The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Captainant 27311]

31 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

 

Yes, because it’s so common to unmask the incoming National Security Advisor. Just another day at the office. Again, the smell test. 

You do realize they request to unmask because they DON'T know who they are, right? I would hope that the intel community actively investigates people who hold the highest security clearance possible for leverage by foreign powers. I understand why this may frustrate you, GRUhorn. 

[Upgrayedd 5803]

30 minutes ago, Captainant said:

You do realize they request to unmask because they DON'T know who they are, right? I would hope that the intel community actively investigates people who hold the highest security clearance possible for leverage by foreign powers. I understand why this may frustrate you, GRUhorn. 

ISWYDT

[notre dame joe 172]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

Speaking of criminal acts, any chance Samantha Powers gets what should be coming to her? I’m guessing zero percent from the Surly faithful. 
 

Oh wait, she had no recollection of such a minor thing! Of course! 

Samantha who?  A week ago Biden couldn't remember that he tried to unmask 

4 hours ago, David Dennison said:

You don't have to be under oath. Lying to the FBI is a crime. 

Again, Michael Flynn could have told them to pound sand. Instead, he chose to lie. That's criminal.

IT was so clear that he fell for the trap set by the FBI that they withheld exculpatory evidence from his inept attorneys, never mind threatening his son.  I'm sure the Obama-Biden team will defend by telling us it was their standard procedure, which is sadly likely to be true.  

[GRHorn 105]

38 minutes ago, Captainant said:

You do realize they request to unmask because they DON'T know who they are, right? I would hope that the intel community actively investigates people who hold the highest security clearance possible for leverage by foreign powers. I understand why this may frustrate you, GRUhorn. 

She has no recollection of any request related to Mr Flynn.
 

She never followed up on who it was, no one bothered to mention it to her. Again, smell test. It’s ok to admit that someone in power gets away with a flagrant crime. Even if it’s on a side that you’re sympathetic to. Once you realize they all do it you’ll stop holding them in some kind of high esteem. Free your mind. 

[jimmyjazz 45513]

10 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

. . . It’s ok to admit that someone in power gets away with a flagrant crime. Even if it’s on a side that you’re sympathetic to. Once you realize they all do it you’ll stop holding them in some kind of high esteem. Free your mind. 

LMFAO.

[Hookah Horns 3058]

8 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

So I know it's all bullshit, but can someone at least try and explain what the Trump administration is claiming Obama/Biden did?  I feel like I follow this shit pretty well and I cannot for the life of me figure out what they are being accused of doing.

I believe they're accusing Obama of wielding the justice dept as a weapon against president-elect fuckwit. I'm pretty sure the entire basis for this claim is that Obama was in office when Justice started kicking the tires on fuckwit's connections to the bolsheviks. Also note that there's no precedent that the president is barred from directing DOJ to investigate someone just bc they're political opponents. 

[GW Hayduke 1950]

7 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Free your mind. 

How much time do you spend on 4chan or reddit in groups that identify as incels? 

[HenryJames 65868]

9 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Speaking of criminal acts, any chance Samantha Powers gets what should be coming to her? I’m guessing zero percent from the Surly faithful. 
 

Oh wait, she had no recollection of such a minor thing! Of course! 

So the lie is that she didn’t recall herself making any request regarding Flynn, but she may have seen the report that someone else requested? 

And to repeat what was said above, they request to unmask because they DON'T know who they are. A Russian ambassador talking to a private American citizen is cause to find out just who that American citizen is. 

[TornACL 7673]

9 hours ago, GRHorn said:

 

Yes, because it’s so common to unmask the incoming National Security Advisor. Just another day at the office. Again, the smell test. 

What's uncommon, is for the incoming National Security Advisor to have a laundry list of inappropriate, unethical, and illegal activities with foreign governments, some (most? all?) hostile to our nation's interests, on his resume. 

So many such activities that his name pops up on an unmasking report. 

What's also uncommon is for multiple people to strongly advise the President against appointment of an NSA, including members of his own team and including the outgoing Prez, only to have him do it anyway. Because he's either a fatheaded dumbass, or because he found those inappropriate relations beneficial to his admin. 

To frame this as some kind of vast D conspiracy is ludicrous. 

These idiotic Twitter folk sharing these "bombshells" are idiots, feeding mental slop to other idiots. They share "This happened, and then this happened" without any critical thinking beyond placing the two statements next to each other. 

