The Robert Mueller Investigation

[krutov 18]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I think he has an assload of evidence of financial crimes that have nothing to do with collusion. 

if you did this kind of investigation to any administration since j q. adams you'd have that even without the kafkesque laws being employed to conjure crimes here. 

but nobody hired a special counsel to look for financial crimes.

[David Dennison 19542]

1 minute ago, krutov said:

if you did this kind of investigation to any administration since j q. adams you'd have that even without the kafkesque laws being employed to conjure crimes here. 

but nobody hired a special counsel to look for financial crimes.

He can go wherever the Russia investigation leads him.

We'll find out shortly.

[krutov 18]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

He can go wherever the Russia investigation leads him.

We'll find out shortly.

he can try.  but tar and feathers and a rail is a real possibility if he does.  and i'm not being metaphoric.

 

 

 

[David Dennison 19542]

2 minutes ago, krutov said:

he can try.  but tar and feathers and a rail is a real possibility if he does.  and i'm not being metaphoric.

The possibility of being lifted up on shoulders and celebrated is just as real.

Sort of metaphoric.

[krutov 18]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

The possibility of being lifted up on shoulders and celebrated is just as real.

Sort of metaphoric.

his job is to be an impartial grown up and sort this russia shit out.  his job is not to get the elected potus at all costs.  in fact, his job is to proactively peel off any shady potus guys that are not positively connected to the potus.  his job is also to give the potus the benefit of the doubt and gracefully exit if he has nothing.

he will lose everything if he oversteps that mandate.  he seems to understand that, which is why he let the doj handle all the cohen crap.  cab medallions would be over the line.

 

[David Dennison 19542]

2 minutes ago, krutov said:

his job is to be an impartial grown up and sort this russia shit out.  his job is not to get the elected potus at all costs.  in fact, his job is to proactively peel off any shady potus guys that are not positively connected to the potus.  his job is also to give the potus the benefit of the doubt and gracefully exit if he has nothing.

he will lose everything if he oversteps that mandate.  he seems to understand that, which is why he let the doj handle all the cohen crap.  cab medallions would be over the line.

Which is why he's turning the screws on Manafort. I think he already knows everything Manafort will testify to, but he's giving him a chance to not spend the rest of his life in prison. We'll see if Paul wants to roll the dice with Virginia and DC juries.

[Anastasis 23720]

LOL. Juries are the least of Paulies concerns. 

[David Dennison 19542]

12 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

LOL. Juries are the least of Paulies concerns. 

Mueller knows this and it is a very important aspect of this investigation.

 

Edited June 9, 2018 by David Dennison

[krutov 18]

10 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Which is why he's turning the screws on Manafort. I think he already knows everything Manafort will testify to, but he's giving him a chance to not spend the rest of his life in prison. We'll see if Paul wants to roll the dice with Virginia and DC juries.

if by "everything manafort will testify to" you mean you think mueller already knows manafort has evidence of collusion by trump, then wouldn't that make trump a target?  seems like mueller is fishing by putting pressure on cohen and manafort because that's all he's got.    he'd be indicting other people if he could just to rally the bots.  at this point even hugo is harbouring doubts,

[David Dennison 19542]

4 minutes ago, krutov said:

if by "everything manafort will testify to" you mean you think mueller already knows manafort has evidence of collusion by trump, then wouldn't that make trump a target?  seems like mueller is fishing by putting pressure on cohen and manafort because that's all he's got.    he'd be indicting other people if he could just to rally the bots.  at this point even hugo is harbouring doubts,

Collusion is not a crime.

Obstruction of justice is.

[krutov 18]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Collusion is not a crime.

Obstruction of justice is.

you are getting desperate. 

[David Dennison 19542]

Just now, krutov said:

you are getting desperate. 

I think all of this is great. Very entertaining.

[krutov 18]

10 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I think all of this is great. Very entertaining.

got me over 50 posts.

[texas08 1599]

TCUfan?

[Tuco 5093]

6 hours ago, TahoeHorn said:

That works if the Prez made the promise.  That doesn't work if Junior had the meeting and you think the Prez must have known and must have made the promise.

Trump knew about the meeting before hand. 

There is a lot of stuff in the investigation I'm not sure about.  That ain't one of them.  There is no way a request comes in from Aras and Jr. doesn't inform the elder Donnie John. It would have been shitty protocol with an extremely rich and powerful man who Trump had done business with, and wanted to do business with in the future.  It was obvious from the suggestion of  sending it to Rhonda, that the intent was that Trump would be involved. No way that it stayed at the lieutenant level.  Between when the email came in and when the meeting occurred, Trump referred to it when he promised to hold a press conference the following week in which he would reveal some "very interesting things" about Clinton.  Just earlier this week, the Trump camp was caught in a lie about dictating the initial response about the meeting.  Yet, for some reason, people are inclined to think that what he, or Jr, says on the matter has some resemblance to what actually occurred.

