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

Cheeseweasel

Cheeseweasel 26437

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Today is not a good day for the Trump administration.

You'd be wrong, but ok.

He gives zero fucks. He's already bought the billboard that says "NO COLLUSION" and spread it thru the country. 99% of people have already made their decision. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18646

Posted
Posted
Just now, Cheeseweasel said:

You'd be wrong, but ok.

He gives zero fucks. He's already bought the billboard that says "NO COLLUSION" and spread it thru the country. 99% of people have already made their decision. 

It doesn' t matter what he thinks. If 99% of the country have already made their decision, he's going to lose in 2020.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

I think it's important to keep all of this straight . . . what's "this" you are referring to?  Specific statements within the report or more of a general vibe?

Just skimming through, but specifically the statement on 1-2 that the Trump campaign expected it would benefit from Russia's actions, and the things being said on CNN about the sharing of poll information by Manafort, tweeting links suggested by Russian operatives (Wikileaks), etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18646

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

It's without the grand jury stuff, which by law cannot be released.   No word though on whether Barr has asked the grand jury court for permission to release those materials, which he could easily do. 

Congress could always call those witnesses to testify. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kevwun

kevwun 15608

Posted
Posted

If your friend steals something you want and then pawns it and you go to the pawnbroker to buy it, are you innocent?  Both sides knew what the other had done during this deal.  There was just no smoking gun uncovered where they discussed the plan before it took place.  Trump skated because Russia had already stolen the documents before his campaign learned about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TxTower

TxTower 649

Posted
Posted
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.

What do you mean the executive branch doesn’t care? The question was about our govt. The investigations into Russian meddling are continuing and hopefully there will be repercussions.

That said, meddling in the foreign elections of others is nothing new. We do it too. See Obama administration meddling in Israel’s elections to stop Netenyahu from being re-elected.

Russia has been meddling in our elections for decades. The just seem to have taken it to a new level this time around.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foosters

Foosters 17725

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, kevwun said:

If your friend steals something you want and then pawns it and you go to the pawnbroker to buy it, are you innocent?  Both sides knew what the other had done during this deal.  There was just no smoking gun uncovered where they discussed the plan before it took place.  Trump skated because Russia had already stolen the documents before his campaign learned about them.

I've said it before, but i guess it went unnoticed. Receipt of stolen property is a crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jhawk

Jhawk 1075

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Absolutely, if Barr came out in his press conference and blasted Trump extensively for his wrongful behavior that simply didn't rise to the level of criminality based on intent, after Trump had submitted personally to an investigatory interview to prove that and other aspects of the alleged crimes, I'd be extremely happy.   I'd be even happier if Trump went before Congress to testify under oath for 11 hours.   

But we don't live in that world.  Well, only for Trump we don't live in that world. 

And if trump sat there for 11 hours and lied in front of congress at some points and refused to answer questions at other points while under oath would you be okay with him not being charged for perjury because of the amount of people who have lied before congress in recent years (holder, comey, etc..) have set the precedent that lying under oath isn't a punishable crime?

You see, trump didn't create the banana republic, he is just part of it.  These precedents have been set in motion long ago and we have a ruling class who is above the law and we have a ruled class who must be punished to the extent the law can require.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
Just now, Jhawk said:

And if trump sat there for 11 hours and lied in front of congress at some points and refused to answer questions at other points while under oath would you be okay with him not being charged for perjury because of the amount of people who have lied before congress in recent years (holder, comey, etc..) have set the precedent that lying under oath isn't a punishable crime?

You see, trump didn't create the banana republic, he is just part of it.  These precedents have been set in motion long ago and we have a ruling class who is above the law and we have a ruled class who must be punished to the extent the law can require.

rolleyes.gif 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foosters

Foosters 17725

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Jhawk said:

And if trump sat there for 11 hours and lied in front of congress at some points and refused to answer questions at other points while under oath would you be okay with him not being charged for perjury because of the amount of people who have lied before congress in recent years (holder, comey, etc..) have set the precedent that lying under oath isn't a punishable crime?

You see, trump didn't create the banana republic, he is just part of it.  These precedents have been set in motion long ago and we have a ruling class who is above the law and we have a ruled class who must be punished to the extent the law can require.

aren't you one of the folks who, despite weeks of careful explanation, just could not wrap his head around the idea of "intent" being a part of a criminal offense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28703

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Foosters said:

I've said it before, but i guess it went unnoticed. Receipt of stolen property is a crime.

That's why they didn't accept the hacked emails from the Russians at the Trump Tower meeting. They told them to sit on them and we'll let you know when to release them.

Seems like the most obvious explanation. It also explains why Rudy Giuliani said "we didn't use it" in reference to the secret meeting that they lied about multiple times in order to conceal it from public knowledge. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jhawk

Jhawk 1075

Posted
Posted
Just now, Foosters said:

aren't you one of the folks who, despite weeks of careful explanation, just could not wrap his head around the idea of "intent" being a part of a criminal offense?

That is correct.  I can't believe it.  You break a law you break a law. There is no intent aspect to it.  If trump broke a law he broke a law, regardless of intent.  Same with lying under oath.  If you do it you committed perjury.  That is against the law.  Let's apply the penalties of law.  Our whole legal and judicial system is built on precedent.  We are ignoring precedent for some and not for others.  That is what they call..... a bad precedent to set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29213

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Foosters said:

aren't you one of the folks who, despite weeks of careful explanation, just could not wrap his head around the idea of "intent" being a part of a criminal offense?

Pretty sure he is.

Oh yay, confirmation. 

Edited by wildcat09
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29213

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Jhawk said:

That is correct.  I can't believe it.  You break a law you break a law. There is no intent aspect to it.  If trump broke a law he broke a law, regardless of intent.  Same with lying under oath.  If you do it you committed perjury.  That is against the law.  Let's apply the penalties of law.  Our whole legal and judicial system is built on precedent.  We are ignoring precedent for some and not for others.  That is what they call..... a bad precedent to set.

You should probably sit this play out, Jr.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29174

Posted
Posted

so the recurring theme i'm seeing is that trump really wanted to obstruct justice, but people around him defied his orders, for whatever reasons.

i feel like this president will be more embarrassed by people not listening to him than he would be from actually obstructing/breaking the law.

is attempted obstruction not a thing?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104537

Posted
Posted
Just now, Jive Turkey said:

 

Contrast this with how most of us would react.

"Brisketexan, there has been a special counsel appointed to investigate [your coordination with Russians, whether you've ever embezzled money from clients, whether you've suborned perjury, etc. etc.]."

Brisketexan reaction: "well, that's annoying.  I don't like being accused of misconduct.  But okay, cool, hook em."  Because....and this is the big reveal....I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO HIDE.  I've done nothing wrong.

Someone who has nothing to hide, who has done nothing wrong, MAY get pissed at the prospect of being investigated, because even being accused sucks and is offensive, but he does NOT say "This is the end of my [presidency, career, etc.].  I'm fucked."

"I'm fucked" is effectively a guilty plea.

But we all know that.  Barr knows that.  Mueller knows that.  Everyone knows that.  But nothing matters.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foosters

Foosters 17725

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Jhawk said:

That is correct.  I can't believe it.  You break a law you break a law. There is no intent aspect to it.  If trump broke a law he broke a law, regardless of intent.  Same with lying under oath.  If you do it you committed perjury.  That is against the law.  Let's apply the penalties of law.  Our whole legal and judicial system is built on precedent.  We are ignoring precedent for some and not for others.  That is what they call..... a bad precedent to set.

Then you'll be alarmed to know that "intent" as an element of the crime has been around for hundreds of years.

  • Haha 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...