Do you think Mueller should be fired?

[HisArpy]

I think you might want to backup and take another look at your assertions. You are ignoring the fact that Mueller was given an open ended mandate. He can investigate anything no matter what it is or where it leads. Fishing expedition? Maybe, but it appears he's filling the hold with a pretty good catch so far and he isn't done yet. As far as the president and Russian collusion, no one knows what he has because he and his team are professional enough to know when to keep their mouth shut, unlike most of Trump's administration.

Great, you have less than perfect reading retention too. did you read the part where I SAID that he has the authority?

And here's the thing that I can't seem to get the ignorant like you to understand; let's say the cops have a warrant to see if you have any baked Easter Bunny on your dining room table. Now, baked Easter Bunny isn't illegal but the neighborhood kids are upset enough that someone needs to investigate it so that everyone knows that doing LEGAL THINGS is illegal somehow if enough people complain.

The cops execute said warrant and come inside. Nope, no leftovers, the table is sparkling clean. BUT, during said search, they also happen to stumble across the picture on the wall of you with a Thanksgiving turkey on your dining room table.

Now, that's just a picture, but it's enough under the open ended terms of the warrant of "and anything that naturally follows" for them to paw through your family photo album in plain view upon yon coffee table. And that leads them to your computer where you store the electronic images that are in that photo album. Which leads them to your browser history. And they find your lit account. And they demand all activity from Laurel for said Lit account because pron. At which time they discover that you used a FAKE NAME for your Lit account and search for all online activity for that fake name and find the encryption for your online banking transactions. Now it's off to the bank because if you didn't have anything to hide why would you use encryption. At the bank they discover you have (horrors of horrors) a JOB and an audit of the company accounting dept procedures and books as well as every employees personal tax returns shows that at 1 point the number of dependents a co-worker claimed for W-2 deductions was higher than the number he actually had. O. M. G!!!! He's a CRIMINAL! And you must be too because you work with him because guilty! yada yada yada.

At what point does this cease to be a search for Easter related leftovers on your dining room table and become a witch hunt? Yes, the cops have the authority and everything they've done is because it's right there for anyone to see and the connection can be traced directly back to the original warrant, but...

Welcome to the unending saga of the Mueller investigation. He's in left field and heading for the cheap seats chasing a hologram of a foul ball.

 

[Taint_mAnn]

Great, you have less than perfect reading retention too. did you read the part where I SAID that he has the authority?

And here's the thing that I can't seem to get the ignorant like you to understand; let's say the cops have a warrant to see if you have any baked Easter Bunny on your dining room table. Now, baked Easter Bunny isn't illegal but the neighborhood kids are upset enough that someone needs to investigate it so that everyone knows that doing LEGAL THINGS is illegal somehow if enough people complain.

The cops execute said warrant and come inside. Nope, no leftovers, the table is sparkling clean. BUT, during said search, they also happen to stumble across the picture on the wall of you with a Thanksgiving turkey on your dining room table.

Now, that's just a picture, but it's enough under the open ended terms of the warrant of "and anything that naturally follows" for them to paw through your family photo album in plain view upon yon coffee table. And that leads them to your computer where you store the electronic images that are in that photo album. Which leads them to your browser history. And they find your lit account. And they demand all activity from Laurel for said Lit account because pron. At which time they discover that you used a FAKE NAME for your Lit account and search for all online activity for that fake name and find the encryption for your online banking transactions. Now it's off to the bank because if you didn't have anything to hide why would you use encryption. At the bank they discover you have (horrors of horrors) a JOB and an audit of the company accounting dept procedures and books as well as every employees personal tax returns shows that at 1 point the number of dependents a co-worker claimed for W-2 deductions was higher than the number he actually had. O. M. G!!!! He's a CRIMINAL! And you must be too because you work with him because guilty! yada yada yada.

At what point does this cease to be a search for Easter related leftovers on your dining room table and become a witch hunt? Yes, the cops have the authority and everything they've done is because it's right there for anyone to see and the connection can be traced directly back to the original warrant, but...

Welcome to the unending saga of the Mueller investigation. He's in left field and heading for the cheap seats chasing a hologram of a foul ball.

Okay, derpy mcderperson.

 

[phrodeau]

Great, you have less than perfect reading retention too. did you read the part where I SAID that he has the authority?

