The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Makes you wonder if Mueller can be fired now.  I mean, I know he could be fired but who in their right mind would do it now?!?  

I can only think of one person.

[Llano Estacado 1,257]

Ahem. Excuse me. I don't mean to interrupt, but are we just going to overlook what is possibly the damning thing we learned today?

A handful of posts agreeing that none of this shit probably moves the needle for either base, and the general public is suffering fatigue from overhyped headlines about Russia and Mueller. Followed by:

“DAMNING! Barr didn’t know about a bill that didn’t leave committee from before he was AG!”

On a day that same AG basically ended testimony with “eh fuck it, charge me with contempt of Congress”

[David Dennison 19,537]

Just now, Llano Estacado said:

A handful of posts agreeing that none of this shit probably moves the needle for either base, and the general public is suffering fatigue from overhyped headlines about Russia and Mueller. Followed by:

“DAMNING! Barr didn’t know about a bill that didn’t leave committee from before he was AG!”

On a day that same AG basically ended testimony with “eh fuck it, charge me with contempt of Congress”

 

The general public is suffering from Trump fatigue more than Russia fatigue. 

His base isn't enough.

[GSU&UT 1,799]

Seriously, you hold them in contempt of court who is responsible for arresting them and are they going to do it? Lawyer people on another board think it's very unlikely that would ever happen.

[Tyler Durden 132]

5 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Graham gonna go down for something in the end.  No one does an about face like that without a compelling reason.  

Sadly he's doing this because he wants to get reelected.  Doubt there is more to it than that.  

[GRHorn 105]

3 hours ago, Red Five said:

Btw there is a line in the report that basically says “it’s possible the obstruction was so successful that it prevented us from finding the evidence of collusion”.

What’s the exact quote?

[bolverk 30,323]

13 minutes ago, Llano Estacado said:

 

A handful of posts agreeing that none of this shit probably moves the needle for either base, and the general public is suffering fatigue from overhyped headlines about Russia and Mueller. Followed by:

“DAMNING! Barr didn’t know about a bill that didn’t leave committee from before he was AG!”

On a day that same AG basically ended testimony with “eh fuck it, charge me with contempt of Congress”

 

Just to clarify: I didn't consider it damning to Barr per se, but it is (or should be) to the White House.

[henrygandorf 29,225]

9 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Seriously, you hold them in contempt of court who is responsible for arresting them and are they going to do it? Lawyer people on another board think it's very unlikely that would ever happen.

i'm not sure about arresting them, but things can happen to them.  they can lose their licenses, get disbarred, etc.  they may not lose their freedom, but they can lose their careers over this idiot who would never get close to doing anything similar for anyone else.

[GRHorn 105]

So what did I miss today?  Everybody is upset with Barr?  Why?

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

7 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Seriously, you hold them in contempt of court who is responsible for arresting them and are they going to do it? Lawyer people on another board think it's very unlikely that would ever happen.

It would never happen.   The House would have to send its sergeant-at-arms to essentially have an armed confrontation with the FBI. The best they can do is file a civil suit against Barr and let that play out in court for several years.   

[retread 2,951]

Quote

Congress has three formal methods by which it can combat non-compliance with a duly issued subpoena. Each of these methods invokes the authority of a separate branch of government. First, the long dormant inherent contempt power permits Congress to rely on its own constitutional authority to detain and imprison a contemnor until the individual complies with congressional demands. Second, the criminal contempt statute permits Congress to certify a contempt citation to the executive branch for the criminal prosecution of the contemnor. Finally, Congress may rely on the judicial branch to enforce a congressional subpoena. Under this procedure, Congress may seek a civil judgment from a federal court declaring that the individual in question is legally obligated to comply with the congressional subpoena.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/congressional-subpoena-power-and-executive-privilege-coming-showdown-between-branches

[bolverk 30,323]

4 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

What’s the exact quote?

Last two paragraphs on page 10:

Quote

Further, the Office learned that some of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct
we investigated-including some associated with the Trump Campaign---deleted relevant
communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature
encryption or that do not provide for long-term retention of data or communications records. In
such cases, the Office was not able to corroborate witness statements through comparison to
contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about statements that appeared
inconsistent with other known facts.
Accordingly, while this report embodies factual and legal determinations that the Office
believes to be accurate and complete to the greatest extent possible, given these identified gaps,
the Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional
light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in the report. 

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

[GRHorn 105]

2 minutes ago, retread said:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/congressional-subpoena-power-and-executive-privilege-coming-showdown-between-branches

Not a lawyer, but didn’t Congress hold the Honorable Eric Holder in contempt?

[bolverk 30,323]

5 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i'm not sure about arresting them, but things can happen to them.  they can lose their licenses, get disbarred, etc.  they may not lose their freedom, but they can lose their careers over this idiot who would never get close to doing anything similar for anyone else.

Problem with Barr is that he came out of retirement for this position and so has no professional future to lose.

[bolverk 30,323]

1 minute ago, GRHorn said:

Not a lawyer, but didn’t Congress hold the Honorable Eric Holder in contempt?

Pinging you to make sure you don't miss the answer I posted to your last query.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

20 minutes ago, Llano Estacado said:

 

A handful of posts agreeing that none of this shit probably moves the needle for either base, and the general public is suffering fatigue from overhyped headlines about Russia and Mueller. Followed by:

“DAMNING! Barr didn’t know about a bill that didn’t leave committee from before he was AG!”

On a day that same AG basically ended testimony with “eh fuck it, charge me with contempt of Congress”

 

At this point everything is a buildup to Robert Mueller publicly testifying.  If his briefing to the American people doesn’t move the needle, nothing will.  

[GRHorn 105]

Just now, bolverk said:

Pinging you to make sure you don't miss the answer I posted to your last query.

Thanks, I saw it. Not as ominous as it was made to sound. 

[GSU&UT 1,799]

12 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

It would never happen.   The House would have to send its sergeant-at-arms to essentially have an armed confrontation with the FBI. The best they can do is file a civil suit against Barr and let that play out in court for several years.   

Right, I'm not clear on these details. Basically the logical conclusion of someone refusing to show up even after a subpoena is that this just basically goes nowhere. House Dems should still go to whatever length they need to if they have spines.

[Llano Estacado 1,257]

Just to clarify: I didn't consider it damning to Barr per se, but it is (or should be) to the White House.

You’re just fatigued from all the old not damning news.

8/28/18

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-security-idUSKCN1L72FN

[bolverk 30,323]

2 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Thanks, I saw it. Not as ominous as it was made to sound. 

I hear you. It's a lot of mild-mannered legalese and, like you, I'm not a lawyer but here are a couple of points that appear especially salient:

(S)ome of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct we investigated-including some associated with the Trump Campaign---deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption...

(T)he Office was not able to corroborate witness statements through comparison to contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about statements that appeared inconsistent with other known facts.

I have absolutely no idea those two facts aren't getting more attention.

[Llano Estacado 1,257]

At this point everything is a buildup to Robert Mueller publicly testifying.  If his briefing to the American people doesn’t move the needle, nothing will.  

Bingo bongo. Mueller will testify in 2 weeks. Dems will says “it’s the most damning thing yet”. Pubs will say “nothing burger fake news”. Gary Johnson voters will say “#bothsides”

[Anastasis 23,717]

Dems lack the political spine to impeach. GOP lacks the political spine to remove from office. But yeah, the real problem is the #bothsides perspective. 

[GRHorn 105]

Just catching up. This guy fucking hates Trump and still wasn’t worked up about today. Take it FWIW. 

 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

1 minute ago, Llano Estacado said:

 

Bingo bongo. Mueller will testify in 2 weeks. Dems will says “it’s the most damning thing yet”. Pubs will say “nothing burger fake news”. Gary Johnson voters will say “#bothsides”

 

Still doesn’t change the fact we’re living through the most consequential scandal in American History.   Just because no one seems to notice or care doesn’t make it irrelevant.  Oh, I get that it’s not relevant now, but it will be. 

[BradInATX 9,208]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Still doesn’t change the fact we’re living through the most consequential scandal in American History.   

