Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45538

Posted
Posted

And speaking of interesting times, what's up with the sudden surge of "Mooslems are inbreeding infidels" posts?  Which newsletter dumped that on our gullible conservative (redundant) friends?

Talk about laughing out loud.  It's like back in grade school, when one class was the Red Wings, one was the Blackhawks, and one was the Flyers, and it took about a half a day for everyone but the Flyers to realize all the morons were . . . Flyers.

Is that rude?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 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

Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

0a0b5bbf6ae1199e3859e25af5f707be.jpg

What? Should he just ignore the dumbasses? They are much easier to swing to the candidates point of view and the best part, their votes count just the same as an Ivy League graduate.

Ask any Madison Avenue ad agency, if you appeal to the lowest common denominator you will never lose in America .

Hillary insulted them with her deplorables comment. She was doomed after that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18646

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Crusher said:

What? Should he just ignore the dumbasses? They are much easier to swing to the candidates point of view and the best part, their votes count just the same as an Ivy League graduate.

Ask any Madison Avenue ad agency, if you appeal to the lowest common denominator you will never lose in America .

Hillary insulted them with her deplorables comment. She was doomed after that.

It's no coincidence that the dumbest people in America have given us three of the dumbest Republican presidents over the last 40 years. At least they got poppy, but then they turned on him because he was too fancy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thetexashammer

Thetexashammer 1062

Posted
Posted (edited)

First of all, I'm not sure that the low IQ people voted Trump. They historically vote Democrat, and I don't think we saw some huge swing in low IQ voters in the last election. 

Trump is likely lying. Like felons, low IQ voters almost always vote Democrat. I'd provide a link but if you don't know this, I can't help you.

Edited by Thetexashammer
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45538

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

I would like to know how far this “can’t indict the sitting President for a crime” theory extends.   Could he literally fulfill the shoot someone on 5th Avenue prophecy and get away with it at this point?  

If you're serious, the point would be moot.  He'd be impeached, removed from office, indicted, tried, and convicted.

Or so says my naive, hopelessly optimistic crystal ball.

Regards,

Pollyanna

Link to comment
Share on other sites
American Swindle

American Swindle 102

Posted
Posted
The thing I dread most about voting is taking the required IQ test beforehand so they can generate the statistics for how low IQ people vote.  It’s not my fault those tests are culturally biased against people who are drunk or illiterate!


You sound like Shaq in the movie Blue Chips, toughen up buttercup.
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Irieguy

Irieguy 1059

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Crusher said:

Who wrote this and why hasn't CNN fired them yet? And by fired, I mean burned at the stake as a heretic? You do not question the Lord Thy God Obama at CNN!!!

You can’t fire somebody who doesn’t work for you. You see this is what is called an opinion piece. 

Written by Mitch McConnell’s former campaign advisor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, American Swindle said:

 

 


Does this support my claim earlier that multiple sources indicated Trump was tougher on Russia than Obama?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Wow...I would say that you have a case. Your father could say " he's making an argument " ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Irieguy said:

You can’t fire somebody who doesn’t work for you. You see this is what is called an opinion piece. 

Written by Mitch McConnell’s former campaign advisor. 

Well excuse me for jumping to conclusions. Since it was an article on the CNN website. But, CNN has tried to burn people before who don't work for them. 

https://variety.com/2017/tv/news/cnn-trump-reddit-bodyslam-video-apology-1202487418/

I can't believe that they published it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Irieguy

Irieguy 1059

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Crusher said:

Well excuse me for jumping to conclusions. Since it was an article on the CNN website. But, CNN has tried to burn people before who don't work for them. 

https://variety.com/2017/tv/news/cnn-trump-reddit-bodyslam-video-apology-1202487418/

I can't believe that they published it.

It’s ok. Nobody expected you, AmericanSwindle or others to be discerning readers. 

But seriously, McConnell’s campaign advisor. Good God man. At least read the header. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Irieguy said:

It’s ok. Nobody expected you, AmericanSwindle or others to be discerning readers. 

But seriously, McConnell’s campaign advisor. Good God man. At least read the header. 

