Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45,491

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Thanks to his fixer AG Barr, at least we won't have to hear from Trump when questioned about this "I can't comment on an ongoing investigation."   

Our country is in deep shit with these two fuckers.  Barr is arguably more dangerous.

Yep.  What % of the electorate do you think has any idea who Barr is?

  • Like 1
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

Zavala

Zavala 1,384

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, suddenly shaggy said:

That is also a lie, but you've never let truth get in your way. 

I mistook two very similar avatars.

LongestHorn

IMG_3508.thumb.PNG.a3af2f8741560a42a3b66

and Zavala, one of the shittiest trolls on here. Zavala fucking sucks and is a blatant troll in nearly every post he has ever made on this board. You want to call that an ad hominem, go for it, it's the truth.

Gfp-lorenzo-de-zavala.jpg.bdbefc5bd512c9

I apologized in exactly in one post and a PM to Longest Horn, who understood why I mistook the two avatars and accepted the apology. That would be 1 out of 25 posts, or a grand total of 4% of my posts on that page. 

I then quoted and responded to ChiTownDoc saying "Jesus, go edit it.  Being mixed up with Zavala will leave a mark" and hg saying he'd made the same mistake. Even if you count both of those as apologies, which they weren't, that's 3 total posts apologizing, out of 25 on the first page for a grand total of 12% of my posts on that page.

That's either a blatant lie by you, or a smaller lie combined with a statistics error, but that would be a pretty basic statistics error and you're a self-proclaimed statistics expert. 

 

 

Ad Hominem, tldr the rest.

My picture is just my username btw. Maybe just put me on ignore if your Boomer brain doesn't work well enough to distinguish between the two.

Any news on the testimony on the last day before Congress goes on break? Can't delay it longer than that right?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,356

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, suddenly shaggy said:

Excerpt from Natasha Bertrand article in Politico. More at the link. 

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/18/trump-cohen-hush-money-negotiations-1421394

Trump regularly talked to Cohen during hush-money negotiations

New court documents show how Michael Cohen kept his boss in the know as he hammered out a deal with Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election.

...

On October 8, 2016, the day the tape was released, Trump campaign press secretary Hope Hicks called Cohen and then, 16 seconds later, Trump himself was dialed into the call, which continued for over four minutes. It was the first call Cohen had received or made to Hicks in at least multiple weeks, and Cohen and Trump had only spoken about once a month prior to that, according to the FBI. Cohen and Hicks spoke again for about two minutes after the call with Trump ended. 

Over the next few weeks, Cohen worked to flesh out a deal with Davidson and American Media, Inc., the parent organization of the National Enquirer. The plan was to have AMI purchase and bury the story, a practice known as “catch and kill,” and Cohen would then reimburse AMI for their expenses. Cohen and Davidson worked on the arrangements with Dylan Howard, the chief content officer at AMI. 

During this period, Cohen connected with Trump several times. Cohen was particularly frantic on October 17, a day when he incorporated an LLC called Essential Consultants in Delaware to funnel the money to Daniels. It’s also when Davidson threatened to cancel the deal by the end of the day if Cohen didn’t pay up. Cohen’s first call after he spoke to Davidson at the end of the day was an eight-second call to Trump, though it’s unclear if they spoke.

THIS IS A FELONY LEVEL CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS ORCHESTRATED BY THE PRESIDENT TO DEFRAUD THE VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES.

THIS IS A FELONY LEVEL CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS ORCHESTRATED BY THE PRESIDENT TO DEFRAUD THE VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES.

THIS IS A FELONY LEVEL CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS ORCHESTRATED BY THE PRESIDENT TO DEFRAUD THE VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zavala

Zavala 1,384

Posted
Posted
On 7/18/2019 at 3:04 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

THIS IS A FELONY LEVEL CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS ORCHESTRATED BY THE PRESIDENT TO DEFRAUD THE VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES.

THIS IS A FELONY LEVEL CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS ORCHESTRATED BY THE PRESIDENT TO DEFRAUD THE VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES.

