███████████ Mueller Investigation Results Thread ███████████

[Que]

So you deny the facts in evidence.

"In evidence?"

When did the trial start?

 

[KeithD]

Que is just one of those idiot Trumpettes. Ethically and morally degenerate.

See how cookie cutter interchangeable those Trumpettes are?

 

[colddiesel]

Trump is an unmitigated fucking cunt. Anyone with a single braincell will have concluded that long long ago.

There is no point defending the indefensible or justifying the criminal. He just is what he is. Just own it you guys who voted for the piece of shit.

And I am no progressive; just a traditional conservative who believes in making incremental improvements while maintaining the nation's fundamental institutions and the rule of law.
.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

"In evidence?"

When did the trial start?

The things we know to be true from the Mueller report, like the clear attempts to get McGann, Lewandowski and KT McFarland to obstruct, and attempt to create a fake record for political purposes should be referred to as facts in evidence. Since Bozo insists a trial by the court of public opinion, he is inviting us to judge him as he consistently judges and projects on us, losers.

 

[Que]

He is formidable. Doesn’t change the fact that Russian money is flowing into Kentucky and he won’t want to jeopardize his monay. Surely you are aware of that.



I laughed.

But you really don’t think Trump is a criminal? Has never willfully broken the law? That he didn’t engage in obstruction? That he’s not enriching himself through his presidency (golf courses/hotels and such now, they all cash in later)? That he’s not beholden to Russia or wants something later so he’s soft there? That he is not corrupt?

Please help me understand why you think it’s okay to ignore criminal behavior in a president. It’s actually amazing how he has corralled the Republican Party in his service. And you too, it seems, unless you’re actually ho hum but taking a side here.

There are books and documentaries on this guy. It’s disingenuous to claim they’re just anti-Trump because...whatever. His behavior and style is out there for all to see for decades. Even friendly biographers end up going “holy shit!”

I dunno...I underestimated his cult of personality.

(No whatabouts lease. Keep it focused, thanks)

The choice was a real estate huckster who no doubt played fast and loose with valuations the bankruptcy code and all the other things that I've very well seen in my real estate background passed. I was always dealing with small potatoes guys and they tried to get away with a lot more than somebody of Trump's eyes would ever be able to get away with.

Or the devil that we on the right definitely no loathe more than we loathe her husband because she yanked him farther to the left. She loves the military she's single-handedly is responsible for Black Hawk Down. She's also responsible for Ruby Ridge and Waco. There's no chance in hell that any one on the right was going across the aisle and vote for Hillary Clinton.

Myself, I wasn't going to make a 500 mile round trip to vote for Donald Trump. Not because I had concerns about his business ethics. He has none. Not because I had any concerns about his obvious moral failings. So it was because I assume that he is going to be a New York liberal at best a Rockefeller Republican and I am a Goldwater Republican that leans a little to the right of Barry Goldwater. As it turns out the way he's governed I would say Goldwater would be pleased. I think Reagan would be pleased. I don't care what else he does for the next however many years based on the tax code alone it was worth putting up with him.

Keeping that from being squandered is worth whatever it takes to keep a Democrat out of office.

The bottom line is you don't have high crimes and misdemeanors. You all seem to not like easternblog baddies but their modus operandi was show me the criminal and I'll find you the crime. Everyone, you included, are committing crimes on a regular basis. I don't know what it would be for me or for you but probably if you looked hard enough you could put together a felony on you or I.


Quite literally nothing happened today you do realize that right? There were no Bombshells this was just trying to get Mueller to voice words that you wanted to hear that characterize things in the report that the Democrats have had full access to four months now. If there was anything worth pursuing they would have already pursued it. Since there's not not according to me but because according to the Democrats it's silly to talk about

 

[Que]

The things we know to be true from the Mueller report, like the clear attempts to get McGann, Lewandowski and KT McFarland to obstruct, and attempt to create a fake record for political purposes should be referred to as facts in evidence. Since Bozo insists a trial by the court of public opinion, he is inviting us to judge him as he consistently judges and projects on us, losers.

What's the motive to obstruct when the underlying crime that they're pursuing didn't exist?

His stated motivation seems pretty likely that he did not approve of being what he viewed as persecuted by democrats for something that he says he didn't do. Mueller says he didn't do it either.

Politically it wouldn't have worked for from a legal standpoint almost everything you're talking about he could have completely avoided by a having less leaks in his operation but given that the full force of the US government was actively spying on him and had a plant inside that's probably hard but even with those leaks he could have 100% Stonewall and claimed executive privilege. Obama claimed executive privilege on Fast and Furious while also claiming he had never had any conversation about Fast and Furious by definition if he didn't have a conversation executive privilege doesn't exist. Obama and holder got away with stonewalling Trump would not have gotten away politically with stonewalling. So he was as open as he had to be while trying to be less than forthcoming about things that he could get away with not being forthcoming about.

There's absolutely no doubt that if he'd sat for an interview he would have been caught in a perjury trap. However, he didn't perjure himself.

And what he did was remarkably politically smart. At this point the Democrats have nothing and will have nothing because of how they have overplayed their hand. There is no political will to do anything about any of the above. So it doesn't matter. If it doesn't matter it didn't happen.

I'm not saying you're not right if this was a non political situation in the set of facts as you outline them whereas you outline them but that's not what we're dealing with impeachment is a political exercise and you have to ask is the activities of a known huckster and hyperbolic megalomaniac something that you can remove him from office for or not? The answer as it turns out is no.

 

[KeithD]

If you haven't been able to see Trump's crimes from just what is available to the public, you have zero brains and analytical capability. We're talking Trumpette-level stupidity here.

Trump's dual efforts to hide his taxes and to avoid testifying to the special prosecutor are ipso facto declarations of obstruction of justice.

Who do you think you're fooling, you ethically and morally degenerate Trumpettes?

 

[Que]

The things we know to be true from the Mueller report, like the clear attempts to get McGann, Lewandowski and KT McFarland to obstruct, and attempt to create a fake record for political purposes should be referred to as facts in evidence. Since Bozo insists a trial by the court of public opinion, he is inviting us to judge him as he consistently judges and projects on us, losers.

. . .but my barb was, when slinging around turn legal terms like facts in evidence you have to take into consideration what it means to have actual evidence of a crime. You might know something you might have an actual fact and something you can document that doesn't mean it's something that you can use. How did you get it? Did you have a legal right to get that piece of information. If you didn't have a legal right to get that piece of information it doesn't exist. If you wouldn't have thought to look for that particular piece of information if you hadn't done something else illegal then it's also not evidence because you can't use it.

I was just objecting to it being framed in legal terms when it's no such thing. The defense hasn't had any chance whatsoever to dispute any of those facts because they'd be stupid to are that in public. There might be alternative facts as this President likes to call them. Which might actually be true. Probably not but we don't know that they haven't presented their case at all nor will they. Nor should they. They've been acquitted in the court of public opinion. Just because some holdouts want to have a trial that we've already decided is never going to happen doesn't mean that they weren't acquitted they were.

And you've got to admit everything that weismann does is suspect. He's known withhold exculpatory evidence he's known for prosecutorial misconduct I can't believe he's even associated with something this important.

 

[moarBB]

Ted Lieu Claims Someone “Got To” Robert Mueller When He Clarified His Statement
Delusional.


CNN
✔
@CNN
Rep. @tedlieu responds to Robert Mueller's clarification regarding guidance against indicting a President: “I don't know who got to him, I don’t know who talked to him, but that was very odd.” http://cnn.it/2yid6QB

 

[moarBB]

so the NYSime says Booby MuleLiar was a mere figure head....a prop....the real leader was

https://hotair.com/archives/allahpu...ron-zebley-actually-running-russiagate-probe/

Aaron Zebley!

and who is THAT NIGGER?

Former special counsel Robert Mueller will be joined in his testimony in front of the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees tomorrow by Aaron Zebley, his chief of staff during his nearly two-year investigation.

Zebley is also the former lawyer for the controversial IT aide to Hillary Clinton who set up her private email server and smashed some of her mobile devices with a hammer.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...nted-the-clinton-aide-who-set-up-email-server


Not only is this prejudicial.....and should lead to an almost certain outcome.....that it DIDNT

Sure says alot

Oh, Trump was right from Day 1, this was a witch hunt by anti Trumpers

 

[jomar]

The choice was a real estate huckster who no doubt played fast and loose with valuations the bankruptcy code and all the other things that I've very well seen in my real estate background passed. I was always dealing with small potatoes guys and they tried to get away with a lot more than somebody of Trump's eyes would ever be able to get away with.

