Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation


Hugo Stiglitz

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The political motivation in this case being what?

To prevent the subversion of American democracy by a hostile foreign government running a multi pronged military intelligence operation? 

How dare they! 

Yes.  It's like arguing the guy who sold heroin to hundreds of 10-year-olds  on the school playground along with dirty needles to shoot up should go free because we have fucked up drug laws in this country.  Yes, there are FISA abuses.  It doesn't mean that wiretaps shouldn't be used when people are offering favors to the KGB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

Yes.  It's like arguing the guy who sold heroin to hundreds of 10-year-olds  on the school playground along with dirty needles to shoot up should go free because we have fucked up drug laws in this country.  Yes, there are FISA abuses.  It doesn't mean that wiretaps shouldn't be used when people are offering favors to the KGB.

It's more like saying that you can't investigate that heroin dealer at all until you can first prove he is 100% guilty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FondrenRoad said:

It's more like saying that you can't investigate that heroin dealer at all until you can first prove he is 100% guilty. 

That too.  It just seems weird to use a case that's exactly why we need FISA (although I agree changes are needed to FISA and Fourth Amendment jurisprudence in general) , to make a point that FISA laws need to be revisited.  Yes, there are some terrible abuses of FISA laws.  There is no reason to believe that wiretapping Michael Flynn was one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Perhaps he's talking about the President brazenly defying his oath of office and attacking the free press.

It doesn't really matter who the criticism comes from. Many media outlets have become their own agenda driven operations. They don't report verified fact they accept undisclosed remarks as fact without verification.  Weak, and skewed reporting was here well before Trump took office.  That includes FOX as well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, XingTheRubicon said:

Voicing displeasure with the free press is part of the same amendment that guarantees a free press.

Yeah but the most powerful person in the world publicly declaring you the enemy of the people for doing your job seems like, I dunno, dangerous and unAmerican.

It’s a line straight from Joseph Stalin.  

He gets away with it because muh free speech but it doesn’t mean we should tolerate it. 

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

It doesn't really matter who the criticism comes from. Many media outlets have become their own agenda driven operations. They don't report verified fact they accept undisclosed remarks as fact without verification.  Weak, and skewed reporting was here well before Trump took office.  That includes FOX as well.  

It does matter who the criticism comes from.  The President represents the state.  When he says it, it is the state attempting to suppress the media.  It is a direct violation of the 1st amendment.  That nobody in the DOJ or Congress attempts to stop him from doing it is a sign of just how close we are teetering to the edge.

When you criticize the media it is not the same thing.  You, as a private citizen, are free to do so.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Anyone who thinks the "call to hack Clinton" is serious, shouldn't be serving in Congress. 

Not only that, the emails were gone and not recoverable at that point.  Hillary made sure of that.  If anything, they could maybe give us the emails she deleted from an earlier hack.  That would have been interesting.  Because those 30,000 emails were not just about yoga routines and Chelsea's wedding.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cheeseweasel said:

Anyone who thinks the "call to hack Clinton" is serious, shouldn't be serving in Congress. 

How many hours passed after Trump called for Russia to hack Clinton before the next Russian hack occurred.  And everything else Schiff laid out ?  Good rebuttal cheese.

fuck these GOP traitors.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Anyone who thinks the "call to hack Clinton" is serious, shouldn't be serving in Congress. 

So "seriousness" is a get out of jail free card?  Trump never comes across as serious.  I guess he can call for whatever he wants then.  

Usually he kind of hints around it and gives himself the ability to say, "I said they could, not that I wanted them too."  The call to hack Clinton was more direct than his usual attempts to incite.  This statement is more typical of him.

“You know, the left plays a tougher game, it’s very funny. I actually think that the people on the right are tougher, but they don’t play it tougher. OK? I can tell you I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump—I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough—until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad. But the left plays it cuter and tougher. Like with all the nonsense that they do in Congress … with all this invest[igations]—that’s all they want to do is —you know, they do things that are nasty. Republicans never played this."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, XingTheRubicon said:

Voicing displeasure with the free press is part of the same amendment that guarantees a free press.

He is actively undermining the 1st Amendment when he calls the press "the enemy of the people".  This is not acceptable from POTUS.

The fact that right-wing bootlickers don't get it is (a) unsurprising and (b) infuriating.  Again, go back to 8th grade and crack open a Civics text.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Schiff lays it out in response to Kevin "two people Putin pays" McCarthy and R's calling for Schiff to resign:

 

 

 

Finally!  Need moar of this now from other democrats.  Start pumping out known facts that will be in the Mueller report.  Keep repeating them over and over again until the Mueller report is released.  Publicly shame the fuck out of the KGOP.   Now is the time the democrats need to start raising hell over this coverup in progress. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, triplehorn said:

How many hours passed after Trump called for Russia to hack Clinton before the next Russian hack occurred. 

