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

elfenix

elfenix 34,169

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

I'm ready to conclude that jaded Hilary voters don't cast reflections in the mirror.  Everything imagined about Trump has a worse known in their 2016 candidate.

we sure dodged that corruption bullet

Edited by elfenix
Link to comment
Share on other sites
XingTheRubicon

XingTheRubicon 134

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

How Baby Boomer of you.  Thanks for fucking it all up, pops.

I'm 39...and fucking what up?  The greatest country on earth?

 

Quit waiting for someone else to do something for you.  You come across as a helpless nitwit that actually thinks a politician is going to make your life complete, or provide for you.  They don't care about you, son...it's all on you.  Gotta grow up sometime.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45,538

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, XingTheRubicon said:

Quit waiting for someone else to do something for you.  You come across as a helpless nitwit that actually thinks a politician is going to make your life complete, or provide for you.  They don't care about you, son...it's all on you.  Gotta grow up sometime.

Yep, you have me dead to rights.  I jes' love me some gubmint teat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokeyTheBear

SmokeyTheBear 5,562

Posted
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, XingTheRubicon said:

So, you're against able-bodied citizens on the 'gubment teat?'  Or just you

What's funny is that every single person in my family that still support Trump are the ones who take government assistance. Every one. And not one in my family who are done with Trump take government assistance. Crazy little stat for your mensa brain to chew on. 

*oh, and they are able bodied. Just hate that the headaches from not being able to drink alcohol for 10 minutes to work, gets them. 

Edited by SmokeyTheBear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29,394

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Jesus Christ.  Decorum and vacation time prevent me from telling you what exactly you can do, but imagine the worst. 

I mean, that's just flat fucking stupid.

No, it's worse. It's not stupid - it's a lie and he knows it.

This is textbook gaslighting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
XingTheRubicon

XingTheRubicon 134

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

What's funny is that every single person in my family that still support Trump are the ones who take government assistance. Every one. And not one in my family who are done with Trump take government assistance. Crazy little stat for your mensa brain to chew on. 

Don't believe a word of what you just typed.  Not one.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Fuck You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29,394

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, XingTheRubicon said:

Don't believe a word of what you just typed.  Not one.

 

 

Most retirees receive government assistance, and it feels like half of rural, working-age adults in some parts of America is on disability. It may well be true for his family, but I don't know anything about their circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
XingTheRubicon

XingTheRubicon 134

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Most retirees receive government assistance, and it feels like half of rural, working-age adults in some parts of America is on disability. It may well be true for his family, but I don't know anything about their circumstances.

Just so we're clear, retirement, pension, and soc security are not 'government assistance.'  That's $ contractually earned.  I agree with your point concerning rural America and disability.  

It's pretty clear that most individuals (left or right) will exploit gov't programs if it's there for the taking.  I'm not denying it happens, just surprised there's that many with absolutely zero pride.  

Speaking of pride, "Operation Mountain Pride" is why I'm a registered pub...if for no other reason.

  • Like 2
  • Fuck You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29,394

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, XingTheRubicon said:

Just so we're clear, retirement, pension, and soc security are not 'government assistance.'  That's $ contractually earned.  I agree with your point concerning rural America and disability.  

It's pretty clear that most individuals (left or right) will exploit gov't programs if it's there for the taking.  I'm not denying it happens, just surprised there's that many with absolutely zero pride.  

Speaking of pride, "Operation Mountain Pride" is why I'm a registered pub...if for no other reason.

 

Those who are on social security are taking out far more than they put in. It's a huge flaw in the system. So, yes, it is government assistance but that's not a condemnation of retirees. It is simply a recognition of the deal that was struck in the social contract.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bmore

bmore 0

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

Congress is getting all of the report. It’s just a matter of when. Dems aren’t in a hurry.

The GOP either rips the bandaid off now or prolonges while showing the public they are hiding information, which only builds it up more and more. 

The only questions in my mind is how long it takes for Congress to get the full report and then how much of the report will be released to the public.

Politics is a game

This guy politics 

100% agree

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
notre dame joe

notre dame joe 172

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Captainant said:

I'm ready to conclude that flathead trumpsters like yourself are going to continue to invoke the clintons until the heat death of the universe, while excusing every terrible thing that the trump admin does

Hey! half an intelligent response.  Someday we won't have Clintons to kick around anymore and will join metoo in the historical footnotes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted

An already guilty, going to prison, Michael Cohen is trying to keep his pants out of the gears of an even bigger shredder.  He knows .

 

"Michael Cohen's legal team has released a 12-page memo it provided to House Democrats Thursday. The memo outlines evidence of what his team describes as "Trump's involvement in a conspiracy to collude with Russian government intervention in his favor during the 2016 presidential campaign" and "other felony crimes committed by Trump before and after he became president." 