Trump got away with a whole lot of illegal stuff and when called out would just sue or pay fines. Had mafia ties that other real estate folk didn't that helped him out. Read a book or two on him.

Or the devil that we on the right definitely no loathe more than we loathe her husband because she yanked him farther to the left. She loves the military she's single-handedly is responsible for Black Hawk Down. She's also responsible for Ruby Ridge and Waco. There's no chance in hell that any one on the right was going across the aisle and vote for Hillary Clinton.

Hillary is personally responsible for Black Hawk Down, Ruby Ridge and Waco? I will admit I need to brush up on them but pretty sure that's a gross over-statement.

But fine, Hillary bad. I agree she was an insider and people were tired of the same old shit. I've said it before...Trump being voted in was sort of a protest vote where people said fuck it, let's throw a monkey wrench in to the machinery and a bull in a china shop, and see what happens. Problem was and is, you guys actually believe his bullshit. He's winging it. He doesn't have a plan.

Myself, I wasn't going to make a 500 mile round trip to vote for Donald Trump. Not because I had concerns about his business ethics. He has none. Not because I had any concerns about his obvious moral failings. So it was because I assume that he is going to be a New York liberal at best a Rockefeller Republican and I am a Goldwater Republican that leans a little to the right of Barry Goldwater. As it turns out the way he's governed I would say Goldwater would be pleased. I think Reagan would be pleased. I don't care what else he does for the next however many years based on the tax code alone it was worth putting up with him.

Good for you for being a 1%er with the tax cut that didn't trickle down.

Tax code revision didn't hurt me last year, but in others wouldn't have been able to deduct as much as I could have. But lots of folk got caught short at tax time when they didn't realize they needed to withhold more.

Keeping that from being squandered is worth whatever it takes to keep a Democrat out of office.

Got it. Protect a criminal to keep a Democrat from being president. That's absolutely despicable and a shame America has come to this point.

The bottom line is you don't have high crimes and misdemeanors. You all seem to not like easternblog baddies but their modus operandi was show me the criminal and I'll find you the crime.

Part two of the report clearly outlines multiple acts of obstruction of justice. What don't you get about that.

Everyone, you included, are committing crimes on a regular basis. I don't know what it would be for me or for you but probably if you looked hard enough you could put together a felony on you or I.

Trump has corrupted you and those like you. Making excuses for and normalizing his corrupt behavior should be seriously disturbing to people. We as a country shouldn't be ok with the POTUS doing such things and openly committing crimes.

Quite literally nothing happened today you do realize that right? There were no Bombshells this was just trying to get Mueller to voice words that you wanted to hear that characterize things in the report that the Democrats have had full access to four months now. If there was anything worth pursuing they would have already pursued it. Since there's not not according to me but because according to the Democrats it's silly to talk about

They clearly have obstruction to pursue but they're not going to get an impeachment because of McConnell. Hence the waffling.

The hearing was probably theater held mostly to get word out to people that Barr's four page version of the report... "nothing to see here, move along" ...was not at all accurate and was, in fact, absolutely misleading even though nothing was grossly inaccurate in it.

 

[moarBB]

They clearly have obstruction to pursue
.

what obstruction

 

[Hal9000_]

https://thumbor.thedailymeal.com/MxynmRTVWs54rEKK77Z2NEK1FMw=/870x565/filters:focal(780x304:781x305)/https://www.thedailymeal.com/sites/default/files/story/2017/PROMO_Trump-steak.jpg

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Well said.

Trump is an unmitigated fucking cunt. Anyone with a single braincell will have concluded that long long ago.

There is no point defending the indefensible or justifying the criminal. He just is what he is. Just own it you guys who voted for the piece of shit.

And I am no progressive; just a traditional conservative who believes in making incremental improvements while maintaining the nation's fundamental institutions and the rule of law.
.

 

[contrifan32]

If you haven't been able to see Trump's crimes from just what is available to the public, you have zero brains and analytical capability. We're talking Trumpette-level stupidity here.