Oh, you.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Dems lack the political spine to impeach. GOP lacks the political spine to remove from office. But yeah, the real problem is the #bothsides perspective. 

The GOP doesn't lack the political spine.   They lack the desire.  They love and support Trump. 

[henrygandorf 29,225]

5 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Just catching up. This guy fucking hates Trump and still wasn’t worked up about today. Take it FWIW. 

 

 

i don't think people are worked up about today because it cracked the mueller report wide open or anything.  i think people are just in disbelief (again) that someone who was once hoped to be neutral has been warped into yet another stooge for this president-turned-king who seems to be able to continually gangster his way around the constitution.

most people grow up in america thinking, "well it can't ever get that bad, the way the govt is set up, it'll work itself out and we have nothing to fear."  we've never seen anyone ever push back this hard on the system, and somehow it's fucking working.

so no, today wasn't some bombshell.  just another in a long line of disappointing and embarrassing days for our country.  at least nixon had shame, and skulked away quietly.  ain't gonna happen with this one. 

[Enchubben 5,600]

33 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

So what did I miss today?  Everybody is upset with Barr?  Why?

Because Hillary didn’t win and Trump is still president.

[Celery Man 21,097]

19 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Right, I'm not clear on these details. Basically the logical conclusion of someone refusing to show up even after a subpoena is that this just basically goes nowhere. House Dems should still go to whatever length they need to if they have spines.

they need to stop hoping that they're not going to have to break the glass and hit the alarm.  the time came months back

[henrygandorf 29,225]

3 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Because Hillary didn’t win and Trump is still president.

you know there were a ton of people who didn't like either and still don't, right?  that's why we are where we are.  not because of russia.

[housious 468]

7 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i don't think people are worked up about today because it cracked the mueller report wide open or anything.  i think people are just in disbelief (again) that someone who was once hoped to be neutral has been warped into yet another stooge for this president-turned-king who seems to be able to continually gangster his way around the constitution.

most people grow up in america thinking, "well it can't ever get that bad, the way the govt is set up, it'll work itself out and we have nothing to fear."  we've never seen anyone ever push back this hard on the system, and somehow it's fucking working.

so no, today wasn't some bombshell.  just another in a long line of disappointing and embarrassing days for our country.  at least nixon had shame, and skulked away quietly.  ain't gonna happen with this one. 

When was the last time we had an AG that was neutral?

[bolverk 30,323]

24 minutes ago, Llano Estacado said:

 

You’re just fatigued from all the old not damning news.

8/28/18

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-security-idUSKCN1L72FN

 

I just can't keep up with ALL the damning news. It's just too much.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

2 minutes ago, housious said:

When was the last time we had an AG that was neutral?

Jeff Sessions oddly. 

[SimonBolivar 11,064]

5 minutes ago, housious said:

When was the last time we had an AG that was neutral?

Bobby Kennedy obviously.

[TheRealRonWeaver? 1,279]

same "Sergeant at Arms" guy that was going to drag Eric Holder in front of this same shit.
The word "Russia" came up almost never today...this-this is now about (actually has always been about) a bunch of butthurt "all in" libtards who are hoping to scratch out some sort of something somehow out of the pot they just put their entire stack into.
Yeah...those 19 pages that Barr didn't release as quickly as you wanted him to, which are now completely released, is now somehow the demonstration of an impeachable offense for both he and the President.
Please proceed with this moronic "strategy"...in the face of all common sense.
 
much love
T

“For he.” Come back when you learn English, komrad.

[Llano Estacado 1,257]

Dems lack the political spine to impeach. GOP lacks the political spine to remove from office. But yeah, the real problem is the #bothsides perspective. 

I’m not hating at all, brother. I’ve been going in waves between libertarian and jaded nothing fucking matters since I first voted on my 18 birthday.

I remember yucking it up with you on TOS in ‘16 primary debate threads on #bothsides. Just not worthwhile to wade into politics online and especially on this site, now that honest whataboutism comparisons and bothsides and Gary Johnson voters are all memes.