THIS IS A FELONY LEVEL CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS ORCHESTRATED BY THE PRESIDENT TO DEFRAUD THE VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES.

Lulz, is Mueller (Ironman) gonna speak in all caps on Wednesday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zavala

Zavala 1,384

Posted
Posted
On 7/18/2019 at 7:13 PM, WhatTheBuck said:

Probably a lot of them know him as the guy who declared that Robert Mueller concluded there was no collusion and no obstruction. 

Actually, Mueller did his job and made a decision on collusion, but left it open on obstruction. 

All of this was a distraction from the whole 'using intelligence agencies to spy on political opponents' thing. Pretty pathetic. 

He's gonna produce a huge nothing burger testimony in a few days too.

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

David Dennison 18,648

Posted
Posted
Just now, Zavala said:

Actually, Mueller did his job and made a decision on collusion, but left it open on obstruction. 

All of this was a distraction from the whole 'using intelligence agencies to spy on political opponents' thing. Pretty pathetic. 

He's gonna produce a huge nothing burger testimony in a few days too.

Who used intelligence agencies to spy on political opponents?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29,174

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Zavala said:

Actually, Mueller did his job and made a decision on collusion conspiracy but left it open on obstruction. 

All of this was a distraction from the whole 'using intelligence agencies to spy on political opponents' thing. Pretty pathetic. 

He's gonna produce a huge nothing burger testimony in a few days too.

fixed it.  there was obvious collusion, but that's not a crime.

as for the testimony, i'm more interested in how the republicans question him.  if they try to rip into him, it could get interesting.

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

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,546

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Zavala said:

Actually, Mueller did his job and made a decision on collusion, but left it open on obstruction. 

All of this was a distraction from the whole 'using intelligence agencies to spy on political opponents' thing. Pretty pathetic. 

He's gonna produce a huge nothing burger testimony in a few days too.

37 indictments, the president's lawyer and deputy GOP finance chair going to prison, the president's campaign manager going to prison, the president's National Security advisor going to prison, over a dozen cases spawned from the Mueller investigation farmed out to federal courts, and a bipartisan list of over a thousand former federal prosecutors stating the Mueller Report contains multiple open-and-shut instances of obstruction of justice

 

*inhales*

 

...is quite the distraction from Nunes Memo Sequel Whatever pulled off by *checks notes* Trump's Dept of Justice.

 

How clear does this need to be, sheeple?

 

So, what do you think we're looking at here with this whole spying on an associate of a life-long white collar criminal, Zavala? A Benghazi number of indictments? A Hillary e-mails number of indictments or maybe something in between?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zavala

Zavala 1,384

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

fixed it.  there was obvious collusion, but that's not a crime.

as for the testimony, i'm more interested in how the republicans question him.  if they try to rip into him, it could get interesting.

Maybe they ask about Epstein

The Democrats are going to be doing the ripping. Guaranteed Mueller plays the Eric Holder game and doesn't know a whole lot.

Didn't he say his report is his testimony? Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18,648

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Zavala said:

Maybe they ask about Epstein

The Democrats are going to be doing the ripping. Guaranteed Mueller plays the Eric Holder game and doesn't know a whole lot.

Didn't he say his report is his testimony? Lol

Which is why he'll be asked to read from the report. Robert Mueller will read into the record passages like this: "If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

Fun!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted

Whichever investigations Barr shutters on behalf of protecting Trump (it appears to be multiple), if Trump falls to an eventual impeachment, or loses his re-election bid, those investigations stand to get re-opened statute of limitations notwithstanding.  

Should Trump get prosecuted after leaving office for crimes committed during his WH tenure ?  Nothing good can come from not doing so, imo.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18,648

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Whichever investigations Barr shutters on behalf of protecting Trump (it appears to be multiple), if Trump falls to an eventual impeachment, or loses his re-election bid, those investigations stand to get re-opened statute of limitations notwithstanding.  

Should Trump get prosecuted after leaving office for crimes committed during his WH tenure ?  Nothing good can come from not doing so, imo.

 

 

I'm pretty sure the statute of limitations is tolled by Donald Trump being president. That shouldn't be a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zavala

Zavala 1,384

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Which is why he'll be asked to read from the report. Robert Mueller will read into the record passages like this: "If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

Fun!

Wow I hope he does do that. A prosecutor who spent 2.5 years investigating the sitting president for treason coming out and saying "not innocent" instead of guilty or not guilty. What a hero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29,174

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Zavala said:

Maybe they ask about Epstein

The Democrats are going to be doing the ripping. Guaranteed Mueller plays the Eric Holder game and doesn't know a whole lot.

Didn't he say his report is his testimony? Lol

lullllllz.  you think the republicans are going to spend their 5 minutes praising him and the work he and his investigators did?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,356

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Among the population that still has working brains, the problem for the Republicans is they have to operate with two conflicting narratives.  

“The Mueller Report completely exonerates Trump by a corrupt investigation run by many angry and obviously biased democrats”

People with working brains should be scratching their heads when the Republicans attack Mueller after he refused to accuse the president of a crime. 

Of course the Cult 45 morons won’t see this but everyone else should take notice when the Republicans start discrediting Mueller and his investigation.

Bottom line is the Republicans are going to have a hard time with a coherent strategy with Mueller but I’m sure they’ll bang on the table and cry foul regardless.

Always the victim.

Always.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zavala

Zavala 1,384

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

lullllllz.  you think the republicans are going to spend their 5 minutes praising him and the work he and his investigators did?

Which side is more butthurt about the reports findings?

5 hours ago, hpslugga said:

Yeah I didn’t get that comment. Seemed more of a confession than the accusation he fancied.

“Well, I called his behavior treasonous, which is to betray one’s trust, and to aid and abet the enemy,” Brennan said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “And I stand very much by that claim.”

Quote

Trump’s disturbing choice to hand over highly sensitive intelligence to the Russians is now a focus of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Trump’s relationship with Russia, both before and after the election.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/11/trump-intel-slip

https://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/busted-treason-manafort-assange-trump/14277/

https://theintercept.com/2018/02/16/trump-russia-election-hacking-investigation/

 

Edited by Zavala
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zavala

Zavala 1,384

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Check that.  Market requires testimony on July 24.  I don't like odds against another delay in testimony. 

They can't delay any longer, gonna be a recess soon.

TIMES UP BLUMF! HIGH CRIMES!

1563759427360-pol.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29,174

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

so tomorrow's the big day? what can we reasonable and honestly expect out of this testimony? is there any hope the dems won't fuck this up?

there is no "fucking it up".  there's no "victory" either.

nothing will move the needle at this point.  those who give a shit already read the report.  those who don't, didn't, and won't care about the shit that gets said.  there will be no [new] bombshells being dropped tomorrow.

my hope is that they get mueller to go thru part 2 as thoroughly as he did in the report, and that it sparks a rash of irrational, unhinged tweets from trump and his top idiots.  then i hope that impeachment talk is rumored for weeks and months, so that trump has to constantly live in a state of paranoia and spends the next weeks/months shitting himself on twitter and repeating his nonsense to the gaggle.

i also hope the r's lay into him and attack his credibility (or the credibility of his investigators) during the hearing, just because i think that's a bad look.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11,360

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

so tomorrow's the big day? what can we reasonable and honestly expect out of this testimony? is there any hope the dems won't fuck this up?

 

1 minute ago, henrygandorf said:

there is no "fucking it up".  there's no "victory" either.

nothing will move the needle at this point.  those who give a shit already read the report.  those who don't, didn't, and won't care about the shit that gets said.  there will be no [new] bombshells being dropped tomorrow.

my hope is that they get mueller to go thru part 2 as thoroughly as he did in the report, and that it sparks a rash of irrational, unhinged tweets from trump and his top idiots.  then i hope that impeachment talk is rumored for weeks and months, so that trump has to constantly live in a state of paranoia and spends the next weeks/months shitting himself on twitter and repeating his nonsense to the gaggle.

