Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
whoknew

The Russia Investigation: Mueller - "Over the course of my career, I've seen a number of challenges to our democracy.The Russian govt's effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious."

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Don't Noonan said:

I wasn't talking about Saints reference, sorry for the confusion.  I am only shocked that Mueller outsourced and may have relied on ultra sketchy outfits.

Not to mention that if Mueller used private eyes, would that be an end run around the fourth amendment, as a private investigator is nit bound by that?  If so, that is even more troubling than the breaches of attorney client privilege.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Rove! said:

Not to mention that if Mueller used private eyes, would that be an end run around the fourth amendment, as a private investigator is nit bound by that?  If so, that is even more troubling than the breaches of attorney client privilege.

They're watching you. :clap:They see your every move. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, knowledge dropper said:

The tone of this thread has definitely changed after Trump’s “exoneration” and now opening an investigation into the source of this “witch hunt.”

It’s BARR TIME.  

Agreed....and I think many of us appreciate that.  It wasn't long ago that many here wouldn't bother to acknowledge reality by using quotes like you do here.  It's pretty refreshing :thumbup: 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "Steele" dossier source who falsely claimed there was a Russian Consulate in Miami was ALSO a source for the Moscow “pee tape” AND **the key source** alleging an “extensive conspiracy” between the Trump campaign & Russia involving Manafort and Page 🚨

https://twitter.com/johnwhuber/status/1129020561684869127

Either Steele lied to the FBI because he didn't admit he was revealing the contents of the dossier to the State Dept (as proven by Kavalec's notes) 

OR the FBI/DOJ lied to the FISC

Pick one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bozeman Bruiser said:

What do you call it in legalese when a claim is made but is not verifiable?

Hearsay?

No

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rove! said:

If Mueller used private eyes, would that be an end run around the fourth amendment, as a private investigator is nit bound by that?

No

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, knowledge dropper said:

The tone of this thread has definitely changed after Trump’s “exoneration” and now opening an investigation into the source of this “witch hunt.”

It’s BARR TIME.  

Is "BARR TIME" the new "LOCK HER UP"? :lol:

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bozeman Bruiser said:

What do you call it in legalese when a claim is made but is not verifiable?

Tuesday at the White House.

  • Like 9
  • Laughing 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ren hoek said:

The "Steele" dossier source who falsely claimed there was a Russian Consulate in Miami was ALSO a source for the Moscow “pee tape” AND **the key source** alleging an “extensive conspiracy” between the Trump campaign & Russia involving Manafort and Page 🚨

https://twitter.com/johnwhuber/status/1129020561684869127

Either Steele lied to the FBI because he didn't admit he was revealing the contents of the dossier to the State Dept (as proven by Kavalec's notes) 

OR the FBI/DOJ lied to the FISC

Pick one.

Hannity's been on on the consulate kick. But accuracy of these statements aside from {squinting} Mr. Undercover Huber .... isn't this obvious from reading the dossier? The sources are shown as Source A-E. If Source A (or whichever) said any given things then you see that, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, knowledge dropper said:

The tone of this thread has definitely changed after Trump’s “exoneration” and now opening an investigation into the source of this “witch hunt.”

It’s BARR TIME.  

Seriously.  Where are all those who cried that "the American people DESERVE to know the truth"?

I am sure that everyone here would want to know if any administration had weaponized our intelligence agencies for the purpose of undoing an election and illegally spied on American citizens.
Most would agree that this far outweighs whether or not a sitting President fudged his taxes fifteen or twenty years ago.

....even if that President is named "Trump".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Opie said:

I am sure that everyone here would want to know if any administration had weaponized our intelligence agencies for the purpose of undoing an election and illegally spied on American citizens.
Most would agree that this far outweighs whether or not a sitting President fudged his taxes fifteen or twenty years ago.

Eh this is the same thing, either you feel Congress has authority and oversight under our Constitution or you’re for absolute authority of the President and the imperial system our founding fathers rejected. I have no problem with Nunes or Graham looking at the FISA process but also Neil getting the tax returns.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Eh this is the same thing, either you feel Congress has authority and oversight under our Constitution or you’re for authority of the President and the imperial system our founding fathers rejected. I have no problem with both Nunes or Graham looking at the FISA process but also Neil getting the tax returns.

It comes down to the matter of, exactly when does "oversight" end and "harassment" begin?

