Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45558

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

I mean, I know that it requires you to read a few pages to pull the post together, and nobody really expects much effort from you.

Me being the low-IQ guy with no integrity that I am.

 

Quote

Still love your chile recipe though man and other contributions. We just talking this thread. 

Chili.

  • Haha 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

hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12833

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That is hardly disputed nowadays.

Do your research: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/publications/report-select-committee-intelligence-united-states-senate-russian-active-measures

The Russians were trying to undermine confidence in the voting system in the US, among other things. 

Kind of like some other fucker we know.

He’s a troll dude. Trump and team coordinated messaging and shared polling data with Russian operatives. That’s not up for debate but certain posters here can do nothing but obfuscate from that fact with look over here bullshit. 

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

TwiceHorn 31275

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The Sussman and Dashenko stuff has been playing out for a while, without much discussion or bumping of this thread.

Not much interest on this board when the focus is on the DNC lawyers peddling nonsense, and the primary source for the Steele dossier. Funny that, huh?

 

Well, Sussman and Dashenko, like a number of Mueller defendants, are merely accused of lying the the FBI, a process crime.

None of those from Mueller were very interesting or revelatory.

Sussman's case seems to be a bit problematic and I am reasonably sure it will go to trial.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31275

Posted
Posted

I will say this, to the extent the Steele Dossier or other spurious information was used to secure FISA or search warrants, I am not cool with that.

I'm not cool with a great deal of the stuff the FBI does and would be thrilled if it was stripped of most of its authority and relegated to an agency that assists states with complex or interstate prosecutions.

It is not clear to me, however, that the entire Russia investigation is "fruit of the poisonous tree."

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Satchel

Satchel 6908

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
31 minutes ago, Bravo said:

The Clinton campaign paid people to create a fake narrative to initiate an investigation that wasted  millions of taxpayer dollars with the sole intent of unseating a sitting President. 

The entire Democrat party was complicit. Now it is all coming out. It started as a drip with the Steele dossier. Now it's a flood. 

Bill Barr created a fake narrative about the contents of the Mueller report to create an illusion of exoneration that resulted in Trump being able to lie about his villainy so as to avoid being removed from office.

The entire Republic part was complicit. Now it’s all coming out. It started with a drip with 10 conspiracy allegations. Now it’s a flood of shredded, flushed and eaten evidence.

  • Hook 'Em 9
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26280

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bravo said:

The Clinton campaign paid people to create a fake narrative to initiate an investigation that wasted  millions of taxpayer dollars with the sole intent of unseating a sitting President. 

The entire Democrat party was complicit. Now it is all coming out. It started as a drip with the Steele dossier. Now it's a flood. 

Fart noise 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6908

Posted
Posted

It’s reasonable to question the degree to which Durham is dissembling:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/special-counsels-weird-prosecution-michael-sussmann

Yet the indictment Durham issued this week against Sussmann suggests not a whiff of improper spying on Trump or his coterie by the FBI. Indeed, it suggests not a whiff of misconduct on the FBI’s part in any respect—though Durham still appears to have his eyes on certain matters within the bureau separately. The FBI, rather, is the supposed victim of Sussman’s alleged crime. Durham is contending that Sussmann—acting as a lawyer for the Hillary Clinton campaign and an unnamed technology executive—lied to the FBI about whom he was representing in the course of an elaborate scheme to get the FBI interested in a false story tying Trump to Russia

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

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Bravo said:

Turns out Trump was right. We have been saying that a lot lately. Huge conspiracy against him to knock him out by DNC. This interview CBS needs to publish an apology, Oh, and the world going to shit because they think we don't have a badass who may do whatever but an invalid at the helm. Sum it up?

 

Curious to see if Annie and our resident trolls agree with this latest hot take by bravo that trump was right and it’s all just some big dem conspiracy.

Of course they won’t address this directly because they know they are completely full of shit. They’ll just continue to obfuscate and lie. Then accuse the board of doing exactly what they are doing.

Its really got to be somewhat boring. 

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

TwiceHorn 31275

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

All you have to do is read the various testimonies to understand how deep the Perkins Coie folks are into all this shit. 

Really, any law firm that represents one of the political parties/campaigns is fairly deep in this shit.  A lot of the time, though, the dirty actors go form their own firm or consultancy that is then hired by the firm in the course of representation so the dirty work is a step removed from the law firm.

Jones Day is the most apt GOP analog most likely and was probably a bit smarter about "offshoring" the dirtier aspects of the political work.  Jones Day has been a national force a lot longer than Perkins Coie.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23395

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Really, any law firm that represents one of the political parties/campaigns is fairly deep in this shit.  A lot of the time, though, the dirty actors go form their own firm or consultancy that is then hired by the firm in the course of representation so the dirty work is a step removed from the law firm.

In related news, PC recently spun off Marc Elias' operation as a independent firm.

https://www.perkinscoie.com/en/news-insights/perkins-coie-and-its-political-law-group-announce-the-formation-of-the-independent-firm-elias-law-group-llp.html

Perkins Coie and its Political Law Group announced today that 11 partners and 3 counsel will separate from the firm to form the independent firm Elias Law Group LLP. The new firm will represent candidates, party committees, political committees, nonprofit organizations, entities, and voters. Elias Law Group will be mission-driven, focusing on electing Democrats, supporting voting rights, and helping progressives make change.

Marc Elias, chair of the Political Law Group, will lead Elias Law Group. The separation will provide Elias Law Group with the independence to broaden its advocacy and types of matters on which it works, including by engaging more directly in the political and electoral process. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31275

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Satchel said:

It’s reasonable to question the degree to which Durham is dissembling:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/special-counsels-weird-prosecution-michael-sussmann

Yet the indictment Durham issued this week against Sussmann suggests not a whiff of improper spying on Trump or his coterie by the FBI. Indeed, it suggests not a whiff of misconduct on the FBI’s part in any respect—though Durham still appears to have his eyes on certain matters within the bureau separately. The FBI, rather, is the supposed victim of Sussman’s alleged crime. Durham is contending that Sussmann—acting as a lawyer for the Hillary Clinton campaign and an unnamed technology executive—lied to the FBI about whom he was representing in the course of an elaborate scheme to get the FBI interested in a false story tying Trump to Russia

I'm not going to call Durham a bad actor until it is pretty definitively proven otherwise.  

Like Mueller, I am going to assume that he approaches the Special Counsel job as a professional prosecutor.

The Sussman thing is a bit odd, because, unlike most of the Mueller "process crime" indictments, Sussman didn't lie during the course of the investigation, i.e. to Durham's team.  His alleged lie was long before Durham was appointed.

Some of the facts of the Sussman thing are relatively clear.  He and Perkins Coie represented the DNC and Clinton Campaigns.  He apparently had an audience of some type with FBI General Counsel James Baker at which he dropped some hints about the Russia connection with the Trump campaign.

Apparently, he told Baker he wasn't representing Clinton or DNC when he did that.  It is possible for a lawyer to be representing a party and do something not on their behalf.  As in, "I'm not here telling you this on behalf of my clients, they didn't ask me to do this."  There seem to be some facts indicating that that might be the case here.

Unlike all of Mueller's process crime defendants, except Flynn, Sussman is not going to plead because his career is at stake.  And I think Durham is going to have some trouble convicting.

The background fact is that Sussman apparently told Baker about the results of the DNS mining and the "unusual" connection between Trump and Russia.  Whether that information is true or accurate is not going to be a centerpiece of Sussman's trial, because it's largely irrelevant.

Danchenko apparently lied to the FBI during the actual investigation of the Steele Dossier, again before Durham's appointment.  Like the Mueller cases, I think his is more cut and dried and it does go to the heart of the falsity of the Steele Dossier.

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

Anastasis 23395

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Like Mueller, I am going to assume that he approaches the Special Counsel job as a professional prosecutor.

