Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46972

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Jimmy, I don't know why you're still engaging with Anastasis on this. He's not acting in good faith here. 

Well, that's why I posted this last night . . . but I got sucked back in this morning.  I need to follow my own advice better.

 

Quote

I don't know why y'all continue to engage @Anastasis on this.  The overarching concern for most decent Americans is whether or not Trump or his campaign worked with Russians to undermine Hillary Clinton's campaign.

The answer is overwhelmingly "yes".

He continues to point at aspects of the investigation that either were not pursued or did not pan out as "evidence" of the contrary.  This is because he is a Trump-aligned "Libertarian" bootlicker.  You keep falling for it.  Stop.

 

  • Hook 'Em 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

PenelopeWitherspoon

PenelopeWitherspoon 19279

Posted
Posted

A real Libertarian would hate Trump.  Real Libertarians do not support tariffs.  Real Libertarians believe in the free movement of capital and labor (i.e. basically open borders).  If you have Libertarian leanings, one of the things you believe government should spend their money on is infrastructure.  It amazes me how many people say they lean Libertarian and then are complete morons about what Libertarians actually believe in.  Note, most people running as Libertarians are not.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29556

Posted
Posted

I mean, like 75% of libertarians are just conservatives who want to smoke weed. Another 10% are just conservatives who oppose age of consent laws. The remaining 15% are conservatives with really weird ideas about money.*

 

*I made these percentages up and really, there's a lot of overlap.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29556

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Y’all are aware that every time someone bumps this thread that Anastasis is legally obligated to post in it. Surly asked me to review their contract with him and it is air tight on that point. Gets a bonus if he works in “brain worms” at least once a month. 

I'm not sure his promise to post in this thread is adequate consideration. You know, given its complete lack of value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23699

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

No, it's not funny.  You continue to ignore the clear evidence of Trump and his campaign conspiring with Russia with this #whatabout angle. 

A poster posted an article regarding the indictment of Steele's primary source on a series of charges related to lying to the FBI, and a group of posters chime in with a cacophony of whatabouttfg's rather than even consider or discuss the implications of the content of that indictment. I point out that there was nothing particularly surprising in that indictment or the one of the DNC lawyer cause much of it is stuff I told y'all years ago about the plays that were being run by the political operatives. buT wHaTabOuTiSm.

I accept the findings of the Mueller report.  Both sections 1 and 2. Some of you guys seem to really struggle with that, and then go into seizures when I point out a couple areas that clearly should have been probed as part of that investigation but were not. I am sure that is just totally coincidental that the lowering of the seizure threshold around here is correlated to roads that lead back the the DNC playbook of stoking misinformation and spreading disinformation from Russians to influence the election and it's aftermath.  

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11861

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

A poster posted an article regarding the indictment of Steele's primary source on a series of charges related to lying to the FBI, and a group of posters chime in with a cacophony of whatabouttfg's rather than even consider or discuss the implications of the content of that indictment.

a visual representation of Surly Leftists.

62c04841-679b-498f-ab40-029f0147d2ad_tex

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38130

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Anastasis said:

A poster posted an article regarding the indictment of Steele's primary source on a series of charges related to lying to the FBI, and a group of posters chime in with a cacophony of whatabouttfg's rather than even consider or discuss the implications of the content of that indictment. I point out that there was nothing particularly surprising in that indictment or the one of the DNC lawyer cause much of it is stuff I told y'all years ago about the plays that were being run by the political operatives. buT wHaTabOuTiSm.

I accept the findings of the Mueller report.  Both sections 1 and 2. Some of you guys seem to really struggle with that, and then go into seizures when I point out a couple areas that clearly should have been probed as part of that investigation but were not. I am sure that is just totally coincidental that the lowering of the seizure threshold around here is correlated to roads that lead back the the DNC playbook of stoking misinformation and spreading disinformation from Russians to influence the election and it's aftermath.  

The DNC hired a British operative that was fed Russian propaganda and lies, which lead to the DNC spreading Russian disinformation to influence the election.

The Trump campaign gave polling data directly to Russian operatives in an effort to influence the election. 

Both are bad, which is worse and why?

Before you spend a few paragraphs explaining why both are bad, are you capable of recognizing why one is inherently worse?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29556

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

The DNC hired a British operative that was fed Russian propaganda and lies, which lead to the DNC spreading Russian disinformation to influence the election.

The Trump campaign gave polling data directly to Russian operatives in an effort to influence the election. 

Both are bad, which is worse and why?

Before you spend a few paragraphs explaining why both are bad, are you capable of recognizing why one is inherently worse?

Slap Bears Stop It GIF - Slap Bears Stop It - Discover & Share GIFs

Link to comment
Share on other sites
babysdaddy

babysdaddy 2731

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

The DNC hired a British operative that was fed Russian propaganda and lies, which lead to the DNC spreading Russian disinformation to influence the election.