So let me get this straight. You are contending that a bunch of Russian hackers were just sitting around waiting for the "go" from a candidate who (at that time) had little chance of winning to hack a US Secretary of States email? How flat is your earth?

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Finally!  Need moar of this now from other democrats.  Start pumping out known facts that will be in the Mueller report.  Keep repeating them over and over again until the Mueller report is released.  Publicly shame the fuck out of the KGOP.   Now is the time the democrats need to start raising hell over this coverup in progress. 

keep up the witch hunt now that the narrative has collapsed.  Guarantee Trump another 4 years.

  • Like 3
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Anyone who thinks the "call to hack Clinton" is serious, shouldn't be serving in Congress. 

I remembered when I pretended to rob that store with a gun, but I was actually just kidding cause.  I even had on my clown mask!  They handed me the money, and I took it, because they gave it to me for free.  So officer, I was just joking.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

So let me get this straight. You are contending that a bunch of Russian hackers were just sitting around waiting for the "go" from a candidate who (at that time) had little chance of winning to hack a US Secretary of States email? How flat is your earth?

It's telling that out of a giant compilation of malfeasance committed by Trump's campaign and other associates, you've found one item to focus on and think you have a "gotcha".  Trump's call to Russia, serious or not, was completely unacceptable.  There's usually truth in "humor".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nivek said:

I remembered when I pretended to rob that store with a gun, but I was actually just kidding cause.  I even had on my clown mask!  They handed me the money, and I took it, because they gave it to me for free.  So officer, I was just joking.  

The emails were long since deleted.  Any chance of getting them would have been from a prior hack.  Clinton’s server — which was turned over to the Department of Justice in 2015 — was out of operation when Trump made his joke. It did not exist as a server then. It was impossible for a foreign power — or anyone else for that matter — to hack something that did not exist.

Use your brains a little bit on that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

It's telling that out of a giant compilation of malfeasance committed by Trump's campaign and other associates, you've found one item to focus on and think you have a "gotcha".  Trump's call to Russia, serious or not, was completely unacceptable.  There's usually truth in "humor".

I was referring to the tweet posted by Tripplehorn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Anyone who thinks the "call to hack Clinton" is serious, shouldn't be serving in Congress. 

Trump was asked if he was serious right after making the comment and he doubled down.  

One minute video in the link. 

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4615527/donald-trump-if-russia-chinahas-emails-love-them

Katy Tur gave him plenty opportunity to say he was just jesting

He was dead serious.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, elguapo said:

It seems @Anastasis natural tendency to play the contrarian in the age of Trump has caused his brain to short circuit in some way.

The Trump era's driven us all a little/lot crazy/crazier.  Anastasis represents the devil's advocate's absurd extremes at times, like Hugo can be the breathless watcher driven mad by the innumerable feints of conspiracy.  Both views have value even if they can be exhausting.  I think, I hope that we'll eventually agree that we've been and continue to be assaulted by misinformation for some time now, propagated by organizations and interests that don't give a shit about us as a country or individuals except for how we can serve them.  Walter was wrong.  Be afraid of the nihilists, because they're only too happy to turn us against each other.

Edited by Degenerate Gardner
  • Like 2
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

He is actively undermining the 1st Amendment when he calls the press "the enemy of the people".  This is not acceptable from POTUS.

The fact that right-wing bootlickers don't get it is (a) unsurprising and (b) infuriating.  Again, go back to 8th grade and crack open a Civics text.

Speaking of civics...

Your feelings being hurt doesn't violate the 1st amendment.  Your ignorance is infinite.

  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, triplehorn said:

Sounds like Mueller report is hundreds of pages, 700 just came up on msnbc.

  By comparison, the Starr report per WaPo:

”Starr and his team at the Office of the Independent Counsel sent a 453-page report (plus 2,000 pages of appendixes) to Congress”

NYT reporting 300+ pages.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/kids/other/mueller-report-exceeds-300-pages-raising-questions-about-four-page-summary/ar-BBVljs7?li=BBnb7Kz

For reference point, the indictments against Kiliminik, the IRA, and Neykysko are approximately 90 pages aggregate.  Tack on the Gates, Manafort and Stone indictments/statement of offense and you are at ~200. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

NYT reporting 300+ pages.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/kids/other/mueller-report-exceeds-300-pages-raising-questions-about-four-page-summary/ar-BBVljs7?li=BBnb7Kz

For reference point, the indictments against Kiliminik, the IRA, and Neykysko are approximately 90 pages aggregate.  Tack on the Gates, Manafort and Stone indictments/statement of offense and you are at ~200. 