A think a reasonable question is why did Mueller not pull on these strings and instead framed them as "outside of his purview".  I mean the Steele dossier stuff was clearly intertwined with all of this.  A former foreign intelligence officer working as an operative of the DNC, bundling up reports from Russians, passing them off to the FBI and State Department.  Maybe something to look into there as it related to an investigation of Russian election interference and the intersection with political campaigns? And the fabricated alfa bank conspiracy, passed off to both FBI and CIA by DNC operatives.  I guess nothing worthy of a deep dive there huh? 

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

TwiceHorn 31275

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

In related news, PC recently spun off Marc Elias' operation as a independent firm.

https://www.perkinscoie.com/en/news-insights/perkins-coie-and-its-political-law-group-announce-the-formation-of-the-independent-firm-elias-law-group-llp.html

Perkins Coie and its Political Law Group announced today that 11 partners and 3 counsel will separate from the firm to form the independent firm Elias Law Group LLP. The new firm will represent candidates, party committees, political committees, nonprofit organizations, entities, and voters. Elias Law Group will be mission-driven, focusing on electing Democrats, supporting voting rights, and helping progressives make change.

Marc Elias, chair of the Political Law Group, will lead Elias Law Group. The separation will provide Elias Law Group with the independence to broaden its advocacy and types of matters on which it works, including by engaging more directly in the political and electoral process. 

Exactly.

Although, I don't think Elias is a particularly bad actor.  He represents the DNC and related interests in legit litigation and does a pretty good job of it.  His counterpart at Jones Day is Ben Ginsburg.

But, representation of a campaigns and parties, broadly, involves dirty work like opposition research.  It's the nature of the beast.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23395

Posted
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

He apparently had an audience of some type with FBI General Counsel James Baker at which he dropped some hints about the Russia connection with the Trump campaign.

"audience of some type" = arranged a private meeting with the general counsel at FBI headquarters, at which he said that he was not there acting on behalf of any client, but billed the time to the Clinton campaign as "work and communications regarding confidential project"

"dropped some hints" = passed off a USB drive detailing the alfa bank conspiracy.

 

Here is the indictment: https://www.justice.gov/sco/press-release/file/1433511/download

 

Edited by Anastasis
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31275

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

A think a reasonable question is why did Mueller not pull on these strings and instead framed them as "outside of his purview".  I mean the Steele dossier stuff was clearly intertwined with all of this.  A former foreign intelligence officer working as an operative of the DNC, bundling up reports from Russians, passing them off to the FBI and State Department.  Maybe something to look into there as it related to an investigation of Russian election interference and the intersection with political campaigns? And the fabricated alfa bank conspiracy, passed off to both FBI and CIA by DNC operatives.  I guess nothing worthy of a deep dive there huh? 

Well, Mueller, apparently unlike Durham, was conscious of criticism of Special Counsels generally:  the aforementioned takes too long, costs too much, wanders all over the goddamn place.  E.g. Ken Starr.  As I have said all along, I don't think Mueller had much interest in pursuing every instance of wrongdoing he came across even though he was theoretically authorized to do so.

If you accept the premise that the Steele Dossier was mostly bullshit, then wasting a lot of time chasing it down is not a productive use of resources when your remit is to investigate Russian interference.  It's falsity is not evidence of the absence of Russian interference.

I still remain a bit puzzled by Mueller's prosecution of Manafort and Gates.  While I think they were legit targets of the Mueller investigation, it seems Mueller got stuck with the prosecution because of an expiring statute of limitations.  I imagine Mueller tried pretty hard to avoid taking those cases because they were, as charged, outside his remit for the most part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31275

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

"audience of some type" = arranged a private meeting with the general counsel at FBI headquarters, at which he said that he was not there acting on behalf of any client, but billed the time to the Clinton campaign as "work and communications regarding confidential project"

"dropped some hints" = passed off a USB drive detailing the alfa bank conspiracy.

 

Here is the indictment: https://www.justice.gov/sco/press-release/file/1433511/download

 

You realize that the facts recited in the indictment, while having some evidentiary support, presumably, are subject to proof and also recited in a way most favorable to the government.

The most curious thing is that I don't think the GC of the FBI is who you typically go to to try to instigate an investigation.