The Trump campaign gave polling data directly to Russian operatives in an effort to influence the election. 

Both are bad, which is worse and why?

Before you spend a few paragraphs explaining why both are bad, are you capable of recognizing why one is inherently worse?

Communication of plan and strategy that was going on directly with Kilimnik by Gates and Manafort. 

The meeting below discussed is in May. https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf page 80 of the report, 94 of the PDF:

 "At the meeting, Manafort walked Kilimnik through the internal polling data from Fabrizio in detail.453 According to Gates, Kilimnik wanted to know how Trump could win.454 Manafort explained his strategy in the battleground states and told Kilimnik about polls that identified voter bases in blue-collar, democratic-leaning states which Trump could swing.455 Manafort said these voters could be reached by Trump on issues like economics, but the Campaign needed to implement a ground game.456 Gates recalled that Manafort further discussed the "battleground" states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota.457"

It's pretty clear, to me, he was doing what he was doing in order to inflate his value and try to collect on $10mm in owed debts from Ukrainian oligarchs given he was broke. In my opinion, his goal was not "share info in order to influence the election" although I don't think intent matters much here.  The Trump campaign literally did zero vetting to understand Manafort's significant liability given his financial situation. 

The question is, of course, was Manafort doing this with Trump's knowledge/blessing?  I don't think that was ever answered and as I understand it, within a day or 2 of Trump's first national security briefing in August, Manafort was out.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13619

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, babysdaddy said:

 

The question is, of course, was Manafort doing this with Trump's knowledge/blessing? 

That's the question if you lend credence to Trump's narrative that Trump's own DOJ establishing the Mueller investigation was somehow a Democratic witch hunt designed exclusively to nab him. And yes, when Mueller allows Trump to be questioned under oath via a take-home, open-book questionnaire that his lawyers are able to assist with, and returns an incomplete list of answers that Mueller testified under oath were "generally dishonest", meaning, as I understand "generally", greater than 50 percent lies-

Yup. Be pretty hard to eliminate plausible deniability, even though the very act of typing that makes me doesitthough.gif

It doesn't matter as it pertains to whether the Mueller investigation was worthwhile. It uncovered a shitload of crime the Drain That Swamp crowd was participating in.

If every lead not panning out or being alleged to be falsified warrant an investigation, let the investigation into the Benghazi investigationS, which turned up jack, begin. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Incredulity said:

a visual representation of Surly Leftists.

62c04841-679b-498f-ab40-029f0147d2ad_tex

I like how a bunch of former republicans who voted for W are now considered “leftists.” Just shows how far radical right the republicans have become. I bet Hitler in hell is saying you guys have gone too far right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

oh.... I love this one.  The conservative bonafides of Surly Leftists.  Tell it again.

 

LOL.

There is nothing at all conservative about the Republican Party now.

Insurrection out front shoulda told a ya.

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

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13619

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

oh.... I love this one.  The conservative bonafides of Surly Leftists.  Tell it again.

 

LOL.

Touche', Incredulity. The deft, out-of-nowhere chess move of "LOL" blows the cover on the at least 3 message board iterations long game going back multiple decades of posters voting for the GOP, posting for the GOP, and working for GOP campaigns. 

Have a Fresca. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 46061

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Touche', Incredulity. The deft, out-of-nowhere chess move of "LOL" blows the cover on the at least 3 message board iterations long game going back multiple decades of posters voting for the GOP, posting for the GOP, and working for GOP campaigns. 

Have a Fresca. 

Yes, it’s a conspiracy, don’t you get it?  So obvious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Touche', Incredulity. The deft, out-of-nowhere chess move of "LOL" blows the cover on the at least 3 message board iterations long game going back multiple decades of posters voting for the GOP, posting for the GOP, and working for GOP campaigns. 

Have a Fresca. 

He thinks let’s go Brandon is clever,as does 90 percent of the Republican Party. Just think about that. 
 

It has become the party of idiots all jumping off a cliff because dear leader told them to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 13351

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Oh, fuck.  why didn't you say so. 

 

Hornfan McHorn worked on a Republican campaign 2 decades ago...  shit... Universal Healthcare, UBI and 95% tax rates it is.

Oh so you mean they do have actual conservative bonafides like working for Republican politicians? 
 

Also there is not a single credible argument against universal healthcare.

Roosevelt, Truman, Nixon, Kennedy, Johnson, Ford, and Carter. All of those guys had 70%+ tax rates while president. I guess those guys are all super liberal huh? Fucking dunce

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DDD Dad

DDD Dad 14571

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Incredulity said:

mXx.gif

 

2 hours ago, Incredulity said:

A phrase leftists were wetting themselves over, "taking back" with Thank You, Brandon.   

pretty fuckin good.

 

2 hours ago, Incredulity said:

Oh, fuck.  why didn't you say so. 