And here's the thing that I can't seem to get the ignorant like you to understand; let's say the cops have a warrant to see if you have any baked Easter Bunny on your dining room table. Now, baked Easter Bunny isn't illegal but the neighborhood kids are upset enough that someone needs to investigate it so that everyone knows that doing LEGAL THINGS is illegal somehow if enough people complain.

The cops execute said warrant and come inside. Nope, no leftovers, the table is sparkling clean. BUT, during said search, they also happen to stumble across the picture on the wall of you with a Thanksgiving turkey on your dining room table.

Now, that's just a picture, but it's enough under the open ended terms of the warrant of "and anything that naturally follows" for them to paw through your family photo album in plain view upon yon coffee table. And that leads them to your computer where you store the electronic images that are in that photo album. Which leads them to your browser history. And they find your lit account. And they demand all activity from Laurel for said Lit account because pron. At which time they discover that you used a FAKE NAME for your Lit account and search for all online activity for that fake name and find the encryption for your online banking transactions. Now it's off to the bank because if you didn't have anything to hide why would you use encryption. At the bank they discover you have (horrors of horrors) a JOB and an audit of the company accounting dept procedures and books as well as every employees personal tax returns shows that at 1 point the number of dependents a co-worker claimed for W-2 deductions was higher than the number he actually had. O. M. G!!!! He's a CRIMINAL! And you must be too because you work with him because guilty! yada yada yada.

At what point does this cease to be a search for Easter related leftovers on your dining room table and become a witch hunt? Yes, the cops have the authority and everything they've done is because it's right there for anyone to see and the connection can be traced directly back to the original warrant, but...

Welcome to the unending saga of the Mueller investigation. He's in left field and heading for the cheap seats chasing a hologram of a foul ball.

Sounds exactly like the Starr investigation.

 

[HisArpy]

Sounds exactly like the Starr investigation.

It does.

So, at what point do we look at each other and ask; didn't we learn from this the first time?

 

[Comshaw]

Great, you have less than perfect reading retention too. did you read the part where I SAID that he has the authority?

And here's the thing that I can't seem to get the ignorant like you to understand; let's say the cops have a warrant to see if you have any baked Easter Bunny on your dining room table. Now, baked Easter Bunny isn't illegal but the neighborhood kids are upset enough that someone needs to investigate it so that everyone knows that doing LEGAL THINGS is illegal somehow if enough people complain.

The cops execute said warrant and come inside. Nope, no leftovers, the table is sparkling clean. BUT, during said search, they also happen to stumble across the picture on the wall of you with a Thanksgiving turkey on your dining room table.

Now, that's just a picture, but it's enough under the open ended terms of the warrant of "and anything that naturally follows" for them to paw through your family photo album in plain view upon yon coffee table. And that leads them to your computer where you store the electronic images that are in that photo album. Which leads them to your browser history. And they find your lit account. And they demand all activity from Laurel for said Lit account because pron. At which time they discover that you used a FAKE NAME for your Lit account and search for all online activity for that fake name and find the encryption for your online banking transactions. Now it's off to the bank because if you didn't have anything to hide why would you use encryption. At the bank they discover you have (horrors of horrors) a JOB and an audit of the company accounting dept procedures and books as well as every employees personal tax returns shows that at 1 point the number of dependents a co-worker claimed for W-2 deductions was higher than the number he actually had. O. M. G!!!! He's a CRIMINAL! And you must be too because you work with him because guilty! yada yada yada.

At what point does this cease to be a search for Easter related leftovers on your dining room table and become a witch hunt? Yes, the cops have the authority and everything they've done is because it's right there for anyone to see and the connection can be traced directly back to the original warrant, but...

Welcome to the unending saga of the Mueller investigation. He's in left field and heading for the cheap seats chasing a hologram of a foul ball.

I realize that I'm just a semi-educated, almost intelligent, blue collar mechanic, but I think I understand more then you give me credit for. Your analogy would be spot on, IF you hadn't run off the rails right at the beginning. That's the problem with those who see only what they want to. If you will look at the bolded portion of your post, you will see where you went wrong. The Mueller investigation wasn't given or limited to a single mandate so the "leftover" part of your analogy, the part I might add that everything else you said is based on, is misleading and false, so subsequently everything you said that follows is also.

If you would like to go back and read the actual charging letter you'll find that Mueller was given an open ended mandate. Now you do have the right to voice your opinion that he shouldn't have been given that power, but then we can weigh it for what it is, your opinion and not a fact. I'll leave it to others to voice their opinion on the veracity of yours.

