Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 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

Hate

Hate 20095

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 


That FISA warrant along with the EO to allow information gathered during the FISA application to be shared among 16 (iirc) different intelligence agencies was nothing short of nefarious, but nobody cares because Trump. This goes far deeper than Trump but nobody cares.

 

In case anyone is actually interested, here is a thread on TOS talking a little bit about it.

 

http://www.shaggytexas.com/board/showthread.php/177331-Was-A-FISA-Court-Supeona-Used-To-Monitor-Trump-s-Campaign/page3

 

Edited by Hate
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

LOL, you put what they said in quotes...then interpret it however you want.  I promise it doesn't read 'completely innocent'.  Legit LOL. 

The legit LOL is you trying to quantify some level of innocence here as if it matters. They investigated for almost two years.  Could not establish collusion by anybody. 

Are you looking for a quality loss, Sooner? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18485

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, GRHorn said:

The legit LOL is you trying to quantify some level of innocence here as if it matters. They investigated for almost two years.  Could not establish collusion by anybody. 

Are you looking for a quality loss, Sooner? 

Smooth sailing for Team Trump here on out.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChiTownDoc

ChiTownDoc 21070

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

The legit LOL is you trying to quantify some level of innocence here as if it matters. They investigated for almost two years.  Could not establish collusion by anybody. 

Are you looking for a quality loss, Sooner? 

LOL, I'm benefitting greatly from this dipshit and his policies.  Morons like you can keep your guns and protect babies so I can buy another vacation house.  Keep checking straight R, it really hurts me, I promise.  Oh, and where did you think I was cheerleading some crazy charges on this thread?  I never was...go back and look.  But if you're not cheerleading some far right victory propaganda, that automatically puts you on the left/libz side, right?  

You see, I'm one of the millions of Republicans that left the party because of this bigoted piece of trash.  

And Sooner?  What bragging rights do you have?  LOL, the Sooner line really burns in the politics forum where you have a pic in your av of a couple guys who would slap the shit out of you if they had to listen to your views on politics.  You just love owning yourself, don't you? 

 

Edited by ChiTownDoc
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, ChiTownDoc said:

LOL, I'm benefitting greatly from this dipshit and his policies.  Morons like you can keep your guns and protect babies so I can buy another house.  Keep checking straight R, it really hurts me, I promise.  Oh, and where did you think I was cheerleading some crazy charges on this thread?  I never was...go back and look.  But if you're not cheerleading some far right victory propaganda, that automatically puts you on the left/libz side, right?  

You see, I'm one of the millions of Republicans that left the party because of this bigoted piece of trash.  

And Sooner?  What bragging rights do you have?  LOL, the Sooner line really burns in the politics forum where you have a pic in your av of a couple guys who would slap the shit out of you if they had to listen to your views on politics.  You just love owning yourself, don't you? 

 

One day soon the feds will likely bust you for ripping off Medicare

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
Just now, Anastasis said:

What we definitely need in this country right about now is more people on twitter chiming in. 

ok, the same man, who wrote the SC regs, has an NYT op-ed up:

The Many Problems With the Barr Letter

Spoiler

On Sunday afternoon, soon after Attorney General Bill Barr released a letter outlining the Mueller investigation report, President Trump tweeted “Total EXONERATION!” But there are any number of reasons the president should not be taking a victory lap.

First, obviously, he still faces the New York investigations into campaign finance violations by the Trump team and the various investigations into the Trump organization. And Mr. Barr, in his letter, acknowledges that the Mueller report “does not exonerate” Mr. Trump on the issue of obstruction, even if it does not recommend an indictment.

But the critical part of the letter is that it now creates a whole new mess. After laying out the scope of the investigation and noting that Mr. Mueller’s report does not offer any legal recommendations, Mr. Barr declares that it therefore “leaves it to the attorney general to decide whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime.” He then concludes the president did not obstruct justice when he fired the F.B.I. director, James Comey.

Such a conclusion would be momentous in any event. But to do so within 48 hours of receiving the report (which pointedly did not reach that conclusion) should be deeply concerning to every American.

The special counsel regulations were written to provide the public with confidence that justice was done. It is impossible for the public to reach that determination without knowing two things. First, what did the Mueller report conclude, and what was the evidence on obstruction of justice? And second, how could Mr. Barr have reached his conclusion so quickly?

Mr. Barr’s letter raises far more questions than it answers, both on the facts and the law.

His letter says Mr. Mueller set “out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the special counsel views as ‘difficult issues’ of law and fact concerning whether the president’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction.” Yet we don’t know what those “difficult issues” were, because Mr. Barr doesn’t say, or why Mr. Mueller, after deciding not to charge on conspiracy, let Mr. Barr make the decision on obstruction.

On the facts, Mr. Barr says that the government would need to prove that Mr. Trump acted with “corrupt intent” and there were no such actions. But how would Mr. Barr know? Did he even attempt to interview Mr. Trump about his intentions?

What kind of prosecutor would make a decision about someone’s intent without even trying to talk to him? Particularly in light of Mr. Mueller’s pointed statement that his report does not “exonerate” Mr. Trump. Mr. Mueller didn’t have to say anything like that. He did so for a reason. And that reason may well be that there is troubling evidence in the substantial record that he compiled.

Furthermore, we do not know why Mr. Mueller did not try to force an interview with the president. The reason matters greatly. Mr. Mueller could have concluded that interviews of sitting presidents for obstruction matters are better done within the context of a congressional impeachment investigation (perhaps because a sitting president cannot be indicted, the Barr letter says this legal argument didn’t influence Mr. Barr’s conclusion but again is pointedly silent as to Mr. Mueller).

Or Mr. Barr could have concluded that the attorney general, not a special counsel, should carry out such an interview. The fact that Mr. Barr rushed to judgment, within 48 hours, after a 22-month investigation, is deeply worrisome.

The opening lines of the obstruction section of Mr. Barr’s letter are even more concerning. It says that the special counsel investigated “a number of actions by the president — most of which have been the subject of public reporting.” That suggests that at least some of the foundation for an obstruction of justice charge has not yet been made public. There will be no way to have confidence in such a quick judgment about previously unreported actions without knowing what those actions were.

On the law, Mr. Barr’s letter also obliquely suggests that he consulted with the Office of Legal Counsel, the elite Justice Department office that interprets federal statutes. This raises the serious question of whether Mr. Barr’s decision on Sunday was based on the bizarre legal views that he set out in an unsolicited 19-page memo last year.

That memo made the argument that the obstruction of justice statute does not apply to the president because the text of the statute doesn’t specifically mention the president. Of course, the murder statute doesn’t mention the president either, but no one thinks the president can’t commit murder. Indeed, the Office of Legal Counsel had previously concluded that such an argument to interpret another criminal statute, the bribery law, was wrong.

As such, Mr. Barr’s reference to the office raises the question of whether he tried to enshrine his idiosyncratic view into the law and bar Mr. Trump’s prosecution. His unsolicited memo should be understood for what it is, a badly argued attempt to put presidents above the law. If he used that legal fiction to let President Trump off the hook, Congress would have to begin an impeachment investigation to vindicate the rule of law.

Sometimes momentous government action leaves everyone uncertain about the next move. This is not one of those times. Congress now has a clear path of action. It must first demand the release of the Mueller report, so that Americans can see the evidence for themselves. Then, it must call Mr. Barr and Mr. Mueller to testify. Mr. Barr in particular must explain his rationale for reaching the obstruction judgment he made.

No one wants a president to be guilty of obstruction of justice. The only thing worse than that is a guilty president who goes without punishment. The Barr letter raises the specter that we are living in such times.

Barr did his mercenary duty, but it won't be enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23328

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, triplehorn said:

ok, the same man, who wrote the SC regs, has an NYT op-ed up:

 The Many Problems With the Barr Letter

  Hide contents

On Sunday afternoon, soon after Attorney General Bill Barr released a letter outlining the Mueller investigation report, President Trump tweeted “Total EXONERATION!” But there are any number of reasons the president should not be taking a victory lap.

First, obviously, he still faces the New York investigations into campaign finance violations by the Trump team and the various investigations into the Trump organization. And Mr. Barr, in his letter, acknowledges that the Mueller report “does not exonerate” Mr. Trump on the issue of obstruction, even if it does not recommend an indictment.

But the critical part of the letter is that it now creates a whole new mess. After laying out the scope of the investigation and noting that Mr. Mueller’s report does not offer any legal recommendations, Mr. Barr declares that it therefore “leaves it to the attorney general to decide whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime.” He then concludes the president did not obstruct justice when he fired the F.B.I. director, James Comey.

Such a conclusion would be momentous in any event. But to do so within 48 hours of receiving the report (which pointedly did not reach that conclusion) should be deeply concerning to every American.

The special counsel regulations were written to provide the public with confidence that justice was done. It is impossible for the public to reach that determination without knowing two things. First, what did the Mueller report conclude, and what was the evidence on obstruction of justice? And second, how could Mr. Barr have reached his conclusion so quickly?

Mr. Barr’s letter raises far more questions than it answers, both on the facts and the law.

His letter says Mr. Mueller set “out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the special counsel views as ‘difficult issues’ of law and fact concerning whether the president’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction.” Yet we don’t know what those “difficult issues” were, because Mr. Barr doesn’t say, or why Mr. Mueller, after deciding not to charge on conspiracy, let Mr. Barr make the decision on obstruction.

On the facts, Mr. Barr says that the government would need to prove that Mr. Trump acted with “corrupt intent” and there were no such actions. But how would Mr. Barr know? Did he even attempt to interview Mr. Trump about his intentions?

What kind of prosecutor would make a decision about someone’s intent without even trying to talk to him? Particularly in light of Mr. Mueller’s pointed statement that his report does not “exonerate” Mr. Trump. Mr. Mueller didn’t have to say anything like that. He did so for a reason. And that reason may well be that there is troubling evidence in the substantial record that he compiled.

Furthermore, we do not know why Mr. Mueller did not try to force an interview with the president. The reason matters greatly. Mr. Mueller could have concluded that interviews of sitting presidents for obstruction matters are better done within the context of a congressional impeachment investigation (perhaps because a sitting president cannot be indicted, the Barr letter says this legal argument didn’t influence Mr. Barr’s conclusion but again is pointedly silent as to Mr. Mueller).

Or Mr. Barr could have concluded that the attorney general, not a special counsel, should carry out such an interview. The fact that Mr. Barr rushed to judgment, within 48 hours, after a 22-month investigation, is deeply worrisome.

The opening lines of the obstruction section of Mr. Barr’s letter are even more concerning. It says that the special counsel investigated “a number of actions by the president — most of which have been the subject of public reporting.” That suggests that at least some of the foundation for an obstruction of justice charge has not yet been made public. There will be no way to have confidence in such a quick judgment about previously unreported actions without knowing what those actions were.

On the law, Mr. Barr’s letter also obliquely suggests that he consulted with the Office of Legal Counsel, the elite Justice Department office that interprets federal statutes. This raises the serious question of whether Mr. Barr’s decision on Sunday was based on the bizarre legal views that he set out in an unsolicited 19-page memo last year.

That memo made the argument that the obstruction of justice statute does not apply to the president because the text of the statute doesn’t specifically mention the president. Of course, the murder statute doesn’t mention the president either, but no one thinks the president can’t commit murder. Indeed, the Office of Legal Counsel had previously concluded that such an argument to interpret another criminal statute, the bribery law, was wrong.

As such, Mr. Barr’s reference to the office raises the question of whether he tried to enshrine his idiosyncratic view into the law and bar Mr. Trump’s prosecution. His unsolicited memo should be understood for what it is, a badly argued attempt to put presidents above the law. If he used that legal fiction to let President Trump off the hook, Congress would have to begin an impeachment investigation to vindicate the rule of law.

Sometimes momentous government action leaves everyone uncertain about the next move. This is not one of those times. Congress now has a clear path of action. It must first demand the release of the Mueller report, so that Americans can see the evidence for themselves. Then, it must call Mr. Barr and Mr. Mueller to testify. Mr. Barr in particular must explain his rationale for reaching the obstruction judgment he made.