 

Hornfan McHorn worked on a Republican campaign 2 decades ago...  shit... Universal Healthcare, UBI and 95% tax rates it is.

 

2 hours ago, Incredulity said:

TIL FDR was a conservative.

 

Well done.

 

2 hours ago, Incredulity said:

Your words chucko.

Was FDR signed up as Burnt Horny on one of the old sites?

 

2 hours ago, Incredulity said:

I'm just excited to learn about 

 

 

1 hour ago, Incredulity said:

what's the opposite of "super liberal"?

Derp. 
 

can someone call in a welfare check on Incredulity?  I think he may be broken. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 28081

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

The DNC hired a British operative that was fed Russian propaganda and lies, which lead to the DNC spreading Russian disinformation to influence the election.

The Trump campaign gave polling data directly to Russian operatives in an effort to influence the election. 

Both are bad, which is worse and why?

Before you spend a few paragraphs explaining why both are bad, are you capable of recognizing why one is inherently worse?

Definitely more plausible deniability in the first case. More proof HRC is way smarter than Trump. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23699

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Definitely more plausible deniability in the first case. More proof HRC is way smarter than Trump. 

And surrounded by much better lawyers to execute the play, by orders of magnitude.

At least some here are acknowledging that both were bad, which is a far ways from the days back when I was told that everything on one side was 100% by the book, and I was a crazy trumpkin bootlicker for suggesting the political play being run through the various lawyer screens and cutouts, and suggesting that an audit of how that information was used by the FBI was going to find serious problems with it's handling in those halls. All those things are now well resolved as facts. 

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

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13619

Posted
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Definitely more plausible deniability in the first case. More proof HRC is way smarter than Trump. 

It's not at all unheard of for political campaigns or intelligence agencies to disseminate disinformation favorable to their opponents so when it's seized upon and publicized by their opponents or allies they can point to the very things they know are untrue, knowing that a significant chunk of the electorate will be swayed by the If-100-%-of-leads-aren't-legit, You-must-acquit fallacy. 

Is that's  what's going on here? Fuck if I know.

Does it matter? Nope. Even Anastasis accepts that. 

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

Sawbonz 28081

Posted
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

It's not at all unheard of for political campaigns or intelligence agencies to disseminate disinformation favorable to their opponents so when it's seized upon and publicized by their opponents or allies they can point to the very things they know are untrue, knowing that a significant chunk of the electorate will be swayed by the If-100-%-of-leads-aren't-legit, You-must-acquit fallacy. 

Is that's  what's going on here? Fuck if I know.

Does it matter? Nope. Even Anastasis accepts that. 

Is it common to hire (former) foreign spy chiefs to gather the disinformation from a third country hostile to the US’s interests? This is the first I’ve ever seen 

When the dossier first became public knowledge, npr had the former Moscow cia station chief on and asked him about the veracity/reliability of the dossier. He said that there would be some true info and some planted falsehoods, mixed so you would not know which was which. He also said all info given to Steele was likely vetted by the Kremlin. He also said Steele would have known this to be the case when he compiled the info. 
 

Do you honestly believe the parties paying for this info would not be aware of that? Do you honestly believe that HRC and the highest levels of her campaign were unaware of what was happening?

 

 

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

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13619

Posted
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Is it common to hire (former) foreign spy chiefs to gather the disinformation from a third country hostile to the US’s interests? This is the first I’ve ever seen 

 

 

 

I'm going to go out on limb here and plant a flag on the hill that says that would likely be more common in the sphere of espionage, deception and trade dealing

than

a sitting US president dismissing the consensus of the US intelligence community's conclusion, confirmed by his own DOJ-appointed Mueller investigation, and re-confirmed by the GOP-chaired Senate Intel Committee with a Paul Ryan-Kevin McCarthy recording cherry on top,

....and instead....

stating he places more trust in a former KGB agent whom he can't bring himself to condemn for murdering his domestic critics when pinkos like Bill O'Reilly prompt him,

and there still being a cacophony of crickets to even attempt to explain why that is.

Not even a stab.

Yup. Think I'm going gauge one of those way more likely than the other.

Edited by Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 28081

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

I'm going to go out on limb here and plant a flag on the hill that says that would likely be more common in the sphere of espionage, deception and trade dealing

But we’re talking about a political campaign, not any of those things

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23699

Posted
Posted (edited)

Trumps reaction, particularly as displayed in Helsinki, was in no way normal. Welcome the world of cluster b personality disorders. He should have been removed from office after that display, being a severely brain damaged narcissist with clear and undeniable functional impairment. But “what about the orange narcissist”. 

Edited by Anastasis
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 28081

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

...and political campaigns from both sides of the aisle hire opposition research who employ those with espionage backgrounds. 

 

I think the difference is the use of foreigners. I’m not sure but I think that is what runs afoul of election law. 

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...