[Gil Bang 26240]

3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't think Mueller is sufficiently a maverick to buck current DOJ policy and provoke a constitutional crisis by indicting the President.  Or perhaps you mean that he intends or hopes to indict Trump after he leaves office, which isn't terribly plausible either as the Special Counsel investigation should be concluded before Trump leaves office, however he leaves office.

You concede, I assume, that Mueller could drop enough evidence (in theory) to cause impeachment and removal, and indictment shortly thereafter?

[Ted Lange 16413]

3 hours ago, krutov said:

sure.  or that.

but we are over two years into the investigation of trump campaign collusion.   mueller has been begging for an interview for months because he's finished and has nothing.  right now mueller is trying to use any coercive power he can find to "flip" cohen and manafort like the desperate amoral hack he is.  but he doesn't have an actual crime to flip them for.  he's just hoping nopt to be an even bigger buffoon than starr.

but there is no there there.

Where do you get “over 2 years” from? Trump math/Fox News indoctrination . We are at a year and 1 month currently.

Speaking of Starr, Whitewater went on for 4 years, so we are at the 1/4 point using that standard.

Why does Trump and the Trumpkins have to lie, over and over and over?

[WhatTheBuck 28930]

4 hours ago, krutov said:

trump knowingly cooperating with a foreign state to commit an actual illegal act before the election.

Like if the Russians committed a cyber crime and offered to give the illegally acquired information to the Trump campaign in an effort to get their preferred candidate elected. 

[MaybeACoordinator 8350]

So we've got a guy named Krutov defending Trump at every turn. These trolls be getting bold. 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13629]

...who spells harboring "harbouring". Oh well, probably knows the lyrics to America The Beautiful better than the president does.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I think krutov is BritishHorn from Shaggy.  

His post timing and messaging is very similar.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13629]

Opaque AND a Trumpkin? Seems outta character.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

9 hours ago, krutov said:

if by "everything manafort will testify to" you mean you think mueller already knows manafort has evidence of collusion by trump, then wouldn't that make trump a target?  seems like mueller is fishing by putting pressure on cohen and manafort because that's all he's got.    he'd be indicting other people if he could just to rally the bots.  at this point even hugo is harbouring doubts,

I think Mueller wants Manafort to flip on the Russians more than Trump.  This is a national security counterintelligence investigation first and foremost.  It’s easy to lose sight of that with all the noise coming from Trump and the media.

Edited June 9, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[krutov 18]

9 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Like if the Russians committed a cyber crime and offered to give the illegally acquired information to the Trump campaign in an effort to get their preferred candidate elected. 

you mean like if some dude stole a bike and then offered to sell it to me and i knew it was stolen and i talked to him and then decided not to buy it?

because i did that once in grade school.  it's only a criminal conspiracy in the mind of a federal prosecutor.

[krutov 18]

5 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I think krutov is BritishHorn from Shaggy.  

His post timing and messaging is very similar.

i am shocked you would come to a completely wrong conclusion that supports your bias based on your vivid imagination and no evidence at all.

shocked.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I mean, of course you would deny it, even if true.  

I don’t give a shit who you are but it’s fun to speculate on socks.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13629]

More like if you publicly solicited more stolen goods from a source that had already released stolen goods to you (and the world), and who had kept goods they stole from you from being released. And you're a little rapey.

[krutov 18]

 

10 hours ago, Ted Lange said:

Where do you get “over 2 years” from? Trump math/Fox News indoctrination . We are at a year and 1 month currently.

Speaking of Starr, Whitewater went on for 4 years, so we are at the 1/4 point using that standard.

Why does Trump and the Trumpkins have to lie, over and over and over?

the fbi currently claims it opened an investigation in the summer of 2016.  it may well have been earlier. 

you guys are idiots on the wrong side of history with this collusion bullshit.  and most of you pulled a lever for hillary clinton too.  as such you are twice proven to be credulous fools with zero judgment. 

 

[krutov 18]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I mean, of course you would deny it, even if true.  

I don’t give a shit who you are but it’s fun to speculate on socks.

your judgment on what is fun to speculate about is kind of suspect. 

 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13629]

Damn, if Mueller could just get a single indictment perhaps the history books will be kinder.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Sigh - someone needs to put together a Clean Up Team so we can get these transparent trolls to -100 quickly and get them gone.  All they do is derail discussion and smear the walls with alt-right fake news bullshit "facts".

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I like the trolls.  You can learn a lot from their talking points and tactics. Free speech and all that shit.