No one wants a president to be guilty of obstruction of justice. The only thing worse than that is a guilty president who goes without punishment. The Barr letter raises the specter that we are living in such times.

Barr did his mercenary duty, but it won't be enough.

KeyGrossCondor-size_restricted.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

LOL, I'm benefitting greatly from this dipshit and his policies.  Morons like you can keep your guns and protect babies so I can buy another vacation house.  Keep checking straight R, it really hurts me, I promise.  Oh, and where did you think I was cheerleading some crazy charges on this thread?  I never was...go back and look.  But if you're not cheerleading some far right victory propaganda, that automatically puts you on the left/libz side, right?  

You see, I'm one of the millions of Republicans that left the party because of this bigoted piece of trash.  

And Sooner?  What bragging rights do you have?  LOL, the Sooner line really burns in the politics forum where you have a pic in your av of a couple guys who would slap the shit out of you if they had to listen to your views on politics.  You just love owning yourself, don't you? 

 

I’m glad you got to keep more of your money. Good for you. 

I’ve met Earl before. We got along fine. Never met Willie, but I could definitely hold my own smoking a fat one with him. Not everyone fits in a perfect box. My avi definitely gets people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yoladu

yoladu 4063

Posted
Posted

01) I am relieved that there was no apparent election conspiracy between Americans and the Russians based on AG Barr's review of the SC Report. That would have been terrible for the country.

02) That being said, i would prefer to learn more than just a filtered summary by the AG. The entire report should be released for public consumption.

03) Speaking of unfiltered, i would love to have an Mueller testify in front of Congress., however,  I fear both parties would make that a circus.

04) I have no doubt the President is a crook (re: Individual #1) and has attempted to obstruct justice (likely because he is a narcissist and bore and couldn't help himself)

05) My already very low opinion of Mr. Trump didn't sink exponentially lower today. Whew.. Winning?

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ulukinatme

ulukinatme 1752

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

If you really believe that Donald Trump is doing a good job as president, then you have to admit that Barack Obama did a good job as president.

 

Do you touch yourself at night, looking at a picture of Barack and think about the good 'ol days?  When he helped screw health care for the middle class?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaysOff

DaysOff 7785

Posted
Posted
I think it's time to let go of that rope, buddy.
Glad to know Trump is just a buffoon and a con-artist and not actually in Russia's pocket.  If the Dems are smart they'll sweep this under the rug as quick as they can and pivot to real issues.  But from all the Aggy talk I've already seen, I'm guessing that's not going to be the case. 
And folks really should read that article by Taibbi.  Dude just ruthlessly lays out how fucked this whole thing was from the jump.  If you think Fox News and the national AM radio hacks like Limbaugh and Levin are the only propagandists living in this country, you're sadly mistaken.  The leftists who think they're so much better/smarter than their conservative counterparts got taken for a ride by their media overlords. 
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million
Also, glad to know that even though he never should have had any in the first place, Hugo's credibility is now somewhere far, far south of zero.  Thousands upon thousands of posts screaming about how the commander-in-chief is a Russian agent.  For this?  Nothing?  Nada?  Just Trump being who we always knew he was: a self-obsessed narcissist.  If Hugo had any shame he'd banish himself.  Instead, he's still here desperately trying to walk it back and spin it as best he can.  Sorry Alex, but the jig is up.  The alien-human hybrids and psychic vampires aren't real. 
Trump is a fucking buffoon, but what a waste of money, time, and resources.

And time for the 4 usual suspects that have 80 percent of the almost 20,000 posts on this thread. Is this what you want to be doing when Jesus comes back?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18485

Posted
Posted
Just now, DaysOff said:

Trump is a fucking buffoon, but what a waste of money, time, and resources.

And time for the 4 usual suspects that have 80 percent of the almost 20,000 posts on this thread. Is this what you want to be doing when Jesus comes back?

Um, I think you mean one usual suspect and three socks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yoladu

yoladu 4063

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, DaysOff said:

Trump is a fucking buffoon, but what a waste of money, time, and resources.

And time for the 4 usual suspects that have 80 percent of the almost 20,000 posts on this thread. Is this what you want to be doing when Jesus comes back?

what should we be doing when Jesus comes back? I suddenly feel unprepared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted

 

So attorney Bill Barr wrote a memo for attorneys representing subjects of Mueller's criminal investigation and then interviews for job as defense counsel. Then the subject of said investigation appoints Bill Barr as Attorney General. 

How much did Bill Barr's job interview memo differ from his memo today ?  It didn't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TexArcher

TexArcher 37414

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, yoladu said:

01) I am relieved that there was no apparent election conspiracy between Americans and the Russians based on AG Barr's review of the SC Report. That would have been terrible for the country.

02) That being said, i would prefer to learn more than just a filtered summary by the AG. The entire report should be released for public consumption.

03) Speaking of unfiltered, i would love to have an Mueller testify in front of Congress., however,  I fear both parties would make that a circus.

04) I have no doubt the President is a crook (re: Individual #1) and has attempted to obstruct justice (likely because he is a narcissist and bore and couldn't help himself)

05) My already very low opinion of Mr. Trump didn't sink exponentially lower today. Whew.. Winning?

 

Agreed.

I'm honestly glad that the Trump campaign didn't collude with the Russians.  It's a relief.  I hope this means it didn't happen and not just that the tracks were very well-covered.  But given Mueller's reputation for thoroughness, I think we can all rest a little easier tonight.

But those of you yelling "exoneration!" seem to be forgetting how many stones are left to overturn with this guy.  Obstruction is still in play, his tax returns can be subpoeaned, he's been in violation of the emoluments clause the whole time, etc.  And, oh yeah, he's probably a rapist.

You are backing a bad man and you cannot deny that.  Doesn't that bother you at all?  As much as you disliked Obama and I disliked W, we couldn't say that they weren't decent men, honorable men.  We just disagreed with their policies.  

Donald Trump is, objectively, a bad person on multiple levels.

Why don't you care?

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EuroHorn

EuroHorn 3204

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

 

So attorney Bill Barr wrote a memo for attorneys representing subjects of Mueller's criminal investigation and then interviews for job as defense counsel. Then the subject of said investigation appoints Bill Barr as Attorney General. 

How much did Bill Barr's job interview memo differ from his memo today ?  It didn't. 

plz-stop-post.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45428

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

I started bitching about FISA 2 minutes ago?  Go to bed Jimmy. You are clowning yourself now. 

I'm sorry, were you bitching about FISA earlier today?  Earlier this week? Mea culpa if I'm wrong for my observation that it looks like you took your cue from the same bullshit right wing media spew that the other fascists are receiving.

You should know about clowning, I'll give you that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thetexashammer

Thetexashammer 1062

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

 

Donald Trump is, objectively, a bad person on multiple levels.

Why don't you care?

 

I agree. Why is it not enough to talk about the things that he's actually done, rather than making up bullshit he didn't do and engaging in mass delusion? 

Edited by Thetexashammer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18485

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

So attorney Bill Barr wrote a memo for attorneys representing subjects of Mueller's criminal investigation and then interviews for job as defense counsel. Then the subject of said investigation appoints Bill Barr as Attorney General. 

How much did Bill Barr's job interview memo differ from his memo today ?  It didn't. 

Which is why no one is going to be satisfied until Mueller's report is released to the public.

The longer it takes, the more it looks like there's something to hide.

It would behoove the White House to get it out to the public as soon as possible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18485

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Thetexashammer said:

I agree. Why is it not enough to talk about the things that he's actually done, rather than making up bullshit he didn't do and engaging in mass delusion? 

We won't know he didn't to it until the report is released. All we know now is that prosecutors didn't think they could convince a jury of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12769

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm sorry, were you bitching about FISA earlier today?  Earlier this week? Mea culpa if I'm wrong for my observation that it looks like you took your cue from the same bullshit right wing media spew that the other fascists are receiving.

You should know about clowning, I'll give you that.

Anastasis has been staunchly opposed to FISA and other intelligence community abuses for about as long as I can remember him posting. I dunno he was on hornfans but I know he’s bee doing it at least since the skat site.

  • Like 1
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...