Pretty much the only thing that would surprise me is if Trump was a trained KGB operative.

Not because Russia didn’t try, but because Trump is too incompetent to learn anything.

Edited June 24, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[HornOnTheBayou 8877]

3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What would surprise anyone at this point? 

Pretty much the only thing that would surprise me is if Trump was a trained KGB operative.

Not because Russia didn’t try, but because Trump is too incompetent to learn anything.

 

[Bruh Man 3160]

4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What would surprise anyone at this point? 

Pretty much the only thing that would surprise me is if Trump was a trained KGB operative.

Not because Russia didn’t try, but because Trump is too incompetent to learn anything.

1. The pee tape actually being a kiddie tape. 

2. The RNC and its leadership somehow being more complicit than what has been made public so far. 

3. Actual vote changing.

[yaqdum 182]

9 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

1. The pee tape actually being a kiddie tape. 

2. The RNC and its leadership somehow being more complicit than what has been made public so far. 

3. Actual vote changing.

you're easy.

[Pods 7522]

13 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

1. The pee tape actually being a kiddie tape. 

2. The RNC and its leadership somehow being more complicit than what has been made public so far. 

3. Actual vote changing.

Not one of those would surprise me. I don't think 1 and 3 are likely, 2 is a virtual certainty. 

Regarding 3, I don't think votes were changed, but I think it's very plausible that voter registrations were altered/deleted.

[Chewy's Hairy Horn 868]

3 minutes ago, Pods said:

Not one of those would surprise me. I don't think 1 and 3 are likely, 2 is a virtual certainty. 

Regarding 3, I don't think votes were changed, but I think it's very plausible that voter registrations were altered/deleted.

I can see #1 being possible in the sense that the girls were supposedly age of consent (15yo or whatever in Russia) and Trump thinking it's cool cause it's totally legal there.  

[atomheartbevo 89362]

The direct vote changing is too risky - what if everybody goes back to paper and ramps up the counting process?

that money and effort is better spent on influencing voters online.  Ads, articles on blogs, etc.

[Bama Chick 28596]

12 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What would surprise anyone at this point? 

Pretty much the only thing that would surprise me is if Trump was a trained KGB operative.

Not because Russia didn’t try, but because Trump is too incompetent to learn anything.

What if the stupidity and boorish is just his cover persona?  And he's really as genius, James Bond type playing the carnival barker to throw us of all off the scent?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

1 minute ago, Bama Chick said:

What if the stupidity and boorish is just his cover persona?  And he's really as genius, James Bond type playing the carnival barker to throw us of all off the scent?

Then he’s fooling everyone in his inner circle because they think he’s an idiot too.

There is no other Donald Trump and I think that was some of his appeal.