The only thing active in your empty skulls is imagination, so you determine that this is proof of a conspiracy. There is a much simpler explanation, and you won't like it. 

 

Edited May 14, 2020 by TornACL

[EMAWesome 101]

Just let them go Notre Dame Joe and GR Horn.  All they are doing is proving they are the actual brain dead zombies that gobble up everything they are spoon fed on the internet and through the media with no concept of critical thinking that they accuse us daily of being.  You have a better chance of getting them to believe that beans belong in chili than you will of getting them to look at the sunlight of reality of all of this.

[Chuckie Finster 22583]

I believe they're accusing Obama of wielding the justice dept as a weapon against president-elect fuckwit. I'm pretty sure the entire basis for this claim is that Obama was in office when Justice started kicking the tires on fuckwit's connections to the bolsheviks. Also note that there's no precedent that the president is barred from directing DOJ to investigate someone just bc they're political opponents. 

So, to be clear, when presented with a scenario where an American citizen has potentially shady foreign connections, the Trump admin is saying that is is legal and expected to go to a foreign government and ask them to investigate, but illegal and unethical to ask your own country’s intelligence agency to look into it?

[Biff Tannen 45477]

8 hours ago, GRHorn said:

She has no recollection of any request related to Mr Flynn.
 

She never followed up on who it was, no one bothered to mention it to her. Again, smell test. It’s ok to admit that someone in power gets away with a flagrant crime. Even if it’s on a side that you’re sympathetic to. Once you realize they all do it you’ll stop holding them in some kind of high esteem. Free your mind. 

 

8 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

LMFAO.

 

14 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

Just let them go Notre Dame Joe and GR Horn.  All they are doing is proving they are the actual brain dead zombies that gobble up everything they are spoon fed on the internet and through the media with no concept of critical thinking that they accuse us daily of being.  You have a better chance of getting them to believe that beans belong in chili than you will of getting them to look at the sunlight of reality of all of this.

The cognitive dissonance is quite astounding.  But this is our world.  This is what we have to live with.

[Irwin F Fletcher 3550]

So, to be clear, when presented with a scenario where an American citizen has potentially shady foreign connections, the Trump admin is saying that is is legal and expected to go to a foreign government and ask them to investigate, but illegal and unethical to ask your own country’s intelligence agency to look into it?

Come on. That wouldn't happen. Asking a foreign government to look into your political opponent could get you impeached.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

[Captainant 27311]

28 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

Just let them go Notre Dame Joe and GR Horn.  All they are doing is proving they are the actual brain dead zombies that gobble up everything they are spoon fed on the internet and through the media with no concept of critical thinking that they accuse us daily of being.  You have a better chance of getting them to believe that beans belong in chili than you will of getting them to look at the sunlight of reality of all of this.

Don't you have some HCQ to take, or other bad medical advice from the president to blindly follow?

[Horn Dog 9644]

15 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

What’s a perjury trap?

A perjury trap is when your wife finds your burner phone and secret credit card filled with one day hotel room charges and asks you to explain.  She has now set a perjury trap and deserves to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, TornACL said:

What's uncommon, is for the incoming National Security Advisor to have a laundry list of inappropriate, unethical, and illegal activities with foreign governments, some (most? all?) hostile to our nation's interests, on his resume. 

So many such activities that his name pops up on an unmasking report. 

What's also uncommon is for multiple people to strongly advise the President against appointment of an NSA, including members of his own team and including the outgoing Prez, only to have him do it anyway. Because he's either a fatheaded dumbass, or because he found those inappropriate relations beneficial to his admin. 

To frame this as some kind of vast D conspiracy is ludicrous. 

These idiotic Twitter folk sharing these "bombshells" are idiots, feeding mental slop to other idiots. They share "This happened, and then this happened" without any critical thinking beyond placing the two statements next to each other. 

The only thing active in your empty skulls is imagination, so you determine that this is proof of a conspiracy. There is a much simpler explanation, and you won't like it. 

 

I’m not even alleging a big conspiracy. I just pointed out that it appears Power lied to Congress. Long ago, that would have had consequences. Not anymore. 
 

 

[TwiceHorn 31184]

First of all, it's exceedingly difficult to prove a perjury crime based on an "I don't recall" statement.  You really need a positive false statement.