I'm not particularly troubled by his billing the client for it.  I wouldn't have done it, but I'm sure the billing pressure at a place like Perkins Coie is immense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23395

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't think Mueller had much interest in pursuing every instance of wrongdoing he came across even though he was theoretically authorized to do so.

Do you think that he was right to take a pass on unpacking the Steele dossier and the alfa bank conspiracy and their direct relationship to the Clinton campaign?

I think that it boils down to he was trying to protect the credibility of the FBI, being a good company man and all. 

As far as the Baker/Sussman meeting.  One of them is lying about how that went down. I don't have a very strong opinion at this point as to which. 

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

TwiceHorn 31275

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Do you think that he was right to take a pass on unpacking the Steele dossier and the alfa bank conspiracy and their direct relationship to the Clinton campaign?

I think that it boils down to he was trying to protect the credibility of the FBI, being a good company man and all. 

As far as the Baker/Sussman meeting.  One of them is lying about how that went down. I don't have a very strong opinion at this point as to which. 

I think Mueller was justifiable in declining to pursue that avenue because it has little actual bearing on the existence or nonexistence of Russian interference.  But, I am sure there was an internal bias against investigating the FBI.  Even if you weren't a past FBI Director, that's just a can of worms that is pretty clearly not closely tied to the existence/nonexistence of Russian interference.

I think Mueller was quite conscious of not letting his investigation wander ala Ken Starr (note that under the statute under which Starr was appointed, he sought and received approval for the wandering that he did from a panel of the DC Circuit, and that is why we don't have a Special Counsel statute anymore, but instead this half-ass AG appointment thing).

I'm no fan of the FBI at all, but I don't have much problem separating my dislike for the organization from these other matters.  I don't fundamentally disagree with your position that Crossfire Hurricane commenced in a "corrupt" fashion with the FISA warrant.  But, I also think that the appointment of Mueller to investigate tended to break the chain of corruption in the investigation.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
horn4life

horn4life 3755

Posted
Posted

IF Mueller were Durham, Donald Trump Jr. would be steadily moving towards prison.

Mueller did not see his job as Partisan, I don't think an honest assessment of Durham's work can looked at from the same lens.  

What is ALWAYS an easy bar bet? Ask a Republican, "How many questions do you think Trump answered, relating to obstruction of justice in the Mueller Investigation?"

Then tell them the answer is none.

Then ask them, "How many questions did Trump answered under Oath in the probe?"  Again answer correctly and tell them none.

The lack of a grasp of factual information is so baked into being a Republican now it's just who the party is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:

On Jan 6, Trump organized and executed a failed coup on live tv to retain control over our government and there’s still people out there that think that both sides are the same.

Weird all those insurrectionists left their firearms at home.  What a shitty coup

  • Fuck You 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6908

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Weird all those insurrectionists left their firearms at home.  What a shitty coup

Our ruling

Trump said there were "no guns whatsoever" at the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and that "people with no guns" walked down to the Capitol.

Court records and news reports show that many insurrectionists were armed, and several were charged with having firearms on Capitol grounds or stashed nearby while in Washington D.C. In addition, rioters had weapons other than firearms and used them during the attack.

We rate this claim False.

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2021/07/14/some-jan-6-capitol-rioters-were-armed-guns-documents-show/7963993002/

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

90% of coups throughout human history were carried out with no firearms.  

Plus, there is somebody in federal custody who has already admitted to prosecutors that he had a boat full of weapons at the ready on the Potomac that day.

here have been legal acquittals, in many instances, of defendants being charged with insurrection and/or treason and walking.  But the reason has never, in history been, "Because he wasn't carrying."  That's not a thing in the legal world.  But I'd like to see somebody try that.  "Your honor, I couldn't possibly have assaulted this child...I didn't even have my gun with me."  You can still assault somebody without a gun.  You can still attempt murder without a gun.  You can even be a serial killer and never hold a handgun.  Insurrection/treason (or a coup) do not require you to be carrying a weapon when you attempt it.  Most of the time, it doesn't.  

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...