Mueller Investigation pt4

[The Big Dog]

"You really do have trouble with English comprehension don't you?"

Oh yeah, mmmm-mmmm, that is the stuff!

Not making claims, making hypothesis! Might not be a mistake, might not be a lie, might might might maybe...

Anyone who believes that Matt Whittaker said pre-AG the Mueller investigation was legitimate is out of their confounded minds, yet that is was thorough thorough thorough Seth claimed.

"Of course, I am being generous by assuming that you actually understand what he has said. "

Oh that right there is the good stuff, folks!

/can a brother get a laughing dog??? Fantastic

 

[Belz...]

Checks in. Hey look at those posts telling me that they already corrected me.

Checks in, sees that TBD is still acting as if he's the lead character in a very important choose-your-own-adventure story.

You really do have trouble with English comprehension don't you?

Right? Right?

 

[Faydra]

My apologies if this has been asked and answered, I don't have the time to search through 93 pages of this thread.

I keep hearing the pundits say it's risky to pardon Stone because then he can't take the fifth - he must answer.

Not sure why this is a risk, all he has to do is lie. Again. Only risk is perjury, he does a few years and he's out working for Infowars. Or Trump just pardons him again.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

In a new filing in the Internet Research Agency case, Mueller's team says they've found evidence discovery documents were forged as part of a "disinformation campaign aimed (apparently) at discrediting ongoing investigations into Russian interference in the US political system."​

Weird that Russia is attempting to discredit the Mueller investigation. It's almost like they're guilty or something.

For those that want the English translation:

The Guardian: Russians leaked Mueller investigation evidence online, prosecutors say

FBI investigators had found no evidence that government servers holding the data had been hacked, according to Mueller’s team, pointing instead to a leak on the Russian side.

So documents Mueller's team shared with Russian attorneys representing

Mueller disclosed the leak in a filing as part of his prosecution of Concord Management and Consulting, a Russian company that allegedly funded hacking operations by Russia’s notorious Internet Research Agency (IRA).

The files weren't damaging to the Mueller investigation but the site they were leaked on tried to make it look like that's all Mueller had which wasn't true.

It said: “The person who created the webpage used their knowledge of the non-sensitive discovery to make it appear as though the irrelevant files contained on the webpage were the sum total evidence of ‘IRA and Russian collusion’ gathered by law enforcement in this matter in an apparent effort to discredit the investigation.”

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

My apologies if this has been asked and answered, I don't have the time to search through 93 pages of this thread.

I keep hearing the pundits say it's risky to pardon Stone because then he can't take the fifth - he must answer.

Not sure why this is a risk, all he has to do is lie. Again. Only risk is perjury, he does a few years and he's out working for Infowars. Or Trump just pardons him again.

I agree. But I quit arguing with people on the thread who insist pleading the 5th has all these consequences to Trump.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I still think Stone is going to (at least try to) stall until the Mueller report is released.

Until then there's no way of knowing which way the wind will blow, rather to jump ship or go down with it.

Ironically Trump's, until now very effective, tactic of "Have so many crises going at once that your enemies can't focus on any one of them so you oddly kind of stay safe" might be coming back to bite him in the ass because it works both ways. The people keep his ass covered have to deal with the same problem, which crises do you cover his ass concerning?

Purely cynical if I'm Stone I wait. If the Mueller probe takes Trump down (or it becomes inevitable that it will) I jump ship and start getting really, really stupid and forgetful about everything Trump told me to do hoping to just survive while everybody is focused on Trump. If the Mueller probe goes the other way I hide behind the President while keeping him safe, something that Stone is supposedly good at.

That's actually prediction for all the Trump underlings. If/When it becomes clear that Trump is going they'll start going low, hoping taking out Trump will be enough to make them slip under the radar.

 

[portlandatheist]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/30/mueller-evidence-leaked-online-russians
"Russians leaked Mueller investigation evidence online, prosecutors say "
This article is horribly written.

Mueller’s court filing on Wednesday said the names and structure of folders containing the leaked files matched those used by Mueller’s office when it shared the data, and that these had not been made public.

...