I am sure that you'd agree that there is a point where this occurs.

Now, If Trump's taxes could be tied to a crime that occured ....get them.  If they're simply looking for something...ANYTHING that he's done wrong....I'd say that line has been crossed.

Edited by Opie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Opie said:

It comes down to the matter of, exactly when does "oversight" end and "harassment" begin?

I am sure that you'd agree that there is a point where this occurs.

Now, If Trump's taxes from a crime that occured ....get them.  If they're simply looking for something...ANYTHING that he's done wrong....I'd say that line has been crossed.

Before I address other points you should check something:

- Currently Trump’s position to Congress and to the courts, as to Russia, taxes and other investigations, is that Congress does ***not have authority to investigate crime.

So you’re directly contradicting Trump himself here.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Before I address other points you should check something:

- Currently Trump’s position to Congress and to the courts, as to Russia, taxes and other investigations, is that Congress does ***not have authority to investigate crime.

So you’re directly contradicting Trump himself here.

What's the crime that they "don't have the authority to investigate"?

...or are they still looking for one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Opie said:

What's the crime that they "don't have the authority to investigate"?

...or are they still looking for one?

Trump is claiming that Congress is investigating possible crimes for impeachment for obstruction and taxes. That’s Trump’s argument. You should catch up to what the President is arguing. Again that’s his claim, not mine.

I'll be glad to post his lawyers’ letter if helpful.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who the hell investigates "possible crimes"?
Do you mean, "looking for a crime that may have been committed"?

Obstruction of what?

From what crime did Trump impede justice being delivered on?

Did he impede the investigation that already took place for a crime that wasn't committed?
Or....is he just refusing to give up any more information for the Democrats to crawl over in their search for a crime?

Again...when does the "oversight" end and "harassment" begin?

Edited by Opie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Opie said:

Who the hell investigates "possible crimes"?
Do you mean, "looking for a crime that may have been committed?

Obstruction of what?

From what crime did Trump impede justice being delivered on?

Did he impede the investigation that already took place for a crime that wasn't committed?
Or....is he just refusing to give up any more information for the Democrats to crawl over in their search for a crime?

Again...when does the "oversight" end and "harassment" begin?

Trump is arguing Congress has no authority to explore these issues at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Opie said:

Who the hell investigates "possible crimes"?

The police do it all the time.

Find a dead body? Was it a crime or did the person die of natural causes? Well, how about we start an investigation to find out?

Come on, man.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Opie said:

Again...when does the "oversight" end and "harassment" begin?

There is never a point that it becomes harassment. It's a feature, not a bug. The American people weigh that when they vote every 2 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, [scooter] said:
11 minutes ago, Opie said:

Who the hell investigates "possible crimes"?

The police do it all the time.

Find a dead body? Was it a crime or did the person die of natural causes? Well, how about we start an investigation to find out?

Come on, man.

Also, hasn't Trump been implicated in possible crimes during sworn Congressional testimony?  And other indictments?

Trump has been implicated in crimes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

The police do it all the time.

Find a dead body? Was it a crime or did the person die of natural causes? Well, how about we start an investigation to find out?

Come on, man.

only see his posts when someone quotes him but.....holy hell.....he didn't really type that did he?

  • Laughing 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Amused to Death said:

Also, hasn't Trump been implicated in possible crimes during sworn Congressional testimony?  And other indictments?

Trump has been implicated in crimes.

It was either yesterday or the day before but Trump’s lawyers told a federal judge that Congress did not have authority to conduct the Watergate or Whitewater investigations and hearings. Seriously. I don’t think even the Trump followers are tracking this.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

It was either yesterday or the day before but Trump’s lawyer’s told a federal judge that Congress did not have authority to conduct the Watergate or Whitewater investigations and hearings. Seriously. I don’t think even the Trump followers are tracking this.

Oh I'm aware of that.  I was just responding to @Opie's comment about "what crime".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Opie said:

Seriously.  Where are all those who cried that "the American people DESERVE to know the truth"?

:oldunsure:

:hey:

Investigate away :shrug: 

I know I throw a kink into the little narrative you want to push, but.....oh well.

ETA:  And it does look pretty stupid to be pushing this while your dear leader is pushing the narrative he is, but that's for you to reconcile.