So, anyone who ever worked on the staff of a Congressman or Senator should ever be taken seriously? Good to know.  I won't make that mistake again. No matter the site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Irieguy

Irieguy 1059

Posted
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Crusher said:

So, anyone who ever worked on the staff of a Congressman or Senator should ever be taken seriously? Good to know.  I won't make that mistake again. No matter the site.

Look at you, misstating my position. So adorable. Not what I said. Mitch McConnell and his staff only and their position on Obama policies. Because him and his staff are inherently biased.  

Edited by Irieguy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Irieguy said:

Look at you, misstating my position. So adorable. Not what I said. Mitch McConnell and his staff only. 

Well, I am so simple that I have misunderstood your post apparently. You really should be more clear for us deplorables.

I might be busy cleaning my gun or reading my bible...

Edited by Crusher
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Irieguy

Irieguy 1059

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Crusher said:

Well, I am so simple that I have misunderstood your post apparently. You really should be more clear for us deplorables.

I might be busy cleaning my gun or reading my bible...

Nobody reads the Bible and surly at the same time. But you have the persecution complex bit down pat. 

Edited by Irieguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6908

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, American Swindle said:

One of the few that didn't fall hook line and sinker for the Russia-Trump Conspiracy and constantly debates with outlets that disagree with him, but nah not reliable at all.  

 

During his debate with David K. Johnston on Democracy Now today, Greenwald called Trump's obstructive behavior okay since he, Trump, believed the investigation was illegitimate.  He actually said that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted

Haven't read the bible in years.  But I do remember the Ten Commandments. There is one that some Democrats, their media mouthpieces and some deep state creatures should have taken heed of, particularly John Brenan and James Clapper. 

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

https://themarketswork.com/2018/02/12/john-brennan-james-clapper-complicity-lies-bill-priestap/

 

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

jimmyjazz 45538

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Crusher said:

Haven't read the bible in years.  But I do remember the Ten Commandments. There is one that some Democrats, their media mouthpieces and some deep state creatures should have taken heed of, particularly John Brenan and James Clapper. 

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

https://themarketswork.com/2018/02/12/john-brennan-james-clapper-complicity-lies-bill-priestap/

 

Well, now we know the next talking point.  Is the newsletter distributed in PowerPoint format, MS Word, PDF, or what?

Heads up, everyone:  Bill Priestap is the new whipping boy that we'll be hearing about ad nauseam

(By the way, your link is absolutely asinine.  It could not contain more unsubstantiated or refuted falsehoods if it had been written by Huckabeef.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted

18 U.S. Code § 2381. Treason

prev | next

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)
 
John Brennan and James Clapper both at times during this farce accused the sitting President of the United States of America of being a Russian agent. A crime punishable by death. Think about that for minute. What would you do? Would you fight back with all your power? 
 
Then when you fight back against a lie, your enemy calls that obstruction? Obstruction? Really. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TDunk

TDunk 590

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, Crusher said:

Haven't read the bible in years.  But I do remember the Ten Commandments. There is one that some Democrats, their media mouthpieces and some deep state creatures should have taken heed of, particularly John Brenan and James Clapper. 

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

https://themarketswork.com/2018/02/12/john-brennan-james-clapper-complicity-lies-bill-priestap/

 

How about number VII...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ted Lange

Ted Lange 16040

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Rip76 said:

This is weird

 

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/04/19/opinions/mueller-report-obama-jennings/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F

How is this “weird?”   

i think with what we know now, the Obama administration absolutely underestimated or didn’t understand Russian intentions.

Fast Forward 4 years and  it is abundantly clear what Russia has done and continues to do,..  So what does the current President do?  He goes to Helsinki and jacks off Putin and lets him finish on his face.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chooky

Chooky 13296

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

I’m not sure what to make of a chooky post that starts out with “in all seriousness” and then the middle and end are serious. 

I was literally hugging an American flag that was stage right from the podium while simultaneously taking a freedom enema in front of the Family Values Conference when I typed that.  I would never cheapen that event with unsophisticated humor.

gettyimages-617806568.jpg?w=960

Link to comment
Share on other sites
American Swindle

American Swindle 102

Posted
Posted
During his debate with David K. Johnston on Democracy Now today, Greenwald called Trump's obstructive behavior okay since he, Trump, believed the investigation was illegitimate.  He actually said that.



