|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> The Mueller report /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1553314436 Message started by eau de sauvage on 03/22/19 at 21:13:56 |
|
Title: The Mueller report Post by eau de sauvage on 03/22/19 at 21:13:56 It's been handed in and here is an excellent 5 minute video recap on how we got to this point beginning from the annexation of Crimea... https://nyti.ms/2UXUuPy |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by eau de sauvage on 03/23/19 at 03:25:33 It now seems that Mueller *will* be subpoenaed to appear before the house and explain anything in the report that need explaining. So one way or the other Barr is not going to be able to hold it up for long. |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by WebsterMark on 03/23/19 at 05:51:33 Take your blinders off and look around a bit will you....... |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by MnSpring on 03/23/19 at 08:58:54 2D3F2B283F393B5E0 wrote:
We, WE ??? Are you not a, 'Subject', of Australia ? Is that not what you have told everybody here ? Also posting a video that is very clearly, Made by a TDS person/firm. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by eau de sauvage on 03/23/19 at 23:32:24 It would appear that the GOP strategy for the Mueller report, (GOP of course including fox 'news') will be for the Mad Orange Prince to say nothing at all and for all his mates to say that the report says no collusion. Just the fact that Trump has been silent on it suddenly is kinda weird. @Mn, thanks for dropping in fcukwad. 6E5C5B4A4D5C4B74584B52390 wrote:
No, thanks, I'll keep them on while you fcuk yourself with a rusty crowbar; it's not something I want to see. |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by WebsterMark on 03/24/19 at 04:47:45 Your unhinged over your Mueller dream not panning out Eau. You gonna start crying next? Anyone know how much it is to ship some tissues down under? |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by oldNslow on 03/24/19 at 16:00:28 Quote:
Well, that is what the report says. From the AGs summary: "The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. " Even Wolf Blitzer on cnn had to read that on the air and acknowledge it. Probably darn near choked on it. Find a link to a copy of the AG's letter and read it. Edited to add a link:: https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/24/politics/read-mueller-key-findings-doj/index.html |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by eau de sauvage on 03/24/19 at 20:12:25 Leave it to President Trump to describe as “Total EXONERATION” a document that specifically quotes Special Counsel Robert Mueller as saying that one of his principal findings “does not exonerate” the president. https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-make-bill-barrs-letter Mueller has played this straight down the line as you'd expect, the devil will be in the detail. There's nearly 2 years for the full ramifications to unfold. |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by eau de sauvage on 03/25/19 at 03:09:14 Seeing as Trump calls losing the House a 'tremendous victory' we wouldn't expect anything less than more obfuscation. But Mueller will be subpoenaed and it will all come out eventually. “Rosenstein and I have concluded.” Barr’s letter mixes two different authors. On questions of conspiracy and coordination, Barr summarizes Mueller’s findings. But on the question of whether Trump obstructed justice, Barr draws his own conclusion: “Deputy Attorney General Rod 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.” That’s Barr’s opinion, not Mueller’s. As the letter concedes, Mueller “did not draw a conclusion one way or the other as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction.” That’s for the rest of us to decide. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/03/mueller-report-barr-summary-obstruction-conspiracy-close-reading.html |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by WebsterMark on 03/25/19 at 05:20:25 I wouldn’t want Aussie to get his panties bunched down under (see what I did there...) so I’ll put this under what is apparently the only official Russian Conspiracy Hoax thread allowed WSJ Attorney General William Barr has reported to Congress that special counsel Robert Mueller has cleared President Trump and his campaign team of claims of conspiring with Russia during the 2016 election. This is more than an exoneration. It’s a searing indictment of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as well as a reminder of the need to know the story behind the bureau’s corrosive investigation. Mr. Mueller’s report likely doesn’t put it that way, but it’s the logical conclusion of his no-collusion finding. The FBI unleashed its powers on a candidate for the office of the U.S. presidency, an astonishing first. It did so on the incredible grounds that the campaign had conspired to aid a foreign government. And it used the most aggressive tools in its arsenal—surveillance of U.S. citizens, secret subpoenas of phone records and documents, even human informants. The wreckage is everywhere. The nation has been engulfed in conspiracy theories for years. A presidency was hemmed in by the threat of a special counsel. Citizens have gone to jail not for conspiracy, but for after-the-fact interactions with Mr. Mueller’s team. Dozens more have spent enormous amounts of money and time defending