Cont: Mueller Investigation pt3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

"“Lisa Page Testimony- NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION BEFORE MUELLER APPOINTMENT.”
@FoxNews
by Catherine Herridge. Therefore, the case should never have been allowed to be brought. It is a totally illegal Witch Hunt!"

"Immediately after Comey’s firing Peter Strzok texted to his lover, Lisa Page “We need to Open the case we’ve been waiting on now while Andy (McCabe, also fired) is acting. Page answered, “We need to lock in (redacted). In a formal chargeable way. Soon.” Wow, a conspiracy caught?"
Click to expand...

Yeah I know - imagine prosecutors and investigators talking about charging or arresting someone! TOTALLY unacceptable!
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

"“Lisa Page Testimony- NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION BEFORE MUELLER APPOINTMENT.”
@FoxNews
by Catherine Herridge. Therefore, the case should never have been allowed to be brought. It is a totally illegal Witch Hunt!"

"Immediately after Comey’s firing Peter Strzok texted to his lover, Lisa Page “We need to Open the case we’ve been waiting on now while Andy (McCabe, also fired) is acting. Page answered, “We need to lock in (redacted). In a formal chargeable way. Soon.” Wow, a conspiracy caught?"
Click to expand...

Is it reasonable to expect Trump to be able to quote that text? Is it public info that he is expected to have?
 
Unsurprisingly, Page didn't say there was no evidence. What she said was that there was no proof.

I can't find a link to any transcript, and the few right-wing sites which are reporting on this have different wordings as allegedly the same quote. Each quote, however, is a variation on her saying that at the time Mueller was appointed they couldn't conclude that Trump was directly personally connected to interference in the election.

Which isn't a bombshell, really. If they could, then there would be no need for an investigation, would there? That's what an investigation is for.
 
Darat said:
Yeah I know - imagine prosecutors and investigators talking about charging or arresting someone! TOTALLY unacceptable!
Click to expand...

That was my sentiment from the first time I heard about this controversy. Especially the name-calling and what not. Would we expect Elliott Ness to use super-polite language when discussing the gangsters on whom he's collecting charges? Did Rudy Giuliani refer to the mobsters in New York as ladies and gentlemen in all of his correspondence?
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Unsurprisingly, Page didn't say there was no evidence. What she said was that there was no proof.

I can't find a link to any transcript, and the few right-wing sites which are reporting on this have different wordings as allegedly the same quote. Each quote, however, is a variation on her saying that at the time Mueller was appointed they couldn't conclude that Trump was directly personally connected to interference in the election.

Which isn't a bombshell, really. If they could, then there would be no need for an investigation, would there? That's what an investigation is for.
Click to expand...
As you said, there might not have been proof. What they saw had to lead them to think there was a little smoke that could lead to a fire though. I can't think of any other reason to keep going with the investigation.
 
carlitos said:
That was my sentiment from the first time I heard about this controversy. Especially the name-calling and what not. Would we expect Elliott Ness to use super-polite language when discussing the gangsters on whom he's collecting charges? Did Rudy Giuliani refer to the mobsters in New York as ladies and gentlemen in all of his correspondence?
Click to expand...

My take also.
 
CapelDodger said:
As I recall it refers to Russian interference and any related matters that the investigation turns up. The latter part brings Trump's campaign into the picture.
Click to expand...

Its even more specific than that


OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
WASHINGTON DC 20530


ORDER NO. 3915-2017
APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL
TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE
2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS​


By virtue of the authority vested in me as Acting Attorney General, including 28 U.S.C.§§ 509, 510, and 515, in order to discharge my responsibility to provide supervision and management of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, I hereby order as follows:

(a) Robert S. Mueller III is appointed to serve as Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice.

(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:

(i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and

(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and

(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a)​

You can read the full document here....

https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Let's assume for the sake of argument that Mueller completes his investigation and issues a report. What do you think will happen?
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that Mueller and pals would love to find something to go after Trump for. One would assume they have been doing their best to do so for quite some time now. I don't think any previous president has gone through such a thorough "probe" or review. Unprecedented? I suspect Mueller would love obstruction of justice, but Trump would never be convicted of that in any court. Could he be charged with it? For what exactly?