The big picture: This release comes two days after the New York Times reported that members of special counsel Robert Mueller's team believe the details of the Mueller report are more damaging than Attorney General Bill Barr first indicated in his summary, which said Mueller's team did not establish a conspiracy with Russia. 

On Thursday, attorney Lanny Davis indicated that Cohen could provide documents from his computers and phones from the past decade that would give "significant value to the various congressional oversight and investigation committees." 

 

ICYMI from 2 days ago:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, retread said:

Is (or was) Cohen making the Manafort calculation? Better to go to prison than drink the polonium tea?

The calculus has always involved access to a pardon more than avoidance of polonium tea.  Cohen is offering everything and the kitchen sink as a ploy to limit prison to 3 years, and even then you have to believe he's going to hold something back.

You know, we're still just seeing the tip of the iceberg.  As frustrating as it's been to have Barr do what he did, having subsequent revelations about how much SCO opposes and disagrees with Barr's actions (per WaPo/NYT/WSJ reporting this week) is a silver lining.  It reveals that this is NOT a 'gotcha investigation'.  It's not a witch hunt.  There is a concerted effort to hide Mueller's findings from the public.  There's a sustained cover-up afoot that the public is now able to more clearly see.  Although that cover-up effort has been multi-faceted and ongoing for two years running, the bi-partisan public support for seeing Mueller's report and the subsequent attempts to delay and obstruct it coming out only exacerbate the inevitable end result.

 

Spoiler

9459395842.jpg

 

Edited by triplehorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted
On 4/2/2019 at 6:41 AM, triplehorn said:

There also appears to be a difference in what information may be available to Congress for purposes of an impeachment process versus exerting oversight, which might force the House's hand on some matters.

Looks like Congress getting its hand forced.  On the face of it, I don't disagree with this decision:

McKeever v. Barr, a ruling issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on April 5, rejects the argument that federal judges can release grand jury evidence whenever they think it’s in the public interest. 

 

"...In the current battle over the Mueller report and evidence, the House Judiciary Committee wants “access to materials the [Justice] Department deems covered by Rule 6(e),” according to a statement by Chair Jerrold Nadler. If McKeever had come out the other way, and recognized the existence of inherent authority to go beyond 6(e), Congress might have argued for release of the evidence on public-interest grounds, as part of its oversight power. But McKeever indicates that Congress probably needs to invoke the “judicial proceeding” exception if it wants grand jury evidence. While impeachment is a judicial proceeding, congressional oversight is not, according to a D.C. district court case from 1981—and nothing in McKeever suggests otherwise.

Congress may have powerful political arguments for the immediate release of the Mueller materials, as part of its oversight function, but under McKeever, it doesn’t have a powerful legal argument. It’s possible, of course, that the Justice Department will redact 6(e) material in the Mueller report to the satisfaction of all concerned. But if the House wants to see the full evidence, it may have no choice but to launch impeachment proceedings..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9,083

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

No puppet! You’re the puppet!

Says

 

22 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Jesus Christ.  Decorum and vacation time prevent me from telling you what exactly you can do, but imagine the worst. 

I mean, that's just flat fucking stupid.

Yeah, no it's not but you keep on poking  that hole in the Hillary poster on your wall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,240

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Looks like Congress getting its hand forced.  On the face of it, I don't disagree with this decision:

McKeever v. Barr, a ruling issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on April 5, rejects the argument that federal judges can release grand jury evidence whenever they think it’s in the public interest. 

 

"...In the current battle over the Mueller report and evidence, the House Judiciary Committee wants “access to materials the [Justice] Department deems covered by Rule 6(e),” according to a statement by Chair Jerrold Nadler. If McKeever had come out the other way, and recognized the existence of inherent authority to go beyond 6(e), Congress might have argued for release of the evidence on public-interest grounds, as part of its oversight power. But McKeever indicates that Congress probably needs to invoke the “judicial proceeding” exception if it wants grand jury evidence. While impeachment is a judicial proceeding, congressional oversight is not, according to a D.C. district court case from 1981—and nothing in McKeever suggests otherwise.

Congress may have powerful political arguments for the immediate release of the Mueller materials, as part of its oversight function, but under McKeever, it doesn’t have a powerful legal argument. It’s possible, of course, that the Justice Department will redact 6(e) material in the Mueller report to the satisfaction of all concerned. But if the House wants to see the full evidence, it may have no choice but to launch impeachment proceedings..."

Toldya.  But it was all those gotdam Trump appointees on the DC Circuit.  Oh, wait.

Also, I don't think they have to start proceedings, but a select committee would help.

Still, we have to see what Barr's response to the reporters' petition before we can speculate in an informed fashion.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,545

Posted
Posted (edited)

My Spidey senses are detecting an administration tone shift regarding public access to the Mueller Report. Though far from a political savant, if I were tasked with advising the White House on handling this issue, I would strongly recommend a two-prong strategy:

1. Eat shit

2. Die

Edited by Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted

What is going on with this situation ?  Michael Cohen's attorneys released a memo at the end of the week with two potentially devastating revelations:

1) "Michael Cohen's legal team has released a 12-page memo it provided to House Democrats Thursday. The memo outlines evidence of what his team describes as "Trump's involvement in a conspiracy to collude with Russian government intervention in his favor during the 2016 presidential campaign" and "other felony crimes committed by Trump before and after he became president." 

2)  "According to the memo, by Cohen attorneys Lanny Davis, Michael Monico, and Carly Chocron, this trove of evidence indicates “possible federal campaign finance violations by the Republican National Committee, including possibly illegal conduiting of illegal substantial donations to the RNC by foreign nationals, including from China.”

 But here's the catch.  The evidence Cohen purportedly has, which he recently "found" and is willing to share with Congress, appears to be contained in a trove of 14 million documents prosecutors returned to him after he got raided:

Spoiler

 

 

So you've got federal prosecutors on one hand, and the Congressional House investigations in the other.  Feds have the Cohen evidence but Congress doesn't.  My question is, would federal prosecutors possibly incentivize Cohen to hand over his evidence to Congress in exchange for not pursuing further indictments on these matters ?  The feds won't just hand over the spoils of their Cohen search warrant to Congress, right ?  And there are systemic rules and mechanisms that prevent the feds from disclosing that evidence in the short term.  The feds conceivably could take Cohen and a lot of others down (Trump/involved GOP) with that evidence but it'd take awhile and feds won't indict Trump.  So for something as potentially huge as 1) and 2) above, the most direct line to ensure it's both public and actionable is to convince Cohen to take it to Congress, correct ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
notre dame joe

notre dame joe 172

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, triplehorn said:

What is going on with this situation ?  Michael Cohen's attorneys released a memo at the end of the week with two potentially devastating revelations:

1) "Michael Cohen's legal team has released a 12-page memo it provided to House Democrats Thursday. The memo outlines evidence of what his team describes as "Trump's involvement in a conspiracy to collude with Russian government intervention in his favor during the 2016 presidential campaign" and "other felony crimes committed by Trump before and after he became president." 

2)  "According to the memo, by Cohen attorneys Lanny Davis, Michael Monico, and Carly Chocron, this trove of evidence indicates “possible federal campaign finance violations by the Republican National Committee, including possibly illegal conduiting of illegal substantial donations to the RNC by foreign nationals, including from China.”

 But here's the catch.  The evidence Cohen purportedly has, which he recently "found" and is willing to share with Congress, appears to be contained in a trove of 14 million documents prosecutors returned to him after he got raided:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

So you've got federal prosecutors on one hand, and the Congressional House investigations in the other.  Feds have the Cohen evidence but Congress doesn't.  My question is, would federal prosecutors possibly incentivize Cohen to hand over his evidence to Congress in exchange for not pursuing further indictments on these matters ?  The feds won't just hand over the spoils of their Cohen search warrant to Congress, right ?  And there are systemic rules and mechanisms that prevent the feds from disclosing that evidence in the short term.  The feds conceivably could take Cohen and a lot of others down (Trump/involved GOP) with that evidence but it'd take awhile and feds won't indict Trump.  So for something as potentially huge as 1) and 2) above, the most direct line to ensure it's both public and actionable is to convince Cohen to take it to Congress, correct ?

 

Since when does Congress have a say in criminal sentencing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,240

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

Since when does Congress have a say in criminal sentencing?

Cohen could conceivably cite to cooperation with congress in support of a downward departure.  GOP talking points aside, Cohen's credibility seems to be a bit questionable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted

It’s not Cohen’s credibility, it’s what was in the trove of digital evidence caught in the raid a year ago.

If his attys are offering evidence on Trump conspiracy to collude w RU govt on the election as well as an illegal foreign campaign finance racket with the RNC, that tells you what the feds have already seen (feds returned his seized property).

Cohen could be trying to milk it by offering too little to substantiate anything, or he could see that there’s no way out from spending many years in prison on some number of pending felony charges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27,403

Posted
Posted
Just now, Thetexashammer said:

Did Hillary take cash from the Russians?

(1) Yes

(2) No

Did she? What evidence are you basing that claim on? Also, how does her (theoretical) taking of money from russia absolve trump and the GOP of taking money from the Russians?

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...