[henrygandorf 29,225]

22 minutes ago, housious said:

When was the last time we had an AG that was neutral?

well, trump has been asking for his own holder/bobby for a while, and i guess he got him.  just seemed at the time with the odd circumstances that brought him into the fold, along with his history, people thought he wasn't the type to fall in line this quickly or easily.  guess believing that was the only part that was unbelievable.

trump has had 450+ people fired or resign in the 2.5 years since he took office, including several in the doj.  barr sat up there talking about rod rosenstein, without even mentioning that rosenstein quit yesterday.  that would've been a big deal in any other white house.  nope.

and at present, col markinson is dead.  is that correct, col jessup?

[Tyler Durden 132]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

What’s the exact quote?

Are you capable of looking anything up for yourself?

[Tyler Durden 132]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

Not a lawyer, but didn’t Congress hold the Honorable Eric Holder in contempt?

Not a googler either.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Holder#Contempt_of_Congress

[Tom 2,960]

I would love it if people could start referring to TTomTeriffic as "TTom" or "TTTF" or "TerrificallyTom."  I get that he's more prolific and has been on this board longer than me, but calling him "Tom" gives me brief PTSD that I'm as stupid as his dumb fucking takes about everything.  

[Gatorubet 30,713]

12 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Fuck you, Lindsey Graham, you shameless hypocritical piece of shit political hack. 

Single fella.

[GRHorn 105]

18 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

Are you capable of looking anything up for yourself?

Why should I do that? This place has at least 50 experts on the Mueller Report. 

14 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

Not a googler either.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Holder#Contempt_of_Congress

H/T good sir. 

[Anastasis 23,717]

28 minutes ago, Llano Estacado said:

I remember yucking it up with you on TOS in ‘16 primary debate threads on #bothsides. Just not worthwhile to wade into politics online and especially on this site...

Ages ago it seems.  As I recall we were trading pics of longhorn memorabilia and debate beverage choices. 

[henrygandorf 29,225]

for those wondering about the implications of ignoring/stonewalling by the white house and the subpoenas, sheila jackson lee was just on cnn saying that when nixon had his people do this, it became one of the "impeachable offenses" that ultimately forced him out.

so i guess throw it on the pile. 

[Anastasis 23,717]

For those interested in what Mueller's testimony may look like in terms of cadence and personality....

https://www.c-span.org/video/?313425-1/fbi-chief-defends-agency-practices-senate-hearing

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4494075/clip-extension-fbi-directors-term-robert-mueller-testimony

 

 

 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

6 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

for those wondering about the implications of ignoring/stonewalling by the white house and the subpoenas, sheila jackson lee was just on cnn saying that when nixon had his people do this, it became one of the "impeachable offenses" that ultimately forced him out.

so i guess throw it on the pile. 

Yeah, they're not lacking in impeachable offenses.   Just guts. 

[Ted Lange 16,413]

So using GOP foxnews nut job logic.   This was all a witch hunt, no collusion or obstruction...since Trump wasn’t indicted, then that means; Hillary has been completely exonerated, Bill Clinton completely exonerated, and they admit Benghazi was a complete witch hunt.   Also, the people responsible for bringing up Hillary’s emails, whitewater and Benghazi all need to be investigated. 

Comgrats Clinton’s and Obama!  I look forward to loony tunes posters like TTOM admitting he was 100% wrong about Hillary.  

 

 

[TtomTerrific 200]

this seems smart. 

 

nevermind that no special prosecution EVER would have been allowed to investigate Hillary.. because.. you know. she and Holder were actually obstructing justice... but.. other than that..it is the exact same thing. 

 

stick to race baiting.. you suck at this. 

 

take the loss, pussy. 

[Ted Lange 16,413]

Good point, the FBI didn’t investigate  Hillary at all.  Oops

moron.  

[David Dennison 19,537]

7 minutes ago, TtomTerrific said:

this seems smart. 

nevermind that no special prosecution EVER would have been allowed to investigate Hillary.. because.. you know. she and Holder were actually obstructing justice... but.. other than that..it is the exact same thing. 

stick to race baiting.. you suck at this. 

take the loss, pussy. 

If only there was some way to look into that. Now who could do that?