We have no idea if the 300+ page number includes appendixes.

If the report is formatted anything like the Starr report, that’s a lot of information. 

However, it will likely be formatted nothing like the Starr report. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

Well, add a reading class to the civics class.  I didn't say he violated the 1st Amendment.

So, the civics test you suggested would reference your feelings being hurt?  

 

 

btw, you never did thank me for teaching you about the Trump tower setup meetings

  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

We have no idea if the 300+ page number includes appendixes.

If the report is formatted anything like the Starr report, that’s a lot of information. 

However, it will likely be formatted nothing like the Starr report. 

Text is probably double-spaced with 12.5 font with at least one table on each page. They probably messed with the margins, as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First search function when the report is released: "Investigation did not establish".

The first question in my mind is what immediately precedes the quote... "[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” 

Hypothesis: "While the investigation revealed a number points of contact between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and individuals associated with the Russian government, t...." 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Wow.

They are actually going to blow this political gift.

I can't say I'm surprised.

Dude, both parties can get away with blowing their dick off right now and have a lifetime left to recover. 

People have already forgotten about the government shutdown and the fake national emergency and that was a month ago.

If there was ever a time for the democrats to go hard to the paint now is the time and the Mueller report is a hill worth dying on.

The voters aren’t going to disapprove of the democrats trying to make the Mueller report public ASAP.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

We have no idea if the 300+ page number includes appendixes.

If the report is formatted anything like the Starr report, that’s a lot of information. 

However, it will likely be formatted nothing like the Starr report. 

So we will not learn wether or not Stormy would not let Trump go down on her because she was on her period? Let's get Starr Report transparent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

He is actively undermining the 1st Amendment when he calls the press "the enemy of the people".  This is not acceptable from POTUS.

The fact that right-wing bootlickers don't get it is (a) unsurprising and (b) infuriating.  Again, go back to 8th grade and crack open a Civics text.

It's inexcusable when the press reports things they haven't vetted. They in fact become enemies of the citizens of the nation thru reckless, self serving reporting of un substantiated fact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

It's inexcusable when the press reports things they haven't vetted. They in fact become enemies of the citizens of the nation thru reckless, self serving reporting of un substantiated fact. 

Except a lot of the things you consider unvetted are, in fact, vetted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

It's inexcusable when the press reports things they haven't vetted. They in fact become enemies of the citizens of the nation thru reckless, self serving reporting of un substantiated fact. 

So what should we do, execute all members of the press?  I mean, them being our enemies and all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, triplehorn said:

In his very next tweet, he falsely claims the Mueller report has been released by substituting for the Barr letter.  And you have Caputo on Fox speaking directly to Trump about pardoning everyone charged to date.  Yesterday, Trump on Fox about Barr “a great gentlemen" & a "great man... So incredible... A very special person.”

Every move and every utterance looks like a cover-up and nothing else.  They know the Mueller report will bear no resemblance to Barr's letter or his partisan intervention.  This is TrumpCo's window of opportunity before the evidentiary tide turns.

Rush was calling for massive pardons as he lied about the investigation, the dossier, and the Clintons. 

They really sound desperate and shrill about using this window between the summary and full report releases to hurl up a stone wall.  It's not a new tactic for the right. Seize a moment that can be used as an end point and then reject all future reference to the issue as "old news."

The amateur operatives around here will be all over it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Rush was calling for massive pardons as he lied about the investigation, the dossier, and the Clintons. 

They really sound desperate and shrill about using this window between the summary and full report releases to hurl up a stone wall.  It's not a new tactic for the right. Seize a moment that can be used as an end point and then reject all future reference to the issue as "old news."

The amateur operatives around here will be all over it.

Every day that goes by without the full report being released makes the administration appear to be hiding something and the AG to be nothing more than a political operative. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

It's inexcusable when the press reports things they haven't vetted. They in fact become enemies of the citizens of the nation thru reckless, self serving reporting of un substantiated fact. 

If only you had the same standard for the fucking President of the United States 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

It's inexcusable when the press reports things they haven't vetted. They in fact become enemies of the citizens of the nation thru reckless, self serving reporting of un substantiated fact. 

Serious question: What unsubstantiated facts have the major news orgs gotten wrong?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...