their reputations. None of this should ever have happened absent highly compelling evidence—from the start—of wrongdoing. Yet from what we know, the FBI operated on the basis of an overheard conversation of third-tier campaign aide George Papadopoulos, as well as a wild “dossier” financed by the rival presidential campaign. Mr. Mueller’s no-collusion finding amounts to a judgment that there never was any evidence. The Papadopoulos claim was thin, the dossier a fabrication. Which is all the more reason Americans now deserve a full accounting of the missteps of former FBI Director James Comey and his team—in part so that this never happens again. That includes the following: What “evidence” did the FBI have in totality? What efforts did the bureau take to verify it? Did it corroborate anything before launching its probe? What role did political players play? How aware was the FBI that it was being gulled into a dirty-trick operation, and if so, how did it justify proceeding? How intrusive were the FBI methods? And who was harmed? If Mr. Mueller has done his job properly, his report will address some of this. His team would have had to look into the sources of the allegations as part of determining the documents’ (lack of) veracity. A Mueller report that doesn’t mention the dossier and its political provenance, or questionable news stories used to justify surveillance warrants, for instance, is a report that is playing politics. The fuller accounting will come only through total disclosure of FBI and Justice Department probe documents. Mr. Trump promised that disclosure in September but has yet to follow through. That transparency is now a necessity. The Mueller report is only half the story. With the special-counsel probe at an end, it’s time to go back the beginning—to the documents that explain its origin. Only then will Americans have the full story of the Russia-collusion narrative. |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by oldNslow on 03/25/19 at 06:24:41 Quote:
No, from a legal standpoint it's up to the AG to decide. And it looks to me like he's already done that. "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.” The "rest of us" can decide to believe whatever we want, but it isn't going to make any difference. Mueller's equivocation on the question of obstruction simply means that the democrats and their allies in the media are going to waste the next two years ( and a whole sh*tload of money) spinning their wheels in endless investigations and other theatrics instead of focusing on their only real hope of getting rid of Trump. Finding a candidate that can defeat him in 2020. If that guy - or gal- exists, I'm pretty sue he or she isn't in the gaggle of hopefuls right now. The whole point of this sorry exercise was to overturn the 2016 election. Didn't work. The wailing and gnashing of teeth will go on for a while but from this point on it's just going to be noise. |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by Eegore on 03/25/19 at 07:05:11 If you are going to quote Strassels' opinion article isn't it best-practice to reference it? https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/kimberley-strassel-muellers-investigation-is-done-now-dig-into-the-real-scandal-missteps-of-comey-fbi |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by WebsterMark on 03/25/19 at 07:16:11 people don't always open links. whats the big deal? |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by Eegore on 03/25/19 at 07:20:53 It infers you created those paragraphs through personal analysis and that they don't only represent your opinion, but are your original thoughts. Posting the material and providing the link at the end will mitigate any concerns that people will not always click on or review the material. It's not a big deal, but it is more appropriate, and respectful than not doing it. |
|
Title: Re: The Mueller report Post by WebsterMark on 03/25/19 at 08:17:02 not at all. i put wsj at the top. if i remember to do it and if im on my laptop instead of ipad, i put articles in italics. if i had written that, i would have said so. back to the point, will the full report show details that will lead investigators to look into who began spying on a US citizen running for office based on evidence created by his opposition? if tje fbi jad concerns russian agents were infiltrating his campaign, why not contact him and jointly work to expose them? my working theory is obama agreed to this as payback for hillary taking the fall for benghazi. nothing could be fabricated easily and with enough believability to make it worth the risk so they let the election play out figuring they wouldn't need the russian/trump story to guarantee hillary's victory and fulfill obama's pledge to her for giving him the cover for benghazi. comey never believed in a million years trump would win so he was free to announce the results of his investigation on hillary over the email scandal and not be concerned the findings would would change what everyone considered a guaranteed victory by hillary. so he called hillary stupid for the server fiasco but famously said no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case. then trump won. after they cleaned the $hit out of their panties, they went full bore on the phoney collusion story trying to salvage what they could, trying for a hail mary pass, looking for a supreme court review and new election. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |