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

'stache

'stache 22143

Posted
Posted

Can a Trump supporter please inform me why, even if there was “no collusion,” you’re okay with the fact that an enemy of our country worked to get your guy elected? And how was it okay for him to praise the interference publicly (i.e. “Russia if you’re listening..” and “I love Wikileaks...”)? Is it okay simply because it was Hillary Clinton? I’m still at a loss how, even if the report is as good as he and Barr claim, this whole situation is okay. From my perspective it’s clearly all about your “team” and hatred for the opposition, essentially anything that keeps a Democrat out of office is okay, including interference from an enemy that supports your team. I just can’t believe that’s where we are in our two party system.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87183

Posted
Posted
Just now, 'stache said:

Can a Trump supporter please inform me why, even if there was “no collusion,” you’re okay with the fact that an enemy of our country worked to get your guy elected? And how was it okay for him to praise the interference publicly (i.e. “Russia if you’re listening..” and “I love Wikileaks...”)? Is it okay simply because it was Hillary Clinton? I’m still at a loss how, even if the report is as good as he and Barr claim, this whole situation is okay. From my perspective it’s clearly all about your “team” and hatred for the opposition, essentially anything that keeps a Democrat out of office is okay, including interference from an enemy that supports your team. I just can’t believe that’s where we are in our two party system.

BECUASE HER EMAILS

That was easy. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SimonBolivar

SimonBolivar 11064

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Can a Trump supporter please inform me why, even if there was “no collusion,” you’re okay with the fact that an enemy of our country worked to get your guy elected? And how was it okay for him to praise the interference publicly (i.e. “Russia if you’re listening..” and “I love Wikileaks...”)? Is it okay simply because it was Hillary Clinton? I’m still at a loss how, even if the report is as good as he and Barr claim, this whole situation is okay. From my perspective it’s clearly all about your “team” and hatred for the opposition, essentially anything that keeps a Democrat out of office is okay, including interference from an enemy that supports your team. I just can’t believe that’s where we are in our two party system.

Dj2e0w9VAAAraKs.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foosters

Foosters 18280

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Captainant said:

So it wasn't illegal for the Trump campaign to get documents from WikiLeaks and other sources because it would only be illegal if those sources were the ones who hacked the system. What a technicality.

It's also not true. I've defended multiple people charged with "receipt of stolen property."

Unless there's no Federal analogue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 10158

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Can a Trump supporter please inform me why, even if there was “no collusion,” you’re okay with the fact that an enemy of our country worked to get your guy elected? And how was it okay for him to praise the interference publicly (i.e. “Russia if you’re listening..” and “I love Wikileaks...”)? Is it okay simply because it was Hillary Clinton? I’m still at a loss how, even if the report is as good as he and Barr claim, this whole situation is okay. From my perspective it’s clearly all about your “team” and hatred for the opposition, essentially anything that keeps a Democrat out of office is okay, including interference from an enemy that supports your team. I just can’t believe that’s where we are in our two party system.

Tax cuts!  Kavanaugh!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87183

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Red Five said:

Well that sure sounded like total exoneration. Report must be clean as a whistle!

Resummarizing your 4 page summary is a lot like when you're summarizing the Cliff Notes in your essay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zork

zork 629

Posted
Posted (edited)

no executive priviledge invoked?

wikileaks and other hack provided info was considered public since no trump associated hacking?  can't collude/obstruct with public information?

mueller-comedy-basketball-ref.jpg

Edited by zork
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87183

Posted
Posted
Just now, Horn Dog said:

So basically Trump campaign actively colluded with Wikileaks to distribute material hacked by Russia, but its not technically illegal.  So no collusion.  Got it.

Idk about you, but when I'm really frustrated, I find that obstructing justice makes me feel better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2951

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

Yeah the IC has put out a full report on it and now the special counsel has said it too. The executive branch just doesn't care because it was for him.

Yep.

DNI released a report in Jan 17 and, I think, another one recently. The forward facing side of our govt (primarily executive) has only tangentially acknowledged the Russian meddling, has shown no outrage about it, has not imposed any significant santions on Russia, and has said 'why would it have been Russia.'

Our intel chiefs appear before Congress every 6-9 months and say, "it's a serious situation, and cyber hacking continues." Then, we hear no more of it.

We basically don't acknowledge the threat.

Edited by retread
  • Like 1
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...