The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Red Five 41607]

Just Google “there is undoubtedly collusion” and Adam Schiff. It’s in today’s Washington Post.

That’s not what was stated.

[notre dame joe 202]

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

There might be. We have to read the report. 

Barr's letter does not say Mueller found no evidence of collusion.

[David Dennison 19441]

Just now, notre dame joe said:

That's not going to work.

In fact, it's already starting to come apart. 

[DDD Dad 14576]

3 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Watch it the mafia gonna get you. Hugo is off limits for questioning how many socks he puts on each day apparently.  I regularly pout on 2 socks. Not sure what Hugo does...

So you're admitting to having socks that you pout on?  IMMMMMMMMAAAMMAAAAAC!!!!!!!!

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by DDD Dad

[NaTeWHO 869]

18 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What the fuck is Rand even talking about? What intelligence report? 

This looks like a setup tweet for Trump to retweet a little later tonight. 

Probably the Intelligence Community Assessment asked for by Democrats in 2016 about Russian interference in the election.

[Anastasis 23703]

He’s referring to the trump tower briefing that served to provide cover for buzzfeed and cnn to publically report the dossier. 

[Biff Tannen 46063]

Anyone else find it odd that a Senator starts a tweet with BREAKING like he's an actual news source?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

18 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Keep fucking that chicken all the way up until 2020, man.

Nah, just trying to correct the record since no one can define collusion. 

In business law, the example used to teach collusion is when two or more competing businesses secretly get together in a hotel room and hatch a plan to create an unfair advantage over their competition. 

The Don Jr/Manafort/Kushner “adoptions” meeting with the Agalarovs was about as close as it gets and from the emails, Don Jr was eager to collude.  The only thing missing is evidence of any kind of agreement and Trump’s knowledge of the meeting. 

I know the ship has completely sailed on this politically but I’m still like “holy shit I can’t believe they did that, kept it secret for over a year, and still tried to cover it up with the “adoptions” BS.”

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[retread 2951]

We never heard another word about the Kush/Flynn meeting w Kislyak re back channel communications. It's all normalized now.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

2 minutes ago, retread said:

We never heard another word about the Kush/Flynn meeting w Kislyak re back channel communications. It's all normalized now.

There’s also the Sessions meetings with Kislyak which seem like decades ago.  The Torshin/Don Jr. meeting, Carter Page trip to Moscow, Prince in the Sechelles, all the Manafort shit, and Flynn sitting right next to Putin at the dinner table in Moscow.

While these might all be innocent coincidences for Trump’s clown car of imbeciles, they weren’t coincidences for Putin. 

[American Swindle 102]

Michael Tracey, Glenn Greenwald, Ron Paul, Tom Woods and many other alternative media folks got it right.   The sad thing is that it seems like 80% of this entire CR is butthurt that the President of the US was not colluding with Russia.  Sad. 

Maybe the Left should..... ya know, try to persuade others and make a case for their ideas rather than obsessing over conspiracy theories?  Just a thought, I hope to see some humility rather than this cult like reaction in doubling down on a failed prophecy.    

See ya'll in a few weeks, just wanted to pop in and see what level of meltdown the board was at.  

Edited March 27, 2019 by American Swindle

[TexEx15 17914]

41 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Anyone else find it odd that a Senator starts a tweet with BREAKING like he's an actual news source?

Haha yep.  And talking about a “high level source”.. Dude you are a US senator you dumb fuck of course your source would be high level.

[maninblack 7975]

I'm getting one of those tomorrow

Got it

[Jim Tom Pinch 120]

2 hours ago, Lagunamadre said:

Can you point me to where Democrats did not accept the results of the election? 

And to be fair, Democrats have not seen the Mueller report, they haven't had a chance to not accept the findings. 

You mean point somewhere other than every fucking day since the election?

Jesus Fucking Christ.

[elguapo 4620]

35 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

Michael Tracey, Glenn Greenwald, Ron Paul, Tom Woods and many other alternative media folks got it right.   The sad thing is that it seems like 80% of this entire CR is butthurt that the President of the US was not colluding with Russia.  Sad. 

Maybe the Left should..... ya know, try to persuade others and make a case for their ideas rather than obsessing over conspiracy theories?  Just a thought, I hope to see some humility rather than this cult like reaction in doubling down on a failed prophecy.    

See ya'll in a few weeks, just wanted to pop in and see what level of meltdown the board was at.  

Wanting to know whether or not the fucking POTUS is compromised by a foreign government = obsessing over conspiracy theories to these brainwashed morons.  Sad

 

This coming from someone who for a long time believed, and perhaps still does, that 9/11 was an inside job.  But yeah, everyone else is obsessed with conspiracy theories.

Edited March 27, 2019 by elguapo

[Biff Tannen 46063]

Did I hear correctly that Barr is now saying it's going to take weeks to get the report to congress because it is so substantial?  Yet he was able to write a summary in less than 48 hours? 