i also hope the r's lay into him and attack his credibility (or the credibility of his investigators) during the hearing, just because i think that's a bad look.

mostly agree with gandorf. 

sheila jackson lee will grandstand. but then the republicans have louie gohmert on the judiciary, so....

it's basically going to be a double shitshow, first at the judiciary, then at the intelligence. at least ted lieu is on the judiciary. i will wait for his questioning with bated breath. 

i'm also eager to see how jim jordan and matt gaetz smear the wall with feces.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,356

Posted
  • Author
Posted
8 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

so tomorrow's the big day? what can we reasonable and honestly expect out of this testimony? is there any hope the dems won't fuck this up?

This should be every question to Mueller phrased differently every time:

"Mr. Mueller, would you describe this assessment of your report to be accurate:  The Russian government attacked our election with the purpose of electing Donald Trump president.  Donald Trump and his campaign knowingly welcomed the Russian attack to help Donald Trump get elected.  When you tried to investigate the Russian attack, President Donald Trump repeatedly tried to interfere, limit the scope, and shut down the investigation.

Do I have this right?"

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29,174

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This should be every question to Mueller phrased differently every time:

"Mr. Mueller, would you describe this assessment of your report to be accurate:  The Russian government attacked our election with the purpose of electing Donald Trump president.  Donald Trump and his campaign knowingly welcomed the Russian attack to help Donald Trump get elected.  When you tried to investigate the Russian attack, President Donald Trump repeatedly tried to interfere, limit the scope, and shut down the investigation.

Do I have this right?"

yeah, uh, i think i would rather mueller do the talking.  if dems spend most of their time repeating 5 sentences over and over before they get a question out just to hear "yes, that is accurate", that's not a good thing.

if america is going to latch onto something memorable, it'll come out of the mouth of the guy getting questioned, not the other way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,356

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, retread said:

"Everything we've done hasn't deterred them ... all the sanctions ... all the talk?"

lmfao.

The thing that hurts Putin the most is damaging his public perception, it's what he cares about most, along with the money.   

Rhetorically going after him is what we're missing from our approach. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,356

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, henrygandorf said:

yeah, uh, i think i would rather mueller do the talking.  if dems spend most of their time repeating 5 sentences over and over before they get a question out just to hear "yes, that is accurate", that's not a good thing.

if america is going to latch onto something memorable, it'll come out of the mouth of the guy getting questioned, not the other way around.

The point is to have those three basic elements of the investigation drilled into the American people's understanding of the Russia investigation.  Keep hammering confirmation of those facts out of Mueller.  

Mueller actually prefers yes/no questions too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29,174

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The point is to have those three basic elements of the investigation drilled into the American people's understanding of the Russia investigation.  Keep hammering confirmation of those facts out of Mueller.  

Mueller actually prefers yes/no questions too.  

yes/no questions don't make for good tv, and that's what this entire thing is about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18,648

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

yeah, uh, i think i would rather mueller do the talking.  if dems spend most of their time repeating 5 sentences over and over before they get a question out just to hear "yes, that is accurate", that's not a good thing.

if america is going to latch onto something memorable, it'll come out of the mouth of the guy getting questioned, not the other way around.

Sadly, I think tomorrow might be the coda until the election.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/07/mueller-testimony-reactions/593827/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11,360

Posted
Posted
Just now, henrygandorf said:

yes/no questions don't make for good tv, and that's what this entire thing is about.

the problem here is that mueller is a hyper-intelligent, fairly reluctant witness. he will answer the questions asked, and offer no elaboration.  i'm not expecting any kind of blockbuster revelation. as a matter of fact, i expect him to repeat, verbatim, from the report in many answers. he's just not the type of person to go out colonel jessup style.

there will not be a

"did you want to indict the president?"

"i did the job i..."

"DID YOU WANT TO INDICT THE PRESIDENT?!"

"YOU'RE GODDAMN RIGHT I DID!"

moment.

it will be boring, and full of carefully crafted legal jargon. 

just my opinion.

  • Like 3
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...