Why have I been constantly hearing the idea that if their isn’t a crime, then their can be no obstruction?

Is this a bunch of baloney?

Also, is it insane to think that if you were being accused of a crime you didn’t commit and had the long schlong of the IC and every MsM outlet propagandizing the world that you did this crime, then would it be reasonable to think that you may act a little vindictive toward the forces trying to smear you?

Link that discussion up and let’s see about the context, but your attempt to discredit GG hasn’t moved me one iota.
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Judge Roybeanbag

Judge Roybeanbag 11802

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

 

 


Why have I been constantly hearing the idea that if their isn’t a crime, then their can be no obstruction?

Because you apparently listen to idiots, liars and morons. 

Is this a bunch of baloney?

Yes.

Also, is it insane to think that if you were being accused of a crime you didn’t commit and had the long schlong of the IC and every MsM outlet propagandizing the world that you did this crime, then would it be reasonable to think that you may act a little vindictive toward the forces trying to smear you?

Not an excuse for breaking the law.

 

 

There.  It’s been explained numerous times why obstruction applies whether a crime is proven or not.  But you’re either too stupid to comprehend it, or you’re a troll.  I’m betting both.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hpslugga

hpslugga 4042

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

There.  It’s been explained numerous times why obstruction applies whether a crime is proven or not.  But you’re either too stupid to comprehend it, or you’re a troll.  I’m betting both.  

I was gonna say, since when have we seen any evidence that smart people choose to be trolls?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
American Swindle

American Swindle 102

Posted
Posted
There.  It’s been explained numerous times why obstruction applies whether a crime is proven or not.  But you’re either too stupid to comprehend it, or you’re a troll.  I’m betting both.  


Ahh, the ole’ surly “you’re stupid” and a “troll” because you are asking questions bit.

I was actually asking the questions in what I thought was a civil manner directly to a poster on the question obstruction if there was no crime to obstruct.

I guess it’s the surly way to be omniscient and and act like we know everything on here right?

Y’all got me really moving to your side

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

BrickHorn 18186

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

 


Ahh, the ole’ surly “you’re stupid” and a “troll” because you are asking questions bit.

I was actually asking the questions in what I thought was a civil manner directly to a poster on the question obstruction if there was no crime to obstruct.

I guess it’s the surly way to be omniscient and and act like we know everything on here right?

Y’all got me really moving to your side
 

 

Fair enough.  But your questions has been answered.  You now understand that someone can obstruct justice even in the absence of an underlying crime, right?  

Edited by BrickHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 9671

Posted
Posted

Your mistress is falsely accused of embezzlement.  You have been transferring cash from your bank account to hers to pay for hotel rooms.  During the police investigation you give misleading statements, hide financial records and order subordinates to lie for you cause you don’t want your wife to find out. Your mistress is ultimately not charged. Although there was no underlying original crime can you be accused of obstructing a police investigation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45538

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

I was actually asking the questions

 

No kidding.  Questions that have been answered here and elsewhere hundreds of times.  You're getting your info from the most hopelessly biased sources imaginable, and you're not thinking for yourself.

If you impede an investigation into a possible crime, you are obstructing justice.  It doesn't matter what the final conclusion is regarding that possible crime.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SubliminalHorn

SubliminalHorn 6672

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

No kidding.  Questions that have been answered here and elsewhere hundreds of times.  You're getting your info from the most hopelessly biased sources imaginable, and you're not thinking for yourself.

If you impede an investigation into a possible crime, you are obstructing justice.  It doesn't matter what the final conclusion is regarding that possible crime.

You’re wasting your time. He knows the answers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted



I'd provide a link but if you don't know this, I can't help you.


No. You'd provide a link but you are talking out your ass, per usual.

https://theconversation.com/do-smart-people-tend-to-be-more-liberal-yes-but-it-doesnt-mean-all-conservatives-are-stupid-57713

http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1968042,00.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/11/education-gap-explains-american-politics/575113/

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...