Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation


Hugo Stiglitz

Recommended Posts

Just now, hayden_horn said:

so, when donald trump junior met with russians about dirt on hillary, which we know about, because HE released those emails, that was not collusion?

these cockroaches are hiding in plain sight, yall

Did Barr address Jr at all?  From what I saw, his press conference comments were pretty narrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don’t really like the guy but Barre sure is smooth.  


I’m with you on that. Was listening on NPR and was glad he didn’t entertain the Fox question of where the investigation originated from, sure she wanted a sound bite of ‘discredited Steele memo’. He just said he was there to talk about his take. So we got that going for us, which is nice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FondrenRoad said:

Did Barr address Jr at all?  From what I saw, his press conference comments were pretty narrow.

i dunno, i did not watch.

but barr is a word weasel, so i'm sure he was very careful in his couched comments.

he is not our attorney general, that much is clear. he's the president's attorney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, zork said:

no executive priviledge invoked?

wikileaks and other hack provided info was considered public since no trump associated hacking?  can't collude/obstruct with public information?

Barr trying to have it both ways: stating criminal standard not met for conspiring with Russian hackers, therefore no "collusion", which carries no legal definition.  But there's a whole lot of evidence that collusion did occur (Stone/guccifer 2/Wikileaks), which is a major fucking betrayal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Upon reflection, and given Barr’s comments about trump being frustrated and his “sincere belief” comments, the obstruction section must be pretty bad. 

Also curious to see who was working with or talking with Wikileaks. I bet that part gets redacted though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

Upon reflection, and given Barr’s comments about trump being frustrated and his “sincere belief” comments, the obstruction section must be pretty bad. 

Also curious to see who was working with or talking with Wikileaks. I bet that part gets redacted though. 

Yeah, it is a very weak defense so the evidence must be overwhelming. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How ironic that Trump and the rest of the banana republicans are claiming complete and total exoneration based on an opinion of his criminal intent, while arguing for years that Hillary is a hardened criminal who should be locked up despite being cleared based on a lack of criminal intent. 

Edited by Mojo Hand
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Did Barr address Jr at all?  From what I saw, his press conference comments were pretty narrow.

It probably follows that Mueller's report will be relatively narrow as well.  That's that's the bad news.  The good news is that the likely purpose is to protect the larger slate of farmed out prosecutions.  There's so much still outstanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barr conflated his remarks in the frame of the "illegal IRA"(Russian research organization) activities that were going on.  I interpret that as acknowledgement that there was Russian intent to affect the election but that there was no intent that could be clearly discerned that anyone in the Trump sphere was intentionally colluding with them in a material way.  Lots of judgement there but also a ton of resources for two years to get at that conclusion.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

, the obstruction section must be pretty bad. 

I’ve been saying for a year the case for obstruction is where Trump has the most jeopardy.  There’s just so much obstruction on top of obstruction and Trump appointing Barr is also obstruction because Barr doesn’t think the president can commit obstruction of justice.  Must be nice to appoint your own prosecutor that can deem your crimes not crimes.  

Banana Republic 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

i dunno, i did not watch.

but barr is a word weasel, so i'm sure he was very careful in his couched comments.

he is not our attorney general, that much is clear. he's the president's attorney.

He certainly is.  I noticed that at one point, in order to quote the Mueller report directly, he specifically referred to a lack of collusion with the Internet Research Agency while avoiding making a statement regarding collusion with any and all Russian efforts.  But then afterward went on to refer to Russian efforts as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*hold press conference before making report public*

*deliver speech that in no way differentiates direct quotes from the report with personal opinion*

*get asked by reporter if speculating on the president's feelings is his duty*

*chastise reporter for not knowing that this was a topic discussed in the report*

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

How ironic that Trump and the rest of the banana republicans are claiming complete and total exoneration based on an opinion of his criminal intent, while arguing for years that Hillary is a hardened criminal who should be locked up despite being cleared based on a lack of criminal intent. 

I wish I could rep this infinity times.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

How ironic that Trump and the rest of the banana republicans are claiming complete and total exoneration based on an opinion of his criminal intent, while arguing for years that Hillary is a hardened criminal who should be locked up despite being cleared based on a lack of criminal intent. 

Republicans are above the law. Democrats are criminals by virtue of being Democrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

Unless the report completely blows this up, I think it is over in the public sphere.  Better get out the vote in 2020.

Yep.  But Dems get out-maneuvered at every fucking turn by a fucking moron and his sycophants.  Get ready for Trump through 2024.  The Dems will insure that it happens.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Upon reflection, and given Barr’s comments about trump being frustrated and his “sincere belief” comments, the obstruction section must be pretty bad. 

Elaborate, please.  I had to drive in to the office and missed all but the first 5 minutes or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

*hold press conference before making report public*

*deliver speech that in no way differentiates direct quotes from the report with personal opinion*

*get asked by reporter if speculating on the president's feelings is his duty*

*chastise reporter for not knowing that this was a topic discussed in the report*

He got pretty defensive about that. Must have struck a nerve. He knows exactly what he's doing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

How ironic that Trump and the rest of the banana republicans are claiming complete and total exoneration based on an opinion of his criminal intent, while arguing for years that Hillary is a hardened criminal who should be locked up despite being cleared based on a lack of criminal intent. 

So if the precedent of how Hilary was treated was cited in this case would you be pissed or happy?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

It probably follows that Mueller's report will be relatively narrow as well.  That's that's the bad news.  The good news is that the likely purpose is to protect the larger slate of farmed out prosecutions.  There's so much still outstanding.

I don't buy this angle re: Junior's meeting in Trump Tower.  That was pure collusion with Russians to affect the election, and Junior was clearly part of the campaign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Elaborate, please.  I had to drive in to the office and missed all but the first 5 minutes or so.

I lean slightly right and I'll be the first to admit, this was a PR move by Barr. He was setting the table for the media to be on the defensive. He's writing the headlines.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

also, that game over tweet is next level shameful shit.

The President of the United States is basically a computer jockey who revels in posting memes on social media , which pretty much describes 99% of us on here, but then again none of us are considered the most powerful person in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, yoladu said:

The President of the United States is basically a computer jockey who revels in posting memes on social media , which pretty much describes 99% of us on here, but then again none of us are considered the most powerful person in the world.

Speak for yourself.  I have a homemade infinity gauntlet!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, yoladu said:

The President of the United States is basically a computer jockey who revels in posting memes on social media , which pretty much describes 99% of us on here, but then again none of us are considered the most powerful person in the world.

President Camacho is not far away, is he?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Elaborate, please.  I had to drive in to the office and missed all but the first 5 minutes or so.

When discussing the obstruction section the AG went out of his way to talk about how frustrated the president was about the investigation and how the president thought it was hurting his presidency. How Barr can know that I have no idea but it sounded like a weak excuse for whatever trump did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

Team collusion delusion takes another blow. 

So just to be clear regardless of whether Trump and his campaign were just useful idiots, whether they received help from Russia and actively thanked or even asked  them (I love Wikileaks, Russia of your are listening etc.) but did not “technically” violate a law, or if there were possibly multiple instances of obstruction, you are all good with that since Trump is POTUS and not Hilary or another Democrat?

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TexEx15 said:

So just to be clear regardless of whether Trump and his campaign were just useful idiots, whether they received help from Russia and actively thanked or even asked  them (I love Wikileaks, Russia of your are listening etc.) but did not “technically” violate a law, or if there were possibly multiple instances of obstruction, you are all good with that since Trump is POTUS and not Hilary or another Democrat?

Yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TexEx15 said:

So just to be clear regardless of whether Trump and his campaign were just useful idiots, whether they received help from Russia and actively thanked or even asked  them (I love Wikileaks, Russia of your are listening etc.) but did not “technically” violate a law, or if there were possibly multiple instances of obstruction, you are all good with that since Trump is POTUS and not Hilary or another Democrat?

Dj2e0w9VAAAraKs.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

President Camacho is not far away, is he?

 

President Camacho is a true statesman compared to President Trump. He was incompetent, but gave a shit.  Trump is incompetent and doesn't give a shit.  We are already in a worse place. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...