FBI investigators had found no evidence that government servers holding the data had been hacked, according to Mueller’s team, pointing instead to a leak on the Russian side

It said: “The person who created the webpage used their knowledge of the non-sensitive discovery to make it appear as though the irrelevant files contained on the webpage were the sum total evidence of ‘IRA and Russian collusion’ gathered by law enforcement in this matter in an apparent effort to discredit the investigation.

I'm confused. What exactly was hacked? It seems like just one small aspect of the investigation may have been compromised and this is much ado about nothing

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/30/mueller-evidence-leaked-online-russians
"Russians leaked Mueller investigation evidence online, prosecutors say "
This article is horribly written.

I'm confused. What exactly was hacked? It seems like just one small aspect of the investigation may have been compromised and this is much ado about nothing

Nothing was hacked. I posted this earlier. Post #3684 above.

Essentially when the Russian company was charged, Mueller turned over discovery items to their attorneys which ended up on a web page that tried to insinuate it was all Mueller had. That was in attempt to discredit the investigation. It wasn't all Mueller had and the leaked documents weren't particularly sensitive.

 

[Dr. Keith]

That's actually prediction for all the Trump underlings. If/When it becomes clear that Trump is going they'll start going low, hoping taking out Trump will be enough to make them slip under the radar.

I know you are talking more about the criminal sense than the political power sense, but I think your comment speaks to why Pelosi's win on the shutdown was so important. If Trump can't get things done then why stick by him?

 

[portlandatheist]

Nothing was hacked. I posted this earlier. Post #3684 above.

Essentially when the Russian company was charged, Mueller turned over discovery items to their attorneys which ended up on a web page that tried to insinuate it was all Mueller had. That was in attempt to discredit the investigation. It wasn't all Mueller had and the leaked documents weren't particularly sensitive.

Opps, sorry for the duplication and thanks for the explanation. The article could have been much more clear.

 

[smartcooky]

Oh yeah, mmmm-mmmm, that is the stuff!

Not making claims, making hypothesis! Might not be a mistake, might not be a lie, might might might maybe...

Anyone who believes that Matt Whittaker said pre-AG the Mueller investigation was legitimate is out of their confounded minds, yet that is was thorough thorough thorough Seth claimed.

Or made a simple typing error - Dear Leader does that with more than half of his tweets, many of which are bona-fide, verifiable, outright, bare-faced, pants-on-fire lies!

Oh that right there is the good stuff, folks!

 

[Norman Alexander]

I still think Stone is going to (at least try to) stall until the Mueller report is released.

Until then there's no way of knowing which way the wind will blow, rather to jump ship or go down with it.

Ironically Trump's, until now very effective, tactic of "Have so many crises going at once that your enemies can't focus on any one of them so you oddly kind of stay safe" might be coming back to bite him in the ass because it works both ways. The people keep his ass covered have to deal with the same problem, which crises do you cover his ass concerning?

Purely cynical if I'm Stone I wait. If the Mueller probe takes Trump down (or it becomes inevitable that it will) I jump ship and start getting really, really stupid and forgetful about everything Trump told me to do hoping to just survive while everybody is focused on Trump. If the Mueller probe goes the other way I hide behind the President while keeping him safe, something that Stone is supposedly good at.

That's actually prediction for all the Trump underlings. If/When it becomes clear that Trump is going they'll start going low, hoping taking out Trump will be enough to make them slip under the radar.

Stone is as lovable and moral and cunning as a ****-house rat. He will try every trick in the book, legal and illegal, to save his own skin. And if that means squealing on Donny then he will do it. Loud and clear.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

If Stone has any self-awareness, he knows he can't go to trial: any jury would convict him.
So I do think he will flip if presented with evidence that Trump is done either way.
Of course, Mueller might not be interested in letting Stone off lightly.

 

[Norman Alexander]

If Stone has any self-awareness, he knows he can't go to trial: any jury would convict him. Stone is not a numbty. So I'm sure is VERY aware of this.

So I do think he will flip if presented with evidence that Trump is done either way. In a trice.

Of course, Mueller might not be interested in letting Stone off lightly. If Stone has even jay-walked, Mueller will hand him over with a nice thick rap-sheet...after Donny is gone and can't pardon him.