Trump's dual efforts to hide his taxes and to avoid testifying to the special prosecutor are ipso facto declarations of obstruction of justice.

Who do you think you're fooling, you ethically and morally degenerate Trumpettes?

So this is your new tagline? Coming from you its even more pathetic then your advanced case of TDS

 

[Rightguide]

Obstruction seemed pretty clearly met.

That's because you're ignorant about what constitutes Obstruction of Justice, the President's Article II authority, and the Constitution, and its principle of separation of Powers. Educate yourself before posting.

 

[HisArpy]

That's because you're ignorant about what constitutes Obstruction of Justice, the President's Article I authority, and the Constitution, and its principle of separation of Powers. Educate yourself before posting.

He will not because faith trumps reason.

 

[Rightguide]

Trump is an unmitigated fucking cunt. Anyone with a single braincell will have concluded that long long ago.

There is no point defending the indefensible or justifying the criminal. He just is what he is. Just own it you guys who voted for the piece of shit.

And I am no progressive; just a traditional conservative who believes in making incremental improvements while maintaining the nation's fundamental institutions and the rule of law.
.

Defending the indefensible is what Mueller and the congressional Democrats failed to do on Wednesday. This whole thing was an invention, a lie, to frame Donald Trump, subvert his candidacy, and after being elected to overthrow his presidency. It failed, people need to go to prison and hopefully will.

 

[Rightguide]

He will not because faith trumps reason.

These are the kind of mentally malleable people that Joe Stalin and Mao would lick their chops over.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

What's the motive to obstruct when the underlying crime that they're pursuing didn't exist?

His stated motivation seems pretty likely that he did not approve of being what he viewed as persecuted by democrats for something that he says he didn't do. Mueller says he didn't do it either.

Politically it wouldn't have worked for from a legal standpoint almost everything you're talking about he could have completely avoided by a having less leaks in his operation but given that the full force of the US government was actively spying on him and had a plant inside that's probably hard but even with those leaks he could have 100% Stonewall and claimed executive privilege. Obama claimed executive privilege on Fast and Furious while also claiming he had never had any conversation about Fast and Furious by definition if he didn't have a conversation executive privilege doesn't exist. Obama and holder got away with stonewalling Trump would not have gotten away politically with stonewalling. So he was as open as he had to be while trying to be less than forthcoming about things that he could get away with not being forthcoming about.

There's absolutely no doubt that if he'd sat for an interview he would have been caught in a perjury trap. However, he didn't perjure himself.

And what he did was remarkably politically smart. At this point the Democrats have nothing and will have nothing because of how they have overplayed their hand. There is no political will to do anything about any of the above. So it doesn't matter. If it doesn't matter it didn't happen.

I'm not saying you're not right if this was a non political situation in the set of facts as you outline them whereas you outline them but that's not what we're dealing with impeachment is a political exercise and you have to ask is the activities of a known huckster and hyperbolic megalomaniac something that you can remove him from office for or not? The answer as it turns out is no.

It's irrelevant what his motivation was for breaking the law on numerous occasions, HE BROKE THE LAW. We are a nation of laws, are we not?

 

[moarBB]

It's irrelevant what his motivation was for breaking the law on numerous occasions, HE BROKE THE LAW. We are a nation of laws, are we not?

what laws were broken?

 

[Kantarii]

CNN and NBC have a lot of fuckers brainwashed.

 

[HisArpy]

It's irrelevant what his motivation was for breaking the law on numerous occasions, HE BROKE THE LAW. We are a nation of laws, are we not?

What laws were broken? Please CITE THE SPECIFIC LAW and provide citation to actual evidence supporting your claims. (Please note that citing to "the Mueller report" or it's contents is insufficient for this. Be specific. Also, include any exculpatory evidence which may contradict your claims.)

 

[moarBB]

what laws were broken?

non

deal with it

move on

CuntClinton will never be COTUS!

 

[Rightguide]

It's irrelevant what his motivation was for breaking the law on numerous occasions, HE BROKE THE LAW. We are a nation of laws, are we not?

Except a dozen or more Trump hating, Hillary loving, legal pit bulls, couldn't come up with a violation of law...numb nuts.