[Enchubben 5598]

16 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Did I hear correctly that Barr is now saying it's going to take weeks to get the report to congress because it is so substantial?  Yet he was able to write a summary in less than 48 hours? 

Can’t wait to hear all the complaining when the report is released but parts are redacted due to classified information etc; nothing will be good enough.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Mueller testimony would be good enough for me.

[elguapo 4620]

2 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Can’t wait to hear all the complaining when the report is released but parts are redacted due to classified information etc; nothing will be good enough.

Why do maga morons always have to resort to logical fallacies?

[Biff Tannen 46063]

1 hour ago, Enchubben said:

Can’t wait to hear all the complaining when the report is released but parts are redacted due to classified information etc; nothing will be good enough.

Answer my question.  Do you think it's reasonable that someone could turn a "substantial" report, presumably hundreds, if not thousands of pages, into a 4 page summary in 48 hours?

[retread 2951]

You just do a Ctrl+F for "not enough evidence" and "did not find" and "there was no"  ^

[Enchubben 5598]

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

Answer my question.  Do you think it's reasonable that someone could turn a "substantial" report, presumably hundreds, if not thousands of pages, into a 4 page summary in 48 hours?

Where did you see the number of pages reported?

If there is a table of contents, sure. The goal of the report and investigation was to find collusion correct? If the conclusion is, no evidence of collusion with trump or his associates, then yes, very possible.

Question for you, have you ever read, in full, hearings or case law? I don’t have to read hundreds of pages of facts to understand the results in the conclusion section.  

If the conspiracy theorists out there want to argue that mueller came up with the wrong conclusion, or Barr misinterpreted the results, I guess that’s your hill to die on and will be proved or disproved when the report is released. (Which I support, btw)

 

[David Dennison 19441]

13 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Can’t wait to hear all the complaining when the report is released but parts are redacted due to classified information etc; nothing will be good enough.

I guess that means it's time to start investigating Hillary Clinton again.

[David Dennison 19441]

4 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Where did you see the number of pages reported?

If there is a table of contents, sure. The goal of the report and investigation was to find collusion correct? If the conclusion is, no evidence of collusion with trump or his associates, then yes, very possible.

Question for you, have you ever read, in full, hearings or case law? I don’t have to read hundreds of pages of facts to understand the results in the conclusion section.  

If the conspiracy theorists out there want to argue that mueller came up with the wrong conclusion, or Barr misinterpreted the results, I guess that’s your hill to die on and will be proved or disproved when the report is released. (Which I support, btw)

 

Barr's letter did not say that Robert Mueller found no evidence of collusion.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

We want to know what happened. If the facts and evidence exonerate the president, great! Let’s see them.  

The whole purpose of a special counsel is to get to the truth without political interference.  

Trump’s hand picked stooge poured politics all over the Mueller report by inserting his own judgment and conclusions.

If this was how the Hillary investigation went down, I’d say that was wrong too.  Let’s see all the evidence and put this shit behind us.

How can anyone be opposed to that? 

[Biff Tannen 46063]

1 hour ago, Enchubben said:

The goal of the report and investigation was to find collusion correct?

No

[retread 2951]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Yeah, that only means there’s incriminating evidence in the Mueller report. 

Nothingburger.

[XingTheRubicon 134]

It's still so hard to let go

[David Dennison 19441]

 

[Enchubben 5598]

6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

We want to know what happened. If the facts and evidence exonerate the president, great! Let’s see them.  

The whole purpose of a special counsel is to get to the truth without political interference.  

Trump’s hand picked stooge poured politics all over the Mueller report by inserting his own judgment and conclusions.

If this was how the Hillary investigation went down, I’d say that was wrong too.  Let’s see all the evidence and put this shit behind us.

How can anyone be opposed to that? 

I don’t think many have argued againat releasing the report at this point. (At least the parts that can safely and legally be released) can’t disagree with anything you said.

Most republicans have an issue with the facts and circumstances with why this investigation began in the first place.

Maybe we should remove the politics from something like this and just have a 2 year investigation of every elected POTUS, since there doesn’t appear to be any concern with the impact on a sitting president.

Also, regardless of the semantics in the summary, the question was could he have read the report and summarized it in two days. My answer is yes, very possible.

[elguapo 4620]

3 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

I don’t think many have argued againat releasing the report at this point. (At least the parts that can safely and legally be released) can’t disagree with anything you said.

 

Not many, only the GOP senate majority leader

 

Quote

McConnell blocks resolution calling for release of Mueller report for second time

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

7 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

with why this investigation began in the first place.

I mean, if you fire the FBI director for an investigation into Russia, you should expect a special counsel investigating your connections to Russia.  

Also, the evidence of Trump blatantly lying to the American people about having no deals in Russia while simultaneously working on a clandestine business deal in Russia while running for President is, I don’t know, SUSPICIOUS.

Edited March 27, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Anastasis 23703]

8 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

 

Does Barr have terminal hepatitis?