Inserts.

 

[Craig B]

Really? Do you test the weight carrying ability of every chair you sit down in before doing so, or do you believe that the manufacturer did their job satisfactorily and that the chair will hold your weight without collapsing?

Do you test all the food your eat, or do you take it on faith that the company followed FDA procedures and that the food is safe to consume?

Shall I continue?

To be fair, that's evidence really, and not faith. If the chair was bought, or the food was bought in a regulated outlet, the probability is that these commodities fulfilled the safety criteria laid down by the authorities. One can reasonably assume that, so the very existence of the thing in the marketplace is evidence of its fitness. That is why deregulation is so bad an idea. It removes such evidence and compels the purchaser to undertake the tests you refer to.

 

[portlandatheist]

Nothing was hacked. I posted this earlier. Post #3684 above.

Essentially when the Russian company was charged, Mueller turned over discovery items to their attorneys which ended up on a web page that tried to insinuate it was all Mueller had. That was in attempt to discredit the investigation. It wasn't all Mueller had and the leaked documents weren't particularly sensitive.

Watching Rachel Maddow tonight, I have a more clear picture of what is going on:
We indicted Concord Management
Concord Management as a defendant hired an attorney to represent them which gave them discovery and then that discovery provided by the Mueller team was leaked online.
Basically, they abused discovery and have no intention on protecting their defendants in trial and the data "breach" is just limited to what the Mueller team knew would probably be compromised anyway.

 

[Aridas]

Watching Rachel Maddow tonight, I have a more clear picture of what is going on:
We indicted Concord Management
Concord Management as a defendant hired an attorney to represent them which gave them discovery and then that discovery provided by the Mueller team was leaked online.
Basically, they abused discovery and have no intention on protecting their defendants in trial and the data "breach" is just limited to what the Mueller team knew would probably be compromised anyway.

It may be worth adding that pretty much everyone who was paying any attention at all saw shenanigans looming the moment Concorde Management began their "defense" maneuvers. Except maybe for those like The Big Dog, though whether TBD didn't see it coming or TBD hates America is up in the air.

Oh, and the discovery wasn't just leaked. A major part of the story is that it was altered, then released. Hard to say what was edited without the originals available, though. Things to discredit the investigation in short, though, supposedly.

 

[PhantomWolf]

To be fair, that's evidence really, and not faith. If the chair was bought, or the food was bought in a regulated outlet, the probability is that these commodities fulfilled the safety criteria laid down by the authorities. One can reasonably assume that, so the very existence of the thing in the marketplace is evidence of its fitness. That is why deregulation is so bad an idea. It removes such evidence and compels the purchaser to undertake the tests you refer to.

What you are calling evidence is really just a bunch of claims. The Manufacturer claims that its chair is suitable for sale, it doesn't provide proof of that claim. The Food processor claims that it obeys FDA regulations, and the FDA claims that it checked to make sure, but there is no actual evidence given to the consumer beyond those claims. While the probability that those claims are true is high, it doesn't make them evidence for the claims to be true.

Bob says that he doesn't believe any claims without actual evidence, so....

 

[BobTheCoward]

Nothing was hacked. I posted this earlier. Post #3684 above.

Essentially when the Russian company was charged, Mueller turned over discovery items to their attorneys which ended up on a web page that tried to insinuate it was all Mueller had. That was in attempt to discredit the investigation. It wasn't all Mueller had and the leaked documents weren't particularly sensitive.

The defendant (the company) is claiming they were hacked, right?

 

[Paul2]

What you are calling evidence is really just a bunch of claims. The Manufacturer claims that its chair is suitable for sale, it doesn't provide proof of that claim. The Food processor claims that it obeys FDA regulations, and the FDA claims that it checked to make sure, but there is no actual evidence given to the consumer beyond those claims. While the probability that those claims are true is high, it doesn't make them evidence for the claims to be true.

Bob says that he doesn't believe any claims without actual evidence, so....

It's called background knowledge, or priors, from Bayes' theorem. We use background knowledge, not faith, to understand that it's likely that the chair we're about to sit on will support our weight.