Additionally as it has been pointed out, that this one is much like the Starr investigation and more recently the 8 investigations into Benghazi, the last of which, by the way, went far afield.

It does.

So, at what point do we look at each other and ask; didn't we learn from this the first time?

It seems that we haven't, otherwise the two new investigations into Hilary (announced 10/24/17) wouldn't have been instigated. And please don't try to tell me these two are the same as the Mueller investigation. The Mueller investigation is the first one dealing with the subjects they are dealing with. The Hillary investigations are the (what?) 3rd? 4th? or more? investigations into the same fucking thing, with nothing of consequence ever being uncovered. You talk about waste of money and time. But if you support the two new investigations into Hillary, you need to shut the fuck up about Mueller. I do despise someone talking out both sides of their face. What's good for the goose is good for the goosee.


Comshaw

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Great, you have less than perfect reading retention too. did you read the part where I SAID that he has the authority?

And here's the thing that I can't seem to get the ignorant like you to understand; let's say the cops have a warrant to see if you have any baked Easter Bunny on your dining room table....

I realize that I'm just a semi-educated, almost intelligent, blue collar mechanic, but I think I understand more then you give me credit for. Your analogy would be spot on, IF you hadn't run off the rails right at the beginning. That's the problem with those who see only what they want to. If you will look at the bolded portion of your post, you will see where you went wrong. The Mueller investigation wasn't given or limited to a single mandate so the "leftover" part of your analogy, the part I might add that everything else you said is based on, is misleading and false, so subsequently everything you said that follows is also.

If you would like to go back and read the actual charging letter you'll find that Mueller was given an open ended mandate. Now you do have the right to voice your opinion that he shouldn't have been given that power, but then we can weigh it for what it is, your opinion and not a fact. I'll leave it to others to voice their opinion on the veracity of yours.

Additionally as it has been pointed out, that this one is much like the Starr investigation and more recently the 8 investigations into Benghazi, the last of which, by the way, went far afield.

It seems that we haven't, otherwise the two new investigations into Hilary (announced 10/24/17) wouldn't have been instigated. And please don't try to tell me these two are the same as the Mueller investigation. The Mueller investigation is the first one dealing with the subjects they are dealing with. The Hillary investigations are the (what?) 3rd? 4th? or more? investigations into the same fucking thing, with nothing of consequence ever being uncovered. You talk about waste of money and time. But if you support the two new investigations into Hillary, you need to shut the fuck up about Mueller. I do despise someone talking out both sides of their face. What's good for the goose is good for the goosee.

Sorry Arpy, but Comshaw is correct on this one. Your error is in comparing the Mueller investigation to a 4th Amendment warrant for the production of evidence. Bad analogy. They ain't the same.

While I, like you, tend to hate the breadth of authority (which you admit Mueller has) given to special prosecutors, they are more like temporary police departments. Police departments investigate the full range of crime all the time -- burglaries, homicides, fraud, sexual assault, traffic violations, etc. That mandate is broad. The rules for the collection and production of evidence related to that mandate are far narrower.

And those same narrow evidentiary and procedural rules will govern whatever prosecutions Mueller decides to proceed with. But not the scope of his investigation itself.

But, hey, don't feel bad. The President doesn't understand this either.

 

[RobDownSouth]

While I, like you, tend to hate the breadth of authority (which you admit Mueller has) given to special prosecutors, they are more like temporary police departments. Police departments investigate the full range of crime all the time -- burglaries, homicides, fraud, sexual assault, traffic violations, etc. That mandate is broad. The rules for the collection and production of evidence related to that mandate are far narrower.

"Temporary police department"....that's a pretty good analogy, actually.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

"Temporary police department"....that's a pretty good analogy, actually.

Yeah, and it's one I missed for a long time. But it's still a bad idea to give special prosecutors that broad of a mandate. Why? Because the basic premise of a special prosecutor is to separate his investigation from any reasonable taint of partiality being given to the person(s) being investigated. In the case of a President's own DoJ investigating the President that makes an obvious degree of sense.

But the farther one gets from that premise -- like investigating friends and associates of the President for money laundering charges years before the President took office -- the thinner the thread by which that justification hangs. The criminal division of the DoJ is not a political entity anyway. They have a long history of being fully able to investigate and prosecute individuals within ALL THREE branches of government and have done so successfully many times.

Besides, you don't think both sides have attempted to politicize this issue long after Mueller was appointed anyway?

Yeah, I get the need for the "appearance" of impartiality. But that's a lot of money to be spent on appearances. In the end, there won't be anything in or about Mueller's investigation that could not have been done just as well under the regular auspices of the DOJ.

And had it been done right, which is to say quietly, the President would have either never known about it, and/or would have had no reason to spend every moment of his day trying to run a publicity campaign against it. And had he been stupid enough to attempt to quietly quash a "quiet" but legitimate investigation, it would have gotten VERY noisy VERY quickly and he might have even been impeached for it by now.

 

[about_average]

But the farther one gets from that premise -- like investigating friends and associates of the President for money laundering charges years before the President took office -- the thinner the thread by which that justification hangs. The criminal division of the DoJ is not a political entity anyway. They have a long history of being fully able to investigate and prosecute individuals within ALL THREE branches of government and have done so successfully many times.

Where do you draw the line?
Does possible corruption today warrant investigating a history of corruption to see if there is an opportunity for blackmail, or evidence of "high crimes and misdemeanors", today?

Similar to the 3 affairs. Normally I'd say it's no one's business but the parties involved, just as I thought in the Lewinsky case, but the fact there were NDA's and hush money paid means fairly significant lengths were gone to to keep it secret which opens Trump up to blackmail.
And THAT is an issue that concerns every American, or at least should.

 

[HisArpy]

Where do you draw the line?
Does possible corruption today warrant investigating a history of corruption to see if there is an opportunity for blackmail, or evidence of "high crimes and misdemeanors", today?

Similar to the 3 affairs. Normally I'd say it's no one's business but the parties involved, just as I thought in the Lewinsky case, but the fact there were NDA's and hush money paid means fairly significant lengths were gone to to keep it secret which opens Trump up to blackmail.
And THAT is an issue that concerns every American, or at least should.

Once again, you have to look at the nexus to what Mueller's supposed to be investigating. (Which was my point above, not the warrant requirement, though that was a valid point/distinction.)

Otherwise, what's to say that some schoolyard fight 50 years ago isn't within the scope of what you're trying to grasp when you say "secrets"? Remember, this is a criminal investigation not an inquiry into Trump's and family's general past. If it were, then one has to ask why there wasn't a criminal inquiry into Bush's "Skull & Bones" secret society membership?

I remember when that hit the news, but no one talked about appointing a special counsel to look into it. Wouldn't membership in a secret society open the President up to potential blackmail?

At some point you have to say enough. Mueller has reached that point and Congress should haul his ass in, sit him down and say; "ok, what you got?" If he's got nuthin' then he needs to go.

 

[Comshaw]

Once again, you have to look at the nexus to what Mueller's supposed to be investigating. (Which was my point above, not the warrant requirement, though that was a valid point/distinction.)

Otherwise, what's to say that some schoolyard fight 50 years ago isn't within the scope of what you're trying to grasp when you say "secrets"? Remember, this is a criminal investigation not an inquiry into Trump's and family's general past. If it were, then one has to ask why there wasn't a criminal inquiry into Bush's "Skull & Bones" secret society membership?

I remember when that hit the news, but no one talked about appointing a special counsel to look into it. Wouldn't membership in a secret society open the President up to potential blackmail?

At some point you have to say enough. Mueller has reached that point and Congress should haul his ass in, sit him down and say; "ok, what you got?" If he's got nuthin' then he needs to go.

The distinction here is between what is and what you want it to be. The warrant charge is what he is suppose to be investigating, which is what ever he happens to find. Just because you don't think it should be so, doen't make it any less valid.

As to your other points: if a school yard fight might influence or have sway on an important decision or action made in the present, it rightly should be included in the investigation. So any action that might open someone to undue influence from those seeking to carry out nefarious operations should be investigated. As to the connection of what the Mueller investigation has found and/or charges brought so far and what the main thrust of the investigation has no one knows and we won't until it's revealed.

I take it you would have been comfortable with the congressional investigation into Benghazi being limited to that and only that? So the investigators shouldn't have followed the leads that lead them to Hillary's private e-mail server? That means by your view what they found should have been ignored and considered outside the investigation?

Your analogy about the Skull and Cross bones society is not even in the same realm as the Mueller investigation by several orders of magnitude.