[krutov 18]

4 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

More like if you publicly solicited more stolen goods from a source that had already released stolen goods to you (and the world), and who had kept goods they stole from you from being released. And you're a little rapey.

so campaign rhetoric is a crime now? 

not only was it legal it was entirely fair comment on what a brazen lawless creature hillary clinton was and is.  the fact you would even object to that makes you a fool or a troll.

i'll grant you he does seem a little rapey though. 

[atomheartbevo 90650]

The only fool here is the one thinking that just because we didn’t vote for Trump, that must mean we voted for Hillary. 

[krutov 18]

4 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Sigh - someone needs to put together a Clean Up Team so we can get these transparent trolls to -100 quickly and get them gone.  All they do is derail discussion and smear the walls with alt-right fake news bullshit "facts".

trolls meaning people who disagree with you?

please fill me in on the bullshit facts i have mentioned?

 

 

[krutov 18]

2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

The only fool here is the one thinking that just because we didn’t vote for Trump, that must mean we voted for Hillary. 

i said "most".  so that fool can't be me.

[TahoeHorn 107]

28 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I mean, of course you would deny it, even if true.  

I don’t give a shit who you are but it’s fun to speculate on socks.

I don't keep track of poster positions.  I'd have no idea how to figure out a sock.  I usually read the post without reading the poster name. Some time a poster like Mr Phlegm is unique enough that I can guess who it is.  But mostly it's just a new post and I have no interest in who the poster is and don't even look at the name unless it's very good or very bad.

If a poster has enough posts that lay out positions I get a sense of how they think and learn them.  But if a posters style is one liners then I don't inventory them unless there is an awful lot.  Usually, one liners are things to forget anyway.  The only interesting posters are one who present a coherent affirmative thought.  If they are commenting on what another poster said I tend to just move on.  "You said Chris Simms had fewer interceptions than Applewhite and ..."  I'm fucking on to the next post.  That's not a poster whose position on QBs I give a shit about.  He's talking about how much some other poster knows about QB stats, which does not interest me.  The only ones I remember are the ones who lay out a view of QBs that is comprehensive and makes me think.

Edited June 9, 2018 by TahoeHorn

[atomheartbevo 90650]

Hint: Texas fans usually aren’t big on folks from, or with ties to Arkansas. That includes:

• Hillary Clinton
• Barry Switzer
• Jerry Jones 

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

10 minutes ago, krutov said:

trolls meaning people who disagree with you?

please fill me in on the bullshit facts i have mentioned?

 

 

I didn't mention any names - why do you assume I meant you?

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13629]

so campaign rhetoric is a crime now? 
not only was it legal it was entirely fair comment on what a brazen lawless creature hillary clinton was and is.  the fact you would even object to that makes you a fool or a troll.
i'll grant you he does seem a little rapey though. 

Someone should investigate Hillary.

[krutov 18]

13 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Damn, if Mueller could just get a single indictment perhaps the history books will be kinder.

i think the history books will question why mueller went so aggressively after a duly elected potus without an actual crime to investigate.  they will wonder why he pursued collateral prosecutions of papadopolous, gates, flynn and manafort, and even went so far as to threaten charges against gates' son in order to "flip" these guys when he didn't know whether potus was guilty of a crime in the first place.  they will wonder why the fact mueller still has no evidence to make trump a target after flipping three guys has not stopped him from pursuing manafort aggressively as well to try and flip him.  they may also know better than us how much mueller is behind the cohen stuff.

in short, they will wonder who gave mueller a mandate to behave like trump was john giotti.  and they will contrast that treatment to what comey gave clinton and shake their heads at how thoroughly the fbi and doj lost its way here.

and while we are speaking of indictments, go read the mueller indictment of the russians again.  the only thing worse than the conspiracy theories you idiots have been exchanging on trump for the past 18 months, are the federal conspiracy laws that guys like mueller rely upon to stretch the criminal law beyond recognition.

 

 

 

 

[krutov 18]

12 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

I didn't mention any names - why do you assume I meant you?

you seem disingenuous. 

[TahoeHorn 107]

1 minute ago, krutov said:

i think the history books will question why mueller went so aggressively after a duly elected potus without an actual crime to investigate.  ...

 

I disagree.  I think that before Mueller was appointed the DOJ knew that Michael Flynn and others committed crimes and that the President didn't want them investigated.  Mueller's job was to investigate those crimes and any others he ran across.  And he's found a bunch of crimes.

We do not know what info comes to Mueller and he shouldn't be telling us, so I don't know how you'd conclude he is chasing things that aren't crimes.