Edited by The Commish
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, knowledge dropper said:

No chance.  “Lock her up” is Stairway to Heaven at a Trump rally

I think Freebird would be the proper analogy here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Opie said:

Who the hell investigates "possible crimes"?
Do you mean, "looking for a crime that may have been committed"?

Obstruction of what?

From what crime did Trump impede justice being delivered on?

Did he impede the investigation that already took place for a crime that wasn't committed?
Or....is he just refusing to give up any more information for the Democrats to crawl over in their search for a crime?

Again...when does the "oversight" end and "harassment" begin?

If Trump were not President, 700+ federal prosecutors agree he’d be indicted on Obstruction. You utterly discount the seriousness of that felony, and that it served its purpose of impeding justice.

Trump’s tax returns show a clear and brazen disregard for laws, and fingerprints of evasion.

And don’t forget he’d have also been indicted on charges in SDNY for campaign finance violations relating to hush money (felonies for which Cohen is doing hard time).

Keep pretending, and act shocked when more of the already established fact pattern shows Trump is a conman criminal beholden to foreign powers and widely vulnerable to blackmail. Which makes it curious how he seems to have undermined our nation’s laws, sought to corrupt it from within, and served foreign interests since his illegitimate installation. 

Edited by Mr. Ham
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bucky86 said:

JUST IN: MUELLER team unseals evidence that Flynn aided the obstruction invsetigation -- including providing testimony and a *voice mail* that "could have affected" his testimony.

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1129137199620984840?s=20

There are tapes.

  • Like 3
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Bucky86 said:

JUST IN: MUELLER team unseals evidence that Flynn aided the obstruction invsetigation -- including providing testimony and a *voice mail* that "could have affected" his testimony.

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1129137199620984840?s=20

Hm, sounds like evidence.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Opie said:

It comes down to the matter of, exactly when does "oversight" end and "harassment" begin?

I am sure that you'd agree that there is a point where this occurs.

Now, If Trump's taxes could be tied to a crime that occured ....get them.  If they're simply looking for something...ANYTHING that he's done wrong....I'd say that line has been crossed.

You’re missing one extremely important piece here.  If he had turned them over in the beginning like everyone before him and we found a crime had occurred we wouldn’t have had to work backwards like you are proposing is improper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Natasha Bertrand‏Verified account @NatashaBertrand 8m8 minutes ago

New: A federal judge has confirmed for the first time that Felix Sater, the Russian-born Trump associate who drove Trump Tower Moscow negotiations during the 2016 election, helped the U.S. government track down Osama bin Laden while he was an informant.

 

Edited by Dinsy Ejotuz
  • Thinking 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

Natasha Bertrand‏Verified account @NatashaBertrand 8m8 minutes ago

New: A federal judge has confirmed for the first time that Felix Sater, the Russian-born Trump associate who drove Trump Tower Moscow negotiations during the 2016 election, helped the U.S. government track down Osama bin Laden while he was an informant.

Apparently Don Trump’s business partner had OBL’s phone number.

  • Thinking 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, John Blutarsky said:

Just like the Trump Russia stuff.

Here’s the Bloomberg report.

- Mueller produced evidence, he stated the DOJ did not have jurisdiction to prosecute. In Ukraine, they investigated and did not find evidence.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Apparently Don Trump’s business partner had OBL’s phone number.

Also, he was cooperating with the intelligence community.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So did Mueller leave these filings/trails out their expecting Barr (and Rosenstein) to whitewash everything for Trump?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sammy3469 said:

So did Mueller leave these filings/trails out their expecting Barr (and Rosenstein) to whitewash everything for Trump?

Think it's pretty hard to interpret without knowing what's happening/what became of the counter-intelligence investigation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sammy3469 said:

So did Mueller leave these filings/trails out their expecting Barr (and Rosenstein) to whitewash everything for Trump?

I think what people have to realize is that before the report there were public filings which together themselves form part of the report. Mueller regularly points to court filings. There is also evidence. As I understand it WaPo got Judge Sullivan to release this stuff as it been in a redacted report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I think what people have to realize is that before the report there were public filings which together themselves form part of the report. Mueller regularly points to court filings. There is also evidence. As I understand it WaPo got Judge Sullivan to release this stuff as it been in a redacted report.

Right...which makes the Barr play even more problematic (presumably Barr knew these were out there since he’s not recused).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.