Comshaw

 

[BobBalouski]

I've changed my mind: I believe the Tool should fire Mueller immediately, thus throwing the entire statist political apparatus into even more of a frenzied tizzy, and thus increasing them all turning more and more on themselves, like swamp rats pushing each other into the drink trying to escape the sinking USSA Shithole.

Bring it ALL down.

 

[cowslinger64]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-struggling-lawyers-represent-him-165448216.html

Trump struggling to find lawyers to represent him as Mueller investigation enters critical phase




Lol @ the rwcj

 

[about_average]

Once again, you have to look at the nexus to what Mueller's supposed to be investigating. (Which was my point above, not the warrant requirement, though that was a valid point/distinction.)

Otherwise, what's to say that some schoolyard fight 50 years ago isn't within the scope of what you're trying to grasp when you say "secrets"? Remember, this is a criminal investigation not an inquiry into Trump's and family's general past. If it were, then one has to ask why there wasn't a criminal inquiry into Bush's "Skull & Bones" secret society membership?

I remember when that hit the news, but no one talked about appointing a special counsel to look into it. Wouldn't membership in a secret society open the President up to potential blackmail?

At some point you have to say enough. Mueller has reached that point and Congress should haul his ass in, sit him down and say; "ok, what you got?" If he's got nuthin' then he needs to go.

All I can say is,

 

[Hypoxia]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-struggling-lawyers-represent-him-165448216.html

Trump struggling to find lawyers to represent him as Mueller investigation enters critical phase

I see lawyers' billboards everywhere when I drive down into the stink of civilization. Most have 1-800 numbers. They're easy to find and they'll do anything for money. Maybe Tromp is too cheap. Or too sleazy.

One evening in October, when I was far from sober,
And carrying a load with manly pride
I began to slip and stutter, so I lay down in the gutter
Then a pig came up and laid right by my side.

Well, I warbled, "It's fair weather when good fellows get together!"
But a Christian passing by was heard to say,
"You can tell a man who boozes by the company he chooses."
Then the pig got up and slowly walked away.​

Even pigs have standards.

 

[Aglaopheme]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/30/us/politics/robert-mueller-questions-trump.html


https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/04/30/us/politics/questions-mueller-wants-to-ask-trump-russia.html

There’s some news being made in those questions.

 

[Que]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-struggling-lawyers-represent-him-165448216.html

Trump struggling to find lawyers to represent him as Mueller investigation enters critical phase




Lol @ the rwcj

Oooh. The "Critical Phase."

A month ago.

When does it reach the double secret critical phase?

 

[Emerson40]

https://78.media.tumblr.com/e07cc7909bec1aabfb51bda4e84fb147/tumblr_p7qvcgOoxv1sh4z4so1_500.jpg

 

[Pookie]

Oooh. The "Critical Phase."

A month ago.

When does it reach the double secret critical phase?

https://78.media.tumblr.com/e07cc7909bec1aabfb51bda4e84fb147/tumblr_p7qvcgOoxv1sh4z4so1_500.jpg

*giggles*

 

[ThatsTheGuy]

There's collusion in Benghazi? They have a justice system too?

 

[Rightguide]

Discussing the Mueller probe, highly respected constitutional scholar and left-leaning Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz explained:

First of all, the president's 100% right. There never should have been an appointment of special counsel here. There was no probable cause at that point to believe that crimes had been committed. I've seen no evidence to suggest that crimes have been committed by the president.​

I. Schwartz, Dershowitz: Trump 100% Right There Never Should Have Been Special Counsel, No Probable Cause, Real Clear Politics (Mar. 21, 2018).

Totally correct. The appointment of Mueller was a violation of law and the DOJ rules on special counsels. As Col. Hogan has said, Mueller has prosecuted noting that couldn't have been done by regular federal prosecutors, or I might add, the Tax Division of the DOJ.

 

[Chancellor_Palpatine]

Totally correct. The appointment of Mueller was a violation of law and the DOJ rules on special counsels. As Col. Hogan has said, Mueller has prosecuted noting that couldn't have been done by regular federal prosecutors, or I might add, the Tax Division of the DOJ.

https://i2.wp.com/www.paulduane.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/tinfoilhatguy.jpg

LOOOL.

 

[Rightguide]

LOOOL.

Typical knee jerk post of the uninformed.

 

[loquere]

This poll should be anonymous.

 

[pointless]

This poll should be anonymous.

no, it shouldn't. there are too many cunts with too many alts here for a poll like this to be anonymous.