[Grade of D as in David 13255]

4 minutes ago, krutov said:

i think the history books will question why mueller went so aggressively after a duly elected potus without an actual crime to investigate.  they will wonder why he pursued collateral prosecutions of papadopolous, gates, flynn and manafort, and even went so far as to threaten charges against gates' son in order to "flip" these guys when he didn't know whether potus was guilty of a crime in the first place.  they will wonder why the fact mueller still has no evidence to make trump a target after flipping three guys has not stopped him from pursuing manafort aggressively as well to try and flip him.  they may also know better than us how much mueller is behind the cohen stuff.

in short, they will wonder who gave mueller a mandate to behave like trump was john giotti.  and they will contrast that treatment to what comey gave clinton and shake their heads at how thoroughly the fbi and doj lost its way here.

and while we are speaking of indictments, go read the mueller indictment of the russians again.  the only thing worse than the conspiracy theories you idiots have been exchanging on trump for the past 18 months, are the federal conspiracy laws that guys like mueller rely upon to stretch the criminal law beyond recognition.

 

 

 

 

Why?

I don't know maybe because it appears that our biggest geopolitical rival for the last 100 years tried to influence our elections?

It is an investigation into the Russian interference in the election, and I believe that it should go as far as necessary to determine the scope and depth of their efforts whether they were successful or not. We should be looking into the campaigns of not only DOTUS but other candidates for federal and high level state office in addition to why the NRA would take money from the Russians.

 

The fact that DOTUS keeps trying to discredit the investigation makes him look extremely guilty. If there is nothing to see then let the process play out. 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13629]

i think the history books will question why mueller went so aggressively after a duly elected potus without an actual crime to investigate. 

Investigations exist in part to determine if a crime has been committed and judging by the guilty pleas Mueller has secured in a fraction of the time Hillary was subjected to investigations, at a fraction of the cost Trump's golf outings have cost the tax payer, lots of crimes were committed. Your willfully obtuse and conflating self should be happy for this, but I sense not.

[krutov 18]

3 minutes ago, TahoeHorn said:

I disagree.  I think that before Mueller was appointed the DOJ knew that Michael Flynn and others committed crimes and that the President didn't want them investigated.  Mueller's job was to investigate those crimes and any others he ran across.  And he's found a bunch of crimes.

We do not know what info comes to Mueller and he shouldn't be telling us, so I don't know how you'd conclude he is chasing things that aren't crimes.

i go by the months of interview requests and the "not a target" representation, to conclude mueller has finished investigating (subject to flipping more people) and has nothing on trump.  i can't rule out that mueller has something on members of the trump inner circle but to the extent they remain in place at the wh with security clearance i think you can assume there are no sealed indictments.  i think there may be some bullshit conspiracy charges coming if he gets convictions on the russians, but if the charges are what i think they will be, they will be process crimes dressed up as a conspiracy and they will not hunt.

as for "potus" didn't want the crimes of flyy and manafort investigated, now you are heading off into obstruction territory.  i won't be joining you on that journey until i see something resembling an overt act by the potus to interfere with an investigation.  every potus wants you to go easy on his people.  what comey claims trump said has been out in the public domain for a long time and it won't hunt either.

[TahoeHorn 107]

1 minute ago, krutov said:

i go by the months of interview requests and the "not a target" representation, to conclude mueller has finished investigating (subject to flipping more people) and has nothing on trump.  i can't rule out that mueller has something on members of the trump inner circle but to the extent they remain in place at the wh with security clearance i think you can assume there are no sealed indictments.  i think there may be some bullshit conspiracy charges coming if he gets convictions on the russians, but if the charges are what i think they will be, they will be process crimes dressed up as a conspiracy and they will not hunt.

as for "potus" didn't want the crimes of flyy and manafort investigated, now you are heading off into obstruction territory.  i won't be joining you on that journey until i see something resembling an overt act by the potus to interfere with an investigation.  every potus wants you to go easy on his people.  what comey claims trump said has been out in the public domain for a long time and it won't hunt either.

The purpose of the investigation was not to investigate Trump.  It was to investigate people like Manafort and Flynn, whom Trump was protecting.  I'm not "heading off into obstruction territory" when I talk about investigating Flynn and Manafort.

 

Mueller had evidence of crimes to investigate and any time you start doing that other stuff comes up, and you chase that too.  I'm sure that's what he's doing.

[krutov 18]

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

 

 

Investigations exist in part to determine if a crime has been committed and judging by the guilty pleas Mueller has secured in a fraction of the time Hillary was subjected to investigations, at a fraction of the cost Trump's golf outings have cost the tax payer, lots of crimes were committed. Your willfully obtuse and conflating self should be happy for this, but I sense not.

are you suggesting the hillary and mueller investigations are comparable in terms of tactics or zeal?

[jimmyjazz 47205]

15 hours ago, krutov said:

sure.  or that.

but we are over two years into the investigation of trump campaign collusion.

Mueller was appointed on May 17, 2017.  I see you caught the lying gene from your orange overlord.

Why do you hate America?

[Hornmatic 294]

1 hour ago, krutov said:

 it's only a criminal conspiracy in the mind of a federal prosecutor.

Good thing we have federal prosecutors on the case.