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

triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s really starting to come together now.  

Cohen’s August/September connections to the hackers alleged in the Dossier and the potential of fixer Cohen reaching out to his Wikileaks/hackers once the the Access Hollywood tape hit the media.  

Yikes!

No wonder Trump is freaked the fuck out.

that.could.do.it.

The appearance of timed and tight coordination between Trump campaign messaging pivots and leaks of stolen hacked information has always been at the crux of it - real time dynamic coordination between Trump campaign and Russian military intelligence/troll farms/fake news bots to maximize effect.  

It's been revealed to be far more complex and multi-layered, but there are zero degrees of separation between Trump and his consigliere, Michael Cohen.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted

OP updated to reflect scoreboard 

https://www.justice.gov/sco

 

Mueller’s Charges:
 
18 U.S. Code § 1001 - False Statements
Paul Manafort 
Rick Gates
Alex van der Zwaan
Michael Flynn
George Papadopoulus
 
 

18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to defraud the United States
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/371

Paul Manafort 
Rick Gates 
13 Russians
 
 
18 U.S. Code § 981 - Civil forfeiture
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/981
Paul Manafort 
 
 
18 U.S. Code § 982 - Criminal forfeiture
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/982
Paul Manafort 
 
 
18 U.S. Code § 1956 - Laundering of monetary instruments
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1956
Paul Manafort
 
 
18 U.S. Code § 1349 - Conspiracy 
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1349
Paul Manafort
Rick Gates 
13 Russians
 
 
18 U.S. Code § 1344 - Bank fraud Conspiracy 
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1344
Paul Manafort 
Rick Gates
 
 
18 U.S. Code § 1028 - Fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents, authentication features, and information.  Identity theft/fraud.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1028
13 Russians
Richard Pinedo
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

Cornyn deserves credit for saying the right thing on this since jump street.  He seems genuine here. 

Perhaps the Republicans are being strategic by not protecting Mueller.

Like setting a trap for Trump to walk in so they can impeach him without consequences.

I’m telling you, there’s nothing the bulk of the GOP wants more than a politically favorable excuse to get rid of this motherfucker.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12791

Posted
Posted
Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Perhaps the Republicans are being strategic by not protecting Mueller.

Like setting a trap for Trump to walk in so they can impeach him without consequences.

I’m telling you, there’s nothing the bulk of the GOP wants more than a good excuse to get rid of this motherfucker.

They’ve had plenty of excuses. They have no spine and won’t do shit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12791

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Their excuse has been “We should let Mueller finish his investigation.”

Which is actually a good excuse.

He fired Comey and admitted to obstructing justice. He has repeatedly violated the emoluments clause. They had plenty of chances before Mueller was even appointed and they have crumbled time and again. Forgive me if I don’t have much faith in the GOP to do their fucking job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yaqdum

yaqdum 182

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Perhaps the Republicans are being strategic by not protecting Mueller.

Like setting a trap for Trump to walk in so they can impeach him without consequences.

I’m telling you, there’s nothing the bulk of the GOP wants more than a politically favorable excuse to get rid of this motherfucker.

by, bulk of the gop, my assumption here is you mean the rank and file gopper.  not to include much, most, or maybe all of the leadership that has been in bed with this all along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Their excuse has been “We should let Mueller finish his investigation.”

Which is actually a good excuse.

You're way off.  If they were waiting for Mueller to finish first,  the House GOP wouldn't have already wrapped up their bullshit investigation by clearing Trump and even concluding that Russia wasn't trying to get Trump elected.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hornmatic

Hornmatic 245

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I’d say the relationship was the worst just after Kennedy was assassinated.

 

6 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I’d say for the Russians it was right after we whipped their ass in the 1980 Olympic hockey semi-final round.

I’d say for the Americans it was right after Yakov Smirnoff’s 1984 North American tour. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 20676

Posted
Posted

Hugo,  don't you think Trump's base is the only thing that will keep these GOP politicians in office?  Trump being impeached doesn't magically bring back the pre-Cheeto Republican Party and put them in a positive light.  These fuckers CREATED this situation. 

They are fucked, they know they're fucked, and they're gonna latch on to Donald's teat until it's over.  The spineless ones (like Paul Ryan) will "retire". 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Hugo,  don't you think Trump's base is the only thing that will keep these GOP politicians in office?  Trump being impeached doesn't magically bring back the pre-Cheeto Republican Party and put them in a positive light.  These fuckers CREATED this situation. 

They are fucked, they know they're fucked, and they're gonna latch on to Donald's teat until it's over.  The spineless ones (like Paul Ryan) will "retire". 

 

 

 

 

Trump’s base has nowhere to go post Trump.

what are they going to do? Vote for a democrat?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29394

Posted
Posted

I could very well be wrong, but I sort of view Trump's nationalist/isolationist base in a similar view as I did Perot's. The angry white working class who feels they're getting screwed over by globalism. Now, of course, this doesn't include the overt racists and alt-righters (nor does it necessarily include the Christian right), but I think it does describe a good portion of the coalition.

If what I stated above is true, then the answer may well lie within the question of where did Perot's supporters go. My sneaking suspicion is many of them dropped out of the political process entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I think a significant amount of them would vote for some Trumpian 3rd party candidate or not vote at all. 

You think they'll vote for a GOP that helped get rid of their dear leader?

 

 

I very much agree with this. Trump's fuck everyone except White America got a lot of people to turn out, they aren't going to enthusiastically do this again unless Trump or his clone is on the ballot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

got dammit

 

 

Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind. Steve was a staffer who worked for me after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates, often described as the most talented field ever assembled in the Republican Party. 

Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn't as easy as I make it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory, which was delivered by the forgotten men and women of this country. Yet Steve had everything to do with the loss of a Senate seat in Alabama held for more than thirty years by Republicans. Steve doesn't represent my base — he's only in it for himself.

Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books. 

We have many great Republican members of Congress and candidates who are very supportive of the Make America Great Again agenda. Like me, they love the United States of America and are helping to finally take our country back and build it up, rather than simply seeking to burn it all down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, GSU&UT said:

I very much agree with this. Trump's fuck everyone except White America got a lot of people to turn out, they aren't going to enthusiastically do this again unless Trump or his clone is on the ballot.

Y’all have it all wrong. Trumpkin ideology is “fuck dems”.  That’s it. That’s all there is for them.  They’re not going to vote for a 3rd party to hand the country over to the libtards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2951

Posted
Posted (edited)

The idea of, and the desire for, payback is big with the Trumpkins.

We'd like to think that we'll be alright b/c there's only one Trump. However, even if we get rid of Trump, a Trump 2.0 might emerge, either from the left or the right side of the aisle.

Edited by retread
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I could very well be wrong, but I sort of view Trump's nationalist/isolationist base in a similar view as I did Perot's. The angry white working class who feels they're getting screwed over by globalism. Now, of course, this doesn't include the overt racists and alt-righters (nor does it necessarily include the Christian right), but I think it does describe a good portion of the coalition.

If what I stated above is true, then the answer may well lie within the question of where did Perot's supporters go. My sneaking suspicion is many of them dropped out of the political process entirely.

I will fully show my age and ignorance with this post, but since I was only 5 and 9 the times Perot ran I don't know too much about him. It kind of blew my mind when I was reading a little bit about his views, I had always assumed he was more or less a Republican, at least fiscally. However what he is discussing here is vehemently anti-current GOP.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Y’all have it all wrong. Trumpkin ideology is “fuck dems”.  That’s it. That’s all there is for them.  They’re not going to vote for a 3rd party to hand the country over to the libtards.

I meant that if Trump isn't running in 2020 then they aren't going to vote GOP unless his clone is running with the (R) next to his name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89396

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

I could very well be wrong, but I sort of view Trump's nationalist/isolationist base in a similar view as I did Perot's. The angry white working class who feels they're getting screwed over by globalism. Now, of course, this doesn't include the overt racists and alt-righters (nor does it necessarily include the Christian right), but I think it does describe a good portion of the coalition.

If what I stated above is true, then the answer may well lie within the question of where did Perot's supporters go. My sneaking suspicion is many of them dropped out of the political process entirely.

One of the biggest factors for Trump, and for Republicans in 2018 and 2020, won’t be on any future ballots: Hillary Clinton. 

Edited by atomheartbevo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104537

Posted
Posted
I think a significant amount of them would vote for some Trumpian 3rd party candidate or not vote at all. 

You think they'll vote for a GOP that helped get rid of their dear leader?

 

 

This. When you understand that the current GOP is a simple hate cult, this conclusion becomes obvious.

 

They’ll never support anyone who betrayed their God, and they’ll only accept replacements that sound like him (“Mexicans! Mooslems! Wall!”)

 

That’s the GOP now. That’s all it is. There’s nothing else left.

 

But I disagree that they’ll go third party. Instead, GOP candidates will go full Trump. In 6 years, there will be no vestige of the former party left. It will be full Trumpism, top to bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


This. When you understand that the current GOP is a simple hate cult, this conclusion becomes obvious.

They’ll never support anyone who betrayed their God, and they’ll only accept replacements that sound like him (“Mexicans! Mooslems! Wall!”)

That’s the GOP now. That’s all it is. There’s nothing else left.

They will vote for whoever Fox News and Rush tells them to and you know it.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104537

Posted
Posted
They will vote for whoever Fox News and Rush tell them to and you know it.

Correct. And that will be a GOP candidate who sounds like Trump. As all GOO candidates will within 4-6 years. All Trumpism. Only Trumpism. They obtained a party, they ain’t giving it back.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12791

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


Correct. And that will be a GOP candidate who sounds like Trump. As all GOO candidates will within 4-6 years. All Trumpism. Only Trumpism. They obtained a party, they ain’t giving it back.

Yep. Until this brand of politics is killed off by continuously losing, and being shamed, we will have new versions of Trump over and over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29394

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

I will fully show my age and ignorance with this post, but since I was only 5 and 9 the times Perot ran I don't know too much about him. It kind of blew my mind when I was reading a little bit about his views, I had always assumed he was more or less a Republican, at least fiscally. However what he is discussing here is vehemently anti-current GOP.

 

I'm not wedded to my hypothesis, but that previously rational crowd I described have now become really angry. Perot had two major platforms that I recall: 1) balance the budget and 2) opposition to NAFTA.

From what I recall, he pulled a lot of support from fiscally conservative, blue-collar workers. Those folks, I believe, have become radicalized by Fox News and further economic losses since 1992.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, bolverk said:

I'm not wedded to my hypothesis, but that previously rational crowd I described have now become really angry. Perot had two major platforms that I recall: 1) balance the budget and 2) opposition to NAFTA.

From what I recall, he pulled a lot of support from fiscally conservative, blue-collar workers. Those folks, I believe, have become radicalized by Fox News and further economic losses since 1992.

Yeah there's no doubt that a huge voting bloc of '92 and '96 have become anti-brown people and anti-PC speech. As long as you say you care about us white working class too then we're sold.

In that video I posted, Perot hits on several points of wages decreasing, CEO pay going up, the U.S. not investing in public investment programs in comparison to the industrialized nation counterparts, etc. These are all huge issues that us millennials care deeply about, it's very eerie to see him in 1992 hit on these same points that today's GOP believes aren't of any concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blotto

Blotto 23424

Posted
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This. When you understand that the current GOP is a simple hate cult, this conclusion becomes obvious.

 

They’ll never support anyone who betrayed their God, and they’ll only accept replacements that sound like him (“Mexicans! Mooslems! Wall!”, muh gunnnnns!)

 

That’s the GOP now. That’s all it is. There’s nothing else left.

 

But I disagree that they’ll go third party. Instead, GOP candidates will go full Trump. In 6 years, there will be no vestige of the former party left. It will be full Trumpism, top to bottom.

Dont forget about Bubba Shrimp Dick, who can't see a way forward in life if he can't maintain his own armory.

Edited by Blotto
Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2951

Posted
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Hillary won’t be on the ballot going forward, so who motivates them to get to the polls for their payback? 

It will be a candidate that will punish the opposition on a daily basis. Trump is a dream come true for those who have been listening to conservative talk radio for the last 20 years. They've been told that the Ds (Clinton and Obama) have gotten it over on them for two decades, and now it's time to elect R Presidents who will beat the Ds down (at least in the R voters' minds).

Edited by retread
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Judge Roybeanbag

Judge Roybeanbag 11802

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Comparing Trump to Perot makes my brain hurt. 

In some ways it’s different some the same.   A bunch of ideologically disaffected voters who wanted fiscal responsibility. On the other hand a bunch of disaffected voters who wanted a rabid, fascist nationalists.  The result was a president who balanced the budget and still went through the impeachment process because...   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zork

zork 629

Posted
Posted
On 3/29/2018 at 3:41 PM, WhatTheBuck said:

Trump supporters start attacking Mueller, the Mueller camp starts leaking. 

I truly hope Trump backs away from dismissing Mueller.  Let him complete the investigation.  If the best they get is campaign tomfoolery from Stormy Daniels(actionable from 10 years ago and hush payments during the campaign) then I guess that is where we will be at that point.  Not much to do with Russian collusion.  We'll see though.  Maybe it will be President Pence, then perhaps a potentially prospective President Pelosi if the predicted  and purported Dem wave happens 5-6 months from now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Judge Roybeanbag

Judge Roybeanbag 11802

Posted
Posted (edited)

Message is focus on dollars, not on ideological stuff, because in the end, you’ll get your shit kicked in.   Nobody likes being told how to live, everyone likes a few dollars.  This administration tried to grab both tails of a one-tailed donkey, and they will fail spectacularly. 

Edited by Judge Roybeanbag
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29394

Posted
Posted
Just now, GSU&UT said:

Yeah there's no doubt that a huge voting bloc of '92 and '96 have become anti-brown people and anti-PC speech. As long as you say you care about us white working class too then we're sold.

In that video I posted, Perot hits on several points of wages decreasing, CEO pay going up, the U.S. not investing in public investment programs in comparison to the industrialized nation counterparts, etc. These are all huge issues that us millennials care deeply about, it's very eerie to see him in 1992 hit on these same points that today's GOP believes aren't of any concern.

Oh, without a doubt, it's not a perfect comparison. As Tahoe likes to say, these guys are supported by "coalitions." At that time, blue-collar workers were still wedded to their unions - which meant being anti-management. The appeal of the message was essentially a class-based one. Today, unions are largely irrelevant to most blue-collar workers. Without that sort of internal leadership, they've become radicalized by outside forces: 9/11!, Mooslems!, immigration! & brown people taking our jobs!

They were always an inherently domestically-focused group. Today, the debt doesn't disturb them anymore (unless it can be used as a useful political football) - it's the way of life they remember that's fucked them in the head.

The comparison I make between one portion of Trump's coalition and Perot's isn't a well thought out one that I've ever given any previous thought to. So, bear with me, I'm just thinking as I type, and I could easily be persuaded otherwise. There's no forethought to any of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29394

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

@bolverk i would rep if I could. But if you think Trump could pull off a presentation like that one linked with perot, well, I know you dont think that. 

Trump's not worried about Perot's numbers - just his anti-globalism feels. That's simply my trite summation of the similarities. Don't get me wrong, Trump obviously doesn't give a fuck about debt or income inequality.

Edited by bolverk
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...