Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Special Council Investigation Complete - results are ....

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 7
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 template Next
  • #31
    C0|dB|00ded - are you seriously making the argument that Trump's actions re: firing James Comey were buttoned up enough that a biased, witch hunt wouldn't recommend bringing charges? Like, you have convinced yourself that Mueller and the 13 angry democrats would do EVERYTHING in their power to smear Trump and try to get him and his associates on "process crimes," but they just ran into this perfect example of by the book behavior that they couldn't figure out how to even write "we recommend bringing charges" in the report?

    Maybe, and I'm just throwing this out there, MAYBE the simpler explanation is that Mueller is actually a pretty unbiased individual who took his job seriously and reported what he found.

    Comment

    • C0|dB|00ded
      #31.1
      C0|dB|00ded commented
      March 25, 2019, 11:08 PM
      Editing a comment
      Looking at his final report one could be justified in taking a softer approach to the Mueller is a closet Libtard conspiracy theory, but I'm going to change my opinion on the issue rather slowly considering this whole ordeal has taken 22 months (about 12 longer than needed). Let's be fair here, Mueller has done significant damage to Trump's legacy. Who knows what else could have gotten done had the Collusion Delusion not been center stage 24/7 for 2 years. The Dims might not have even won the House. Imagine that!

      Mueller is likely a Never Trumper who wanted to punish him as much as he could without handing a huge victory to the opponent... similar to Comey. Mission accomplished.


      T


      ...:cool:
  • #32
    Originally posted by C0|dB|00ded View Post

    Both the Russia Collusion and Monica Lewinsky blowjob investigations went off the rails for sure. I don't remember the veracity of the claims regarding the Clinton illegalities back in the day but several were quite serious. They went with the lying under oath because I think it was the easiest to prove. Same thing with Mueller. Squeeze 'em until they lie. Weaksauce but effective.

    I truly believe Donald looks dirtier than he really is and the Clintons are dirtier than they look.


    T


    ...:cool:
    you are saying there never was a blowjob?

    Comment

    • #33
      Originally posted by jdshock View Post
      C0|dB|00ded - are you seriously making the argument that Trump's actions re: firing James Comey were buttoned up enough that a biased, witch hunt wouldn't recommend bringing charges? Like, you have convinced yourself that Mueller and the 13 angry democrats would do EVERYTHING in their power to smear Trump and try to get him and his associates on "process crimes," but they just ran into this perfect example of by the book behavior that they couldn't figure out how to even write "we recommend bringing charges" in the report?

      Maybe, and I'm just throwing this out there, MAYBE the simpler explanation is that Mueller is actually a pretty unbiased individual who took his job seriously and reported what he found.
      W-O-W. :stupid:

      Will someone please explain what "no further indictments means."

      "Deputy AG Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction of justice offense." - AG Barr

      https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartanntp

      Last edited by ShockingButTrue; March 25, 2019, 07:43 PM.

      Comment

      • #34
        Originally posted by jdshock View Post
        There was bipartisan support to release the report publicly. Now, republicans have kind of lost the incentive to fight to make it public, so we'll see if it is released through an act of Congress or if it gets leaked.
        And to the surprise of no one, McConnell blocks resolution that passed the House 420-0 to release the Mueller report.

        Comment

        • #35
          This old poll should tell everyone, it's past time to move on. Dems need to learn from the damage that repubs caused themselves with Clinton and the Starr Report and Whitewater, it's as losing effort.
          Only 29% Favor Democratic Probe of Trump If Mueller Finds Nothing
          http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/february_2019/only_29_favor_democratic_probe_of_trump_if_mueller_finds_nothing
          So far the facts aren’t there, but Democrats remain convinced that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to win the presidency. Most voters in general, however, say if Special Counsel Robert Mueller can’t prove it, Democrats should let it go.
          There are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese.
          • Likes 1

          Comment

          • #36
            This debate needs the perspective of one who can add the proper context:

            Obstruction.jpg

            Oh, wait...

            Comment

            • #37
              Originally posted by MoValley John View Post
              This old poll should tell everyone, it's past time to move on. Dems need to learn from the damage that repubs caused themselves with Clinton and the Starr Report and Whitewater, it's as losing effort.
              http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public..._finds_nothing
              It seems to me that most of the current battle is to try to figure out what Mueller said. Reading between the lines, Mueller was appointed specifically because there were concerns of obstructing justice. If Trump hadn't fired Comey, I'd bet dollars to donuts that Mueller doesn't get appointed if Comey isn't fired. (Giuliani agrees).

              It's totally crazy that then we would have a scenario where the special counsel delivers the report to the AG, and conceivably punts the the obstruction issue to Congress, but the AG steps in with the interception and runs it back for a pick six saying "SPECIAL COUNSEL LEFT IT TO ME TO DECIDE OBSTRUCTION, AND I DECIDE THERE WAS NONE!" That's probably not how that should work.

              Transparency on this should be a bipartisan issue. There is literally zero reason to hide this. The house passed the resolution 420-0. Save the requests to "move on" for when we actually have the report that says "Mueller finds nothing" as your poll shows.
              • Likes 1

              Comment

              • #38
                Why should political opponents be the beneficiaries of state gathered intel on the President, if there was no crime committed (which we now know there was not)?

                If that's how it should work then Trump should begin investigating all Dems immediately, because it would be really nice to have some deep state sponsored intel going into the next round of elections -- who cares if the Dems actually broke any laws.
                Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!

                Comment

                • #39
                  Originally posted by Kung Wu View Post
                  Why should political opponents be the beneficiaries of state gathered intel on the President, if there was no crime committed (which we now know there was not)?

                  If that's how it should work then Trump should begin investigating all Dems immediately, because it would be really nice to have some deep state sponsored intel going into the next round of elections -- who cares if the Dems actually broke any laws.
                  Why should "political opponents" be "beneficiaries" of the state gathered intel? Your immediate reaction to a request for government transparency is that this is about "political opponents." 9/10 times, republicans are about smaller government, distrusting the government, etc. But now you're just cool with Barr writing up his two page "summary" and acting like that's the end all be all?

                  Immediately prior to us finding out if the report exonerated, indicted, condemned, etc., the House passed a unanimous resolution about transparency on this issue. When we did not know the outcome, both sides agreed that it was in the country's best interest to have the report. Now that we know a couple of quotes, republicans have lost their incentive to fight that battle.

                  And, as an absolutely monstrous aside from all of the above, we don't know that "there was no crime committed." How can you possibly say that with a straight face? Barr said the report found that there was no coordination with Russia. Barr said the report punted on the obstruction of justice claim, but that could be (as I've said several times now) anything from 1. absolutely no evidence, we'll leave it to someone else to exonerate him, to 2. loads and loads of evidence, we'll leave it to someone else to indict him. You do not have to have an underlying crime to prove an obstruction of justice. That is blatantly false. It is a lie being spread by the AG and Trump supporters. It is not true, it has never been true, and it is a total fabrication in line with all of the other anti-Mueller propaganda that the right has been spreading for 22 months.

                  Edit to add: what state gathered intel do you think there is? Clearly, Mueller said there was no coordination on the Russia front. We don't know what Mueller said on the obstruction front, but you seem to think it didn't rise to the level of a crime. In that world, how bad could the "intel" even be? Alternatively, let's assume it is really bad. How can you possibly justify keeping that a secret from the public?
                  Last edited by jdshock; March 26, 2019, 01:42 PM.

                  Comment

                  • #40
                    My comment regarding "no crime committed" was 100% only regarding Russia and election interference. It was not speaking to obstruction.

                    If no crime was committed regarding Russia (which we now know there was not), which is the pretense of the investigation, then all intel gathered on Trump and other persons investigated that did not commit a crime, absolutely should not be made available to their future political opponents.

                    Otherwise, PLEASE start the investigation of all Dems for their alleged election fraud. I mean we can't know if they committed a crime unless we investigate, right? And the results of those investigations really should be public!
                    Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!
                    • Likes 1

                    Comment

                    • #41
                      The report will come out, and that will backfire on the dems too.
                      "When life hands you lemons, make lemonade." Better have some sugar and water too, or else your lemonade will suck!
                      • Likes 2

                      Comment

                      • jdshock
                        #41.1
                        jdshock commented
                        March 26, 2019, 02:07 PM
                        Editing a comment
                        Because the report will fully exonerate Trump? Geez, I hope you're right. And I hope that democrats shut up when that happens.

                        And if you're right, it seems to me that the report should come out incredibly quickly.
                      • ShockerPrez
                        #41.2
                        ShockerPrez commented
                        March 26, 2019, 02:22 PM
                        Editing a comment
                        I dunno, just seems the dems are always out over their skis.

                        The report has to be redacted, either way. Not sure how long that takes.
                        • Likes 1
                    • #42
                      Originally posted by Kung Wu View Post
                      My comment regarding "no crime committed" was 100% only regarding Russia and election interference. It was not speaking to obstruction.

                      If no crime was committed regarding Russia (which we now know there was not), which is the pretense of the investigation, then all intel gathered on Trump and other persons investigated that did not commit a crime, absolutely should not be made available to their future political opponents.

                      Otherwise, PLEASE start the investigation of all Dems for their alleged election fraud. I mean we can't know if they committed a crime unless we investigate, right? And the results of those investigations really should be public!
                      What election fraud are you talking about? Literally the only election fraud that has been established is on the GOP side of things in North Carolina.

                      In regards to your "I mean we can't know if they committed a crime unless we investigate" comment:

                      C'mon... please, please, just show an ounce of objectivity. Trump fired the FBI director and then went on TV and said it was because of the Russia investigation. I mean, c'mon... we are just so, so far passed any type of argument that there wasn't evidence to establish an investigation. The argument just makes my head hurt. It just honestly makes me sad that people would go to ends of the earth to back up Trump's claim that there was no justification for a special counsel. Do you need to be reminded that democrats weren't behind the appointment of the special counsel?

                      Yes, I 100% think that if Obama's DOJ felt the need to establish a special counsel to investigate his behavior, yeah, I'd want that report to be public. This is not a crazy stance to have. I'm not saying Mueller was a biased individual. He was a republican appointed by republicans in the administration of the target of the investigation and I'm literally not even making the argument that he was biased. I think he was great, and I think he was professional in his job.

                      Take a step back. Think about it objectively. Obama is credibly accused of X, Y and Z. There are rumblings about the initiation of an investigation. Obama fires the FBI director, goes on TV and says "I fired that guy because he was going to investigate me." Obama's DOJ is so nervous that they appoint a special counsel. Special counsel delivers the report to Obama's newly appointed AG who had publicly and famously said that X, Y, and Z are not crimes. That AG takes the report, keeps the contents private, and then writes a summary that says "All clear!" You seriously, honestly, deep down don't believe you would be asking for the report to be made public?

                      Comment

                      • #43
                        Trump is collecting chess pieces like a Russian, that's for sure. He knows exactly what is on that report and he's holding on to it along with the FISA reports for election time or whenever he needs a distraction. Trump has always been about controlling the media and his powers just got supercharged.


                        T


                        ...:cool:

                        Comment

                        • #44
                          Originally posted by jdshock View Post
                          If Trump hadn't fired Comey, I'd bet dollars to donuts that Mueller doesn't get appointed if Comey isn't fired. (Giuliani agrees).
                          Duhhh...Just like rosenstein recommended. Had to lend some credibility to the totally phony dossier. Perfect opportunity. Those lawyers are so smart aren't they?

                          How long did it take to figure that out? It was pretty obvious 2 years ago wasn't it? Ray Charles saw it. Hell, everybody saw it. Well, everybody that is but this guy:

                          racist.jpg
                          Last edited by ShockingButTrue; March 26, 2019, 03:15 PM.

                          Comment

                          • #45
                            One word. Triggered.
                            There are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese.

                            Comment

                            Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 template Next
                            Working...
                            X