I've seen many toss out theories about money laundering without any proof also. Do you suspect Trump of election rigging? Based on? Just curious what yourself and others may think Trump could possibly end up charged with. "collusion"?

Does anyone think these documents might change things or did anyone notice this?

I have some suspicions that exposing the roots may be interesting.
 
River said:
Does anyone think these documents might change things or did anyone notice this?
Click to expand...
Trump is releasing cherry-picked, self-serving text that has already been deemed as too sensitive for release by his own government, involving an investigation into Trump. It's an egregious, bare naked abuse of government power, all hail the Banana Republican.
 
varwoche said:
Trump is releasing cherry-picked, self-serving text that has already been deemed as too sensitive for release by his own government, involving an investigation into Trump. It's an egregious, bare naked abuse of government power, all hail the Banana Republican.
Click to expand...
He thinks that it will distract the media/people enough to reduce the pushback on Kavanaugh.
 
River said:
I have no doubt that Mueller and pals would love to find something to go after Trump for. One would assume they have been doing their best to do so for quite some time now. I don't think any previous president has gone through such a thorough "probe" or review.
Click to expand...
That's probably because other president's have not engaged in the sort of unethical behavior Trump and his cohorts have been involved in.

After all, the average person didn't get the type of police attention Al Capone did either... but then the average person wasn't a mob boss. It does happen where people's activities get investigated because they are actually dirty.

Unprecedented? I suspect Mueller would love obstruction of justice, but Trump would never be convicted of that in any court.
Click to expand...
Why? Does Trump have some sort of magic "get out of jail free" card?

Now granted, as president he'd have to go through impeachment (or wait until his term ends) to be tried n court. But that doesn't mean that a jury would find him innocent.

Could he be charged with it? For what exactly?
Click to expand...
Firing comey. Duh!

Comey was investigating Russian interference in the election. Trump said "stop that". Comey said "no". Trump fired Comey. That is obstruction.

I've seen many toss out theories about money laundering without any proof also.
Click to expand...
While we (as private citizens) do not have hard 'proof' (or, a better word would be evidence) of money laundering, we wouldn't necessarily be privy to the details of the investigation. (I suspect Mueller may have more information.)

However, what we do have is:
- Admission by Trump's family that they get all the money they need from Russian sources
- Periods of time when "king of debt" Trump (as he called himself) made large purchases in Cash
- The use of murky accounting practices (such as the creation of multiple shell companies for even simple purchases)
- Close personal ties with individuals (such as Cohen) who HAVE been found to have engaged in shady financial dealings

So while we don't have hard proof, we do have plenty of circumstantial evidence. Plenty of red flags. Now, if Trump would (for example) release his tax returns we could get a better idea about whether he is engaging in money laundering or not. But, he has kept them hidden (and lied about the reason why). That should be another red flag.

Then of course we have all the other shady Trump dealings... Trump U., the failure to use a blind trust and violation of the emoluments clause, the Trump foundation. If someone is going to engage in those types of dealings, then I'm sure they'd have no qualms about money laundering.
Do you suspect Trump of election rigging? Based on?
Click to expand...
Well for one a meeting with Russian operatives during the campaign (the existence of which was lied about).
Just curious what yourself and others may think Trump could possibly end up charged with. "collusion"?
Click to expand...
A yes, the whole "collusion" argument.

No, "collusion" may not be listed in the criminal code. But I believe conspiracy is, which is what Trump might be charged with.
Does anyone think these documents might change things or did anyone notice this?
Click to expand...
Likely not.

Yes, Trump is declassifying a bunch of stuff. Basically its a hail mary, an attempt to discredit the people investigating his many potential crimes.
I have some suspicions that exposing the roots may be interesting.
Click to expand...
Not to anyone who's not a fan of racism Trump. Most people here are skeptics, meaning they can recognize the type of bunk that Trump is trying to toss around.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom