The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Your boy Rick Dearborn is, at a minimum, a witness in the Russia investigation.

I think it’s in his best interest to lay low.

[bolverk 29659]

24 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Welp, there’s my buddy Rick Dearborn again.

His wife was constantly posting “Look at us, all up in the White House all the time” pictures on Facebook - up until Trump started using Jeff Sessions as a punching bag.

Then she openly endorsed Doug Jones and she got blackballed out of the Republican Alabama State Executive Committee.
 

 

And since he resigned from his position at the White House, she’s gone absolutely radio silent about politics. And only posts about Alabama football.

Makes me wonder if they’ve been advised by an attorney to lay low.

 

You should start posting observations/quotes/tweets from this thread to see if you can get a rise out of them.

[TwiceHorn 31443]

4 hours ago, DDD Dad said:

I'm not a criminal defense lawyer but I know that there are tolling provisions for civil actions that address things like being outside of the court's jurisdiction, and a quick Google search to the DoJ's website indicates that federal criminal limitations are tolled while a defendant is a fugitive, and an order of tolling can be obtained in certain circumstances (not specifically addressing any official immunity).  

I think you're right, however, at least just based on my quick search that there doesn't seem to be anything directly on point.  Just wondering if this might be something that could be subject to creation by some type of judicial review (but that itself might constitute an ex post facto creation of law--just spitballing here).

I tend to agree with this.  If it's simply a matter of DoJ policy, then Mueller will seek (or he's already sought) an indictment and either keep it sealed or release it and serve the President.

Interesting times, to be sure.

I think the DOJ policy is just an implementation or recognition of an untested constitutional doctrine that a sitting President should not be subject to criminal charges. I think if that doctrine were tested, a part of it certainly could and should be that limitations are tolled while the President is in office and enjoys that immunity, which I don't think anyone has ever suggested is absolute and for all time. And a valid end run/compromise position would seem to be a sealed indictment. 

[Gil Bang 25928]

42 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Welp, there’s my buddy Rick Dearborn again.

His wife was constantly posting “Look at us, all up in the White House all the time” pictures on Facebook - up until Trump started using Jeff Sessions as a punching bag.

Then she openly endorsed Doug Jones and she got blackballed out of the Republican Alabama State Executive Committee.
 

 

And since he resigned from his position at the White House, she’s gone absolutely radio silent about politics. And only posts about Alabama football.

Makes me wonder if they’ve been advised by an attorney to lay low.

 

Depends.  Was it a "jew" attorney?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

The NRA is about to take it in the Butina.

[Celery Man 20933]

4 hours ago, lemonlime said:

Trying to infiltrate?

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

You should start posting observations/quotes/tweets from this thread to see if you can get a rise out of them.

Oh no!

[bolverk 29659]

2 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Oh no!

...

 

 

 

 

I didn't actually mean link them to the source of said snark...just what you may have been "hearing," or, you know, what "people have been saying."

[Bama Chick 28596]

I don’t really get political on Facebook.

I mean, I live in Alabama. The congested, wheezing heart of Trumplandia.

I still have to live and work with the people that can see what I post on FB.

My only exception was during the senate special election but I tried to keep it to only pro Jones posts and not post about what a disgusting shitpickle Roy Moore is.

I try to keep my real life internet activity limited to bragging about my offspring, supporting my various sports teams, discussing my favorite movies/books/TV shows, posting pretty pictures of the British Royal Family, and gushing about Harry Styles.

IOW, basic white girl shit.

This place is my outlet for my political opinions. Keeps my real life less messy.

Now if I happened to bump into her in person, I’d totally have that kind of conversation. I’m just not the kind to put messiness on my front porch, so to speak.

[Junior Miller 1502]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

I think the DOJ policy is just an implementation or recognition of an untested constitutional doctrine that a sitting President should not be subject to criminal charges. I think if that doctrine were tested, a part of it certainly could and should be that limitations are tolled while the President is in office and enjoys that immunity, which I don't think anyone has ever suggested is absolute and for all time. And a valid end run/compromise position would seem to be a sealed indictment. 

I can see why you wouldn't want a sitting president to be indicted or charged with crimes because it would easily become a political ploy where one party (Republicans) would be trying to charge a Democrat president with bullshit. I think the belief always was if the president committed a crime bad enough to be indicted then they would surely be impeached first. 

That should work but it requires  republican politicians to actually put the country and their duty above their selfish interests and we know that isn't happening. 

[Mdhorn 5947]

2 hours ago, bolverk said:

That doesn't sound incriminating in the slightest.

Remember Sarah Palin's I can see Russia from my house?  Yeah, those were the good ol days.  

[Continental Op 3934]

3 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

[unnamed gun-rights organization]

Boy, that’s going to be a tough one to crack.

"WE FUCKING TOLD YOU ALL THOSE LITTLE BASTARD PROTESTERS FROM STONEMAN DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL WERE UP TO NO GOOD!!!!!"  --Republicans

Edited December 11, 2018 by Continental Op

[horncyclist 1387]

7 hours ago, Junior Miller said:

I can see why you wouldn't want a sitting president to be indicted or charged with crimes because it would easily become a political ploy where one party (Republicans) would be trying to charge a Democrat president with bullshit. I think the belief always was if the president committed a crime bad enough to be indicted then they would surely be impeached first. 

That should work but it requires  republican politicians to actually put the country and their duty above their selfish interests and we know that isn't happening. 

Founding fathers couldn't have envisioned the level of corruption and treason in today's GOP.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, horncyclist said:

Founding fathers couldn't have envisioned the level of corruption and treason in today's GOP.

I think they did envision it but they didn’t foresee the tools necessary to keep the traitors in power. 

The internet, troll farms, bots, talk radio, Facebook, micro targeting, and billion dollar psyops weren’t in the calculation. 

[DigglerontheHoof 21184]

8 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

I don’t really get political on Facebook.

I mean, I live in Alabama. The congested, wheezing heart of Trumplandia.

I still have to live and work with the people that can see what I post on FB.

My only exception was during the senate special election but I tried to keep it to only pro Jones posts and not post about what a disgusting shitpickle Roy Moore is.

I try to keep my real life internet activity limited to bragging about my offspring, supporting my various sports teams, discussing my favorite movies/books/TV shows, posting pretty pictures of the British Royal Family, and gushing about Harry Styles.

IOW, basic white girl shit.

This place is my outlet for my political opinions. Keeps my real life less messy.

Now if I happened to bump into her in person, I’d totally have that kind of conversation. I’m just not the kind to put messiness on my front porch, so to speak.

I used to think this way; I'd steer completely free of political posts.  But I started feeling like a fraud.  So, the beginning of the year I decided to start speaking out, loudly, about my opposition to Trump.  I also like to call out false narratives.  Now, I don't personally attack people for their political stances but I absolutely skewer Trump every chance I get. 

But I really love wearing my "Anti-Trump AF" t-shirt under my jacket to redneck and biker bars.  I like to sit down incognito and wait for the inevitable Trump fellatio conversation to start.  Then the jacket comes off and the fun begins.  It's weird how much less confrontational they get when they realize I'm one of the "snowflakes" they'd been going internet-tough on.

 

[atomheartbevo 89637]

1 hour ago, horncyclist said:

Founding fathers couldn't have envisioned the level of corruption and treason in today's GOP.

I think they did, that’s partly why we broke away from England.  Well, maybe not the treason part, but they certainly saw the corruption of the English royals and their entourages.   

In theory, Congress would put a check on that corruption.  

In theory. 

[TwiceHorn 31443]

9 hours ago, Junior Miller said:

I can see why you wouldn't want a sitting president to be indicted or charged with crimes because it would easily become a political ploy where one party (Republicans) would be trying to charge a Democrat president with bullshit. I think the belief always was if the president committed a crime bad enough to be indicted then they would surely be impeached first. 

That should work but it requires  republican politicians to actually put the country and their duty above their selfish interests and we know that isn't happening. 

Yep that's exactly the reasoning, bolstered a little by the notion that it would give the judicial branch a big leg up directly on the executive branch that I think was implicitly intended to be avoided. 

[BurntOrange&White 39930]

To be fair the executive branch needs to be slapped down a bit.

[Ted Lange 16084]

narrator, they don’t. 

[kevwun 15772]

It's ok because Orrin Hatch can't actually remember saying that.

Edited December 11, 2018 by kevwun

[Chad Fuck 17664]

2 minutes ago, kevwun said:

It's ok because Orrin Hatch can't actually remember saying that.

[triplehorn 2664]

thanks, but no thanks.

[retread 2951]

Finally, we'll get to the bottom of election meddling.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Fucking Russians trolling again.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Pescado_Rojo 19416]

She might have brought him a cup of coffee once or something.

 

[Grade of D as in David 13253]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Vlad, buddy, the low level staffer bit has already been played out with Papadopoulos. Please stick to talking points and rebuttals not already issued to Trump and the GOP for distribution.

 

You're a KGB spy, you're better than this.

[Cajun 11705]

13 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The NRA is about to take it in the Butina.

Let 'em burn.

[Cajun 11705]

8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

He denied it strongly!

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

For the record, way back when I first linked Russia to the NRA, it was based almost entirely on their media operation and messaging.  

I couldn’t tell if the NRA was more pro Russia or Trump based on the narratives they were peddling.  Turns out they are almost one and the same.

[triplehorn 2664]

NRA racketeering stands to envelop the GOP. 

More than mere "violation of campaign finance laws," it's about conspiracy to commit fraud.

Butina Butina

[Fozzz 152]

So Butina isn’t a spy, and is merely on the hook for failing to notify the AG regarding her status as a foreign agent?  Yawn. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

2 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

So Butina isn’t a spy, and is merely on the hook for failing to notify the AG regarding her status as a foreign agent?  Yawn. 

Spy or not, she’s 100% an agent of the Russian government working to advance their subversion of American institutions. 

 

[ADHD 28]

57 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

thanks, but no thanks.

What the hell is this !?

[ADHD 28]

44 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Is this real? This is the same patterned response Trump gives when he burns his people, so this is a parody of Trump right. 

[Fozzz 152]

32 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Spy or not, she’s 100% an agent of the Russian government working to advance their subversion of American institutions. 

 

So she’s a lobbyist. Not like there aren’t plenty of those running around DC also trying to subvert American institutions. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, Fozzz said:

So she’s a lobbyist. Not like there aren’t plenty of those running around DC also trying to subvert American institutions. 

That doesn’t make her any less of a threat. 

She reports directly to a globally sanctioned organized crime boss oligarch. 

[David Dennison 18852]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

That doesn’t make her any less of a threat. 

She reports directly to a globally sanctioned organized crime boss oligarch. 

To be fair, so does our military.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Can’t get over the stupidity of this...

[triplehorn 2664]

17 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

So she’s a lobbyist. Not like there aren’t plenty of those running around DC also trying to subvert American institutions. 

lollerskates

[Fozzz 152]

Do lobbyists not try to subvert American institutions?  Doesn't matter much to me if it's done in the interest of a foreign government or corporation.

[Ted Lange 16084]

1 hour ago, Fozzz said:

So Butina isn’t a spy, and is merely on the hook for failing to notify the AG regarding her status as a foreign agent?  Yawn. 

If that turns out to be it, then agree yawn.  If ALL she did was “forget to register,” then this one case doesn’t amount to much.  Most folks think it goes a bit deeper, we should know more tomorrow. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

7 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Do lobbyists not try to subvert American institutions?  Doesn't matter much to me if it's done in the interest of a foreign government or corporation.

This is a great whataboutism and lobbyist are a huge problem too. 

However, foreign governments have military operations they coordinate with their intelligence operations to attack the institutional structures of a adversary county.  They do this for reasons that go far beyond the profit motives of corporations.

Corporations use lobbyists to bend the government in an effort to create more profits for their shareholders.

Pretty big fucking difference.

Edited December 11, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Fozzz 152]

Hugo, it sounds like you are referring to espionage, something that Butina has not been charged with.  

[Fozzz 152]

Sad to see that this Russia shit has turned Marcy Wheeler into a conspiracy theorist.  

 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, Fozzz said:

Hugo, it sounds like you are referring to espionage, something that Butina has not been charged with.  

There isn’t a difference between a spy and an agent of influence like Butina to the Russians.  

They’re all on the same team trying to achieve the same objectives. 

Yuri out front should have told you.

[Native Horn 3499]

1 hour ago, Cajun said:

He denied it strongly!

I strenuously object and request an 802 conference!

Edited December 11, 2018 by Native Horn

[Keef 764]

20 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Can’t get over the stupidity of this...

It's like the Charlie Strong special teams unit ran a collusion campaign.

[Fozzz 152]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

There isn’t a difference between a spy and an agent of influence like Butina to the Russians.  

They’re all on the same team trying to achieve the same objectives. 

Yuri out front should have told you.

 

 

[triplehorn 2664]

Putin and Trump are using identical messaging tactics opposite reality.  

Same bullshit, targeting the same deplorable audience.