Second, as has been pointed out, numerous unmasking requests are made a DAY in DC.  Which is not to say that she made one a day, but enough likely that they got lost in the shuffle.

Third, an unmasking request probably implicates the name of more than one person referenced in an intelligence item. So, while an unmasking request may involve a level of curiosity or "need to know" about a person, who might be Flynn, or maybe one of a half dozen other names in an item, I think it's a stretch to say that a half dozen unmasking requests that involved Flynn all resulted in someone thinking "AHA, Flynn that dirty bastard, I knew it was him" and thus making it unlikely that they do not, in fact, recall.

If you are going to attempt to charge and convict someone for lying to Congress based on an "I don't recall" statement, you are going to need a more certain level of proof than that.

Besides, it's just kind of absurd to meet every criminal or ethical charge against a partisan politician with, "oh yeah, here's one from your team!"

Flynn is dirty as hell, even if the criminal charges were somehow improper.  I don't like supporting a conviction by arguing uncharged bad conduct, but he is a dirty birdy for sure.  And the dismissal is beyond bizarre.

[Biff Tannen 45477]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Flynn is dirty as hell, even if the criminal charges were somehow improper.  I don't like supporting a conviction by arguing uncharged bad conduct, but he is a dirty birdy for sure.

This is where it blows my mind the most with pretty much this entire admin.  How can anyone remotely paying attention see what these people are doing and not connect the dots?  It's BLATANTLY obvious that they are unfit, improper, and in many cases, downright criminal.  It's not hard.  Believe your eyes.  It's happening right in front of us.

[Captainant 27311]

12 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I’m not even alleging a big conspiracy. I just pointed out that it appears Power lied to Congress. Long ago, that would have had consequences. Not anymore. 

You're also ignoring the sequencing of events that undercut your argument of Powers lying to congress. It's possible (and indeed, likely) that she requested unmasking on the unnamed NSC advisor because of the incredibly concerning behavior and financial ties to multiple foreign and adversarial powers. It's also possible (and indeed, likely) that she did not know that she was requesting the unmasking of Flynn and then received docs on Flynn. But keep fuckin that bothsides chicken, comrade GRUhorn. I'm sure annie will give you a hand if you get tired.

So no, you have not proven or demonstrated that she lie to congress. You have made the claim and provided inconclusive evidence to back it.

[GRHorn 105]

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

You're also ignoring the sequencing of events that undercut your argument of Powers lying to congress. It's possible (and indeed, likely) that she requested unmasking on the unnamed NSC advisor because of the incredibly concerning behavior and financial ties to multiple foreign and adversarial powers. It's also possible (and indeed, likely) that she did not know that she was requesting the unmasking of Flynn and then received docs on Flynn. But keep fuckin that bothsides chicken, comrade GRUhorn. I'm sure annie will give you a hand if you get tired.

So no, you have not proven or demonstrated that she lie to congress. You have made the claim and provided inconclusive evidence to back it.

So you believe that the results of the unmasking were not relayed to her? I wonder if that would’ve made an impression on her if she heard that? 

Youre right. I can’t prove that does recollect that. I think it’s clear to someone with a functioning brain that it would be extremely unlikely for her to forget it. This isn’t Joe Biden. She has her full faculties presumably. 

[Captainant 27311]

3 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

So you believe that the results of the unmasking were not relayed to her? I wonder if that would’ve made an impression on her if she heard that? 

Youre right. I can’t prove that does recollect that. I think it’s clear to someone with a functioning brain that it would be extremely unlikely for her to forget it. This isn’t Joe Biden. She has her full faculties presumably. 

I bet you feel the same about every member of the trump admin being "unable to recawwwl" their comms with russians or orders to pressure an allied nation to engage in sham investigations into political rivals as well, right?

[GW Hayduke 1950]

37 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't like supporting a conviction by arguing uncharged bad conduct, but he is a dirty birdy for sure. 

I think it’s important to acknowledge the FBI was working within the realm of national security and not just criminal law. Any of Flynn’s misdeeds and poor choices (taking money from Russia and Turkey and hiding those facts, conspiring within a kidnapping plot with Turkey, undermining the Obama admin through discussions with Russia diplomats and lying to the VP about it) could have been held over his head while serving as DNI, putting at risk national security. 

How the FBI protects national security varies and depends on the context, but it does not solely rely on prosecutions. They affectively got Flynn removed from the DNI position, neutralizing the immediate threat. Prosecuting him for lies to the FBI maintains a degree of deterrence and helps ensure the FBI has the ability to gather information in the future as it works on other national security issues

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Welcome to Soviet America 

 

[Irwin F Fletcher 3550]

Didn't we already do this? Didn't the Senate Intelligence Committee reaffirm Russian tampering in the 2016 campaign just a couple of weeks ago. FFS. 

[TornACL 7673]

2 hours ago, GRHorn said:

I’m not even alleging a big conspiracy. I just pointed out that it appears Power lied to Congress. Long ago, that would have had consequences. Not anymore. 

Three times you've referenced this action not passing the "smell test". And you've referenced people in power getting away with "flagrant crime." 

But sure, you're not suggesting a conspiracy. Ok. If you don't have the balls to say it yourself, the people who you are retweeting certainly are. 

I'd just be curious how you think these dots connect. What do you think is the underlying reason that this person would claim to not recall this situation? 

[David Dennison 18608]

41 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Welcome to Soviet America 

 

Gee, who appointed Robert Mueller?

[wildcat09 29187]

13 hours ago, GRHorn said:

 

Yes, because it’s so common to unmask the incoming National Security Advisor. Just another day at the office. Again, the smell test. 

How are you even dumber than the domer? Such a thing shouldn’t even be possible. 

[henrygandorf 29174]

14 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

How are you even dumber than the domer? Such a thing shouldn’t even be possible. 

there. is. no. bottom.

...since 2016

[David Dennison 18608]

14 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Yes, because it’s so common to unmask the incoming National Security Advisor. Just another day at the office. Again, the smell test. 

Why was the incoming National Security Advisor talking to the Russians without clearing it with the White House or the intelligence community?

[notre dame joe 172]

12 hours ago, Hookah Horns said:

I believe they're accusing Obama of wielding the justice dept as a weapon against president-elect fuckwit. I'm pretty sure the entire basis for this claim is that Obama was in office when Justice started kicking the tires on fuckwit's connections to the bolsheviks. Also note that there's no precedent that the president is barred from directing DOJ to investigate someone just bc they're political opponents. 

Where were you during the impeachment coup?

 

(The difference being Hunter Biden was on a foreign payroll)

[Doc Sam Beckett 5781]

4 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

Where were you during the impeachment coup?

 

(The difference being Hunter Biden was on a foreign payroll)

An impeachment coup and a but Hunter! 

[David Dennison 18608]

13 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

Where were you during the impeachment coup?

 

(The difference being Hunter Biden was on a foreign payroll)

The difference being Donald Trump never asked DOJ to investigate the Bidens. He wanted the Ukrainians to announce they were conducting an investigation in order to get congress-approved military aid.

 

[Anastasis 23375]

3 hours ago, Captainant said:

I'm sure annie will give you a hand if you get tired

Still living rent free in you head I see. 

 

I haven't really opined much ever on Flynn, other than to say I have no idea why he lied to the FBI when he knew that they had the call monitored, and more recently to say that he is a grifter who plead the crime and should do the time.  But keep doing you. 

[StassneyHorn 6534]

45 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

Where were you during the impeachment coup?

 

(The difference being Hunter Biden was on a foreign payroll)

Burisma is a private company. They paid him a fairly normal wage for an oil and gas company I’d assume. I’ve worked at Dimensional here in Austin and board members were getting a fairly healthy amount in either cash or stock

Edited May 14, 2020 by StassneyHorn

[HenryJames 65868]

 

[TwiceHorn 31184]

The Hunter Biden trope is so idiotic, particularly coming from Trump or his supporters.

I have no doubt there is and was serious corruption in Ukraine.  Biden's hiring might have been a tiny, infinitesimal glimpse of that corruption (in terms of why did Burisma want a politically connected American on their board more than anything the Bidens did wrong), but if your goal is to investigate and eliminate Ukrainian corruption, Hunter Biden is about 999/1000 on your priority list.  Unless, of course, you're running against his Dad for President.

Further, if your goal is to investigate Ukrainian corruption, why investigate Hunter Biden?  Investigate Burisma and Ukrainians, not Americans and not Biden.  Biden might be some type of collateral damage, but the focus should be on Burisma.

Finally, the notion of Donald J. Trump questioning the bona fides of a hire is laughable in view of his own nepotism.

Edited May 14, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Anastasis 23375]

2 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

[jimmyjazz 45513]

2 hours ago, Irwin F Fletcher said:

Didn't we already do this? Didn't the Senate Intelligence Committee reaffirm Russian tampering in the 2016 campaign just a couple of weeks ago. FFS. 

Please refer to the Benghazi Manual.  All your questions are answered there.

[henrygandorf 29174]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Further, if your goal is to investigate Ukrainian corruption, why investigate Hunter Biden?  Investigate Burisma and Ukrainians, not Americans and not Biden.  Biden might be some type of collateral damage, but the focus should be on Burisma.

this is always why it seemed so hollow to label it as "investigating corruption in ukraine" when it was so obvious an "investigation to smear biden while he's running for president."

i don't know how these investigations work - if the us govt has any grounds to investigate a foreign country.  but if someone like bush was president, and biden wasn't anything more than a senator, then hunter biden would seem like a useful witness or background source in the investigation.  not the fucking target.

not sure what's dumber, the story they're telling, or the people who believe it.

[workswithseed 2033]

37 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Still living rent free in you head I see. 

 

I haven't really opined much ever on Flynn, other than to say I have no idea why he lied to the FBI when he knew that they had the call monitored, and more recently to say that he is a grifter who plead the crime and should do the time.  But keep doing you. 

As I've heard is that he didn't think he was being questioned for criminality, and he figured that since he knew they had transcripts what reason would they to lead him on. When he gave a wrong answer, and they didn't correct him he thought he was right.

[GRHorn 105]

16 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

Is this the bill that had an anti surveillance amendment come up one vote short and Bern no  showed for the vote?

[Hookah Horns 3058]

5 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

So, to be clear, when presented with a scenario where an American citizen has potentially shady foreign connections, the Trump admin is saying that is is legal and expected to go to a foreign government and ask them to investigate, but illegal and unethical to ask your own country’s intelligence agency to look into it?

Yes and ideally you also withhold aid congress has told you to pay them if they don't comply. 

[GRHorn 105]

2 hours ago, TornACL said:

 

I'd just be curious how you think these dots connect. What do you think is the underlying reason that this person would claim to not recall this situation? 

For some reason they don’t want to be associated with the act. Why? I don’t know. 

[jimmyjazz 45513]

8 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

As I've heard is that he didn't think he was being questioned for criminality, and he figured that since he knew they had transcripts what reason would they to lead him on. When he gave a wrong answer, and they didn't correct him he thought he was right.

And yet Andy McCabe fried for a similar accusation.

[StassneyHorn 6534]

10 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Is this the bill that had an anti surveillance amendment come up one vote short and Bern no  showed for the vote?

Yes, also had a Dem miss the vote who intended to be vote 60

[David Dennison 18608]

9 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

Yes, also had a Dem miss the vote who intended to be vote 60

It was never going to get 60 votes. Republicans who voted for it would have just voted no to kill it. Mitch knows how to count votes.

[washparkhorn 9931]

1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

 

Welcome to East Germany USA

[otisdog 365]

4 hours ago, GRHorn said:

 This isn’t Joe Biden. She has her full faculties presumably. 

I find it stunning (although I shouldn't, by now) that you continue to question Biden's mental clarity while continuing to support the capital (village) idiot.

[Alvin89 108]

5 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

This is where it blows my mind the most with pretty much this entire admin.  How can anyone remotely paying attention see what these people are doing and not connect the dots?  It's BLATANTLY obvious that they are unfit, improper, and in many cases, downright criminal.  It's not hard.  Believe your eyes.  It's happening right in front of us.

On April 17, 2012, PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA  nominated Flynn to be the 18th director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.^[33][34] Flynn took command of the DIA in July 2012.^[35] He simultaneously became commander of the Joint Functional Component Command for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, and chair of the Military Intelligence Board.

[otisdog 365]

2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Why was the incoming National Security Advisor talking to the Russians without clearing it with the White House or the intelligence community?

My take is Flynn was doing the White Houses' bidding, but when he got busted for talking to Kislyak, he concocted the "lying" part to cover trump and pence's asses...

Edited May 14, 2020 by otisdog
more than one donkey