[Enchubben 5598]

Just now, elguapo said:

Not many, only the GOP senate majority leader

 

 

I saw him interviewed live last night indicating that the report will be released with no objection in weeks, not months.

Did you actually read those full reports and understand why the resolution to immediately release it was blocked? Or did you blindly read the headline alone? 

[elguapo 4620]

5 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

I saw him interviewed live last night indicating that the report will be released with no objection in weeks, not months.

Did you actually read those full reports and understand why the resolution to immediately release it was blocked? Or did you blindly read the headline alone? 

I did, do you actually think his reasons for blocking are valid?

 

It's the same damn resolution that passed the house 420-0.

Edited March 27, 2019 by elguapo

[Anastasis 23703]

Just now, fffvvvckkk said:

STFU you accomplice to Treason!

[TwiceHorn 31996]

9 minutes ago, elguapo said:

I did, do you actually think his reasons for blocking are valid?

I have zero doubt that there is information in there that needs to be redacted for both "ongoing investigation" purposes and national security purposes.  I might suspect that Mueller or his team could make quick work of the former, the latter would probably take some time with review from CIA, FBI, NSA, DIA and maybe others. And even with respect to the ongoing investigation material, the actual investigators (SD NY, etc.) might want/need to take a pass over it.

And, I don't think it's implausible that Barr and his minions were able to summarize and report on two issues basically from a very lengthy report that deals with dozens and dozens of issues, for example, all the indicted people, investigatory dead-ends and so on.  If his summary purported to be of the entire report, that would strain credibility.

Edited March 27, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

I have zero doubt that there is information in there that needs to be redacted for both "ongoing investigation" purposes and national security purposes.  I might suspect that Mueller or his team could make quick work of the former, the latter would probably take some time with review from CIA, FBI, NSA, DIA and maybe others.

And, I don't think it's implausible that Barr and his minions were able to summarize and report on two issues basically out of a possibly 1000-page report that deals with, for example, all the indicted people, investigatory dead-ends and so on.  If his summary purported to be of the entire report, that would strain credibility.

What puzzles me is why didn’t Mueller have a report for public/congressional consumption ready to go?  Maybe he did and we just don’t know about it.

He had to know the moment he turned in a report everyone would be breaking his door down for information. 

[Tuco 5093]

I have not been able to follow much. Have they shared with the gang of 8?

[bolverk 30246]

2 minutes ago, Tuco said:

I have not been able to follow much. Have they shared with the gang of 8?

Not to my knowledge, no.

[XingTheRubicon 134]

Talking to a pharmaceutical VP in Basal (Switzerland), they speak some kind of country 'Basal German' so his accent is horrid.  Anyway, he asked about our POTUS and the russians...what the hell is going on.

I told him a special prosecutor was appointed to investigate if Trump was colluding with Russia to fix the 2016 election.

Then he said, in his broken English "So, the billionaire real estate guy, Trump...they, uh...they saying he was Russian double agent?"

"Yeah, (I answered)...it sounds kinda crazy when you say it like that."

 

 

I wonder who will be the last one to 'believe.'

 

 

[TwiceHorn 31996]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What puzzles me is why didn’t Mueller have a report for public/congressional consumption ready to go?  Maybe he did and we just don’t know about it.

He had to know the moment he turned in a report everyone would be breaking his door down for information. 

That actually seems like something he might do, but I don't think he could see his way clear to sharing it with the investigating entities and national security entities before delivering it to the AG, so it might be tailored to pass any such review, but would still need reviewing.

[Enchubben 5598]

10 minutes ago, elguapo said:

I did, do you actually think his reasons for blocking are valid?

 

It's the same damn resolution that passed the house 420-0.

Then you saw this his reason for blocking it was because they wanted to add the language that would allow for a review of the process and evidence used to begin the investigation in the first place.

If everything was on the up and up, there shouldn’t be an issue with that right?

[Biff Tannen 46063]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

If his summary purported to be of the entire report, that would strain credibility.

Is it not?  That's the way it is being perceived.  

[Anastasis 23703]

Holy god bannon on cnn looks like straight up Palpatine. 

Edited March 28, 2019 by Anastasis

[elguapo 4620]

10 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Then you saw this his reason for blocking it was because they wanted to add the language that would allow for a review of the process and evidence used to begin the investigation in the first place.

If everything was on the up and up, there shouldn’t be an issue with that right?

I have no problem with that, let it all out.  

[David Dennison 19441]

10 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Then you saw this his reason for blocking it was because they wanted to add the language that would allow for a review of the process and evidence used to begin the investigation in the first place.

If everything was on the up and up, there shouldn’t be an issue with that right?

Of course not. They can review all they want. Again. 

[Enchubben 5598]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Of course not. They can review all they want. Again. 

 I think we’re on the same page here; tell Schumer. 

[Poolflood 845]

1 hour ago, maninblack said:

Got it

Well done.