Mueller Investigation pt5

Status
Not open for further replies.
In a no-nutshell

7Bs2fip.jpg
 
Skeptic Tank said:
Didn't that just end up being some stupid click generating, pot-stirring outfit that did stuff on both sides?
Click to expand...


Indeed. Relatively unprofessional stuff-that-everyone-in-internet-marketing-does without direct relation to the Trump campaign and a tiny budget compared to what Cambridge Analytica and associated firms did with targeted facebook ads for Trump. But those are British/"Western" Spinmeisters and therefore no need to talk about.
 
crescent said:
So there is something I am still not clear on.

The report does not recommend any indictments. I can see that having two possible meanings:

1: The report may conclude that the President didn't do anything indictable.

or

2: The report may conclude that the President committed crimes, but the FBI/Meuller may feel that it is not possible to indict a sitting president.
Click to expand...
Maybe. But there is also something I'll call the "reasonable prosecutor" standard: No reasonable prosecutor would bring charges in such a case (whatever it is). Comey IMO hurt himself (and probably the country) by wanting it both ways: He wanted to signal disapproval of Hillary Clinton's actions, yet still be able to justify the fact that he did not pursue charges. I doubt Mueller is going to tip his hand by calling any press conferences to explain his findings. Whatever he has to say is in the report. It's out of his hands. He'll leave it up to others to release, leak, spin, hold congressional hearings etc.

I don't know the technicalities of what it would take to support solid criminal prosecutions against Donald Jr., Kushner or Trump himself. I'm pretty sure Mueller does. If he thinks he couldn't get an indictment, let alone a conviction, he's probably right. Exonerating Trump was never in the cards.

ETA: Because that's not what prosecutors do.
 
Last edited:
Bogative said:
It's a damn shame The Atlantic didn't make Mueller aware of this evidence of criminal collusion before he ended his investigation. Then he surely would've issued indictments.

Or, maybe, Putin has some dirt on Mueller and blackmailed him into not indicting Trump. Does anyone know if Mueller has ever visited Moscow, maybe there's some secret pee-pee tapes?
Click to expand...

from the article (if you read it)
But many wrongs are not crimes. And many things that are crimes are not prosecutable for one reason or another—for instance, when a statute of limitations expires.
Click to expand...

The Atlantic didn't uncover anything, it states facts that are already public knowledge but you knew that already. We all know who individual one, the unindicted co-conspirator, and and it is a shame that there has not been the political will to hold him responsible for his actions.
 
portlandatheist said:
The Atlantic didn't uncover anything, it states facts that are already public knowledge but you knew that already. We all know who individual one, the unindicted co-conspirator, and and it is a shame that there has not been the political will to hold him responsible for his actions.
Click to expand...


LOLWUT? The first "fact" in your quotation of that article is already complete nonsense:

The Atlantic said:
It’s not a theory but a matter of historical record that Vladimir Putin’s Russia hacked American emails and used them to help elect Trump to the presidency.
Click to expand...


It's what cultists believe, while reality-based critically thinking individuals know how far this is from a "fact".
 
The background to the decision to investigate is intel that U.S. agencies have long had -- and we of course don't know everything they know or have heard -- regarding the Russian government and Vladimir Putin. I was not aware until I read the latest issue of The New Yorker, Russia apparently left some fingerprints on Britain's Leave movement. The Arron Banks referred to in the quote below was an early supporter of Leave and provided funding for a lot of the grassroots movements.
Banks’s 2016 memoir, “The Bad Boys of Brexit,” acknowledges that before the referendum campaign he met with Russian officials, including Alexander Yakovenko, the Russian Ambassador to London. Subsequent reporting has uncovered several other previously undisclosed meetings and contacts between Banks and Russian businessmen, during which opportunities with Russian firms in the mineral sector were discussed. Link
Click to expand...

Banks also has Trump/Russia ties:
Banks, Wigmore, and Farage came to public attention in the U.S. shortly after the 2016 elections, when they were photographed with President-elect Donald Trump outside his apartment in Trump Tower. A few days later, in London, Banks and Wigmore again met with the Russian Ambassador, recounting their meeting with Trump and passing on contact details for members of Trump’s transition team.
Click to expand...

What's Russia/Putin's interest in all this? Apparently various Western intelligence agencies believe:
According to Andrew Weiss, a Russia expert at the Carnegie Endowment, Russian officials believed that the West had been pursuing a “regime-change agenda” around the world, particularly in Ukraine in 2014, and worried that Putin’s regime might be targeted next. “Russia felt they needed to push back hard,” Weiss told me. “They wanted to promote cleavages in the West, and that’s where their promotion of populist and nationalist groups and—I think—their support of Brexit fits in.”
Click to expand...

I was not aware of most of this but U.S. (and British) intelligence officials certainly are -and probably know a whole lot more they do not want revealed for tactical reasons.
 
Childlike Empress said:
The Mueller Report Is In. They Were Wrong. We Were Right.

No worries. :D
Click to expand...

Wipe that silly grin off your green face. You have nothing to be excited about.

Nothing has changed.

We knew all along that Mueller would eventually stop indicting people and hand in a report. We knew all along Mueller would not recommend a DOJ indictment of the president.

What we don't know (yet) is whether the imagined exoneration of Trump amounts to nothing more than a declination to prosecute.

Breakdowns of all prosecutions and all declinations to prosecute should be included in the report, and should be made available to congress, and then to the public. We will know nothing more than we knew last week until that either happens or does not happen. Either way, we will then know something we didn't know last week.

I may take the time to let you know what we know when we know it, since you are continually disinformed by your pithy "sources". OTOH, I am aware of the futility of such a gesture, so I may not bother to ever say anything to you ever again.
 
dejudge said:
This is fascinating, are we to believe the so-called "13 Angry Democrats" started a "Witch Hunt" to clear Trump of Collusion but caused Manafort, Cohen, Flynn, Papadopoulus, Gates and Stone to be jailed, plead guilty or indicted?





Based on what I have heard so far, I think the Mueller report is likely to be extremely damaging to Trump. In effect, Trump's re-election bid may become hopeless and the Republicans may have to nominate another Presidential candidate.
Click to expand...
The report looks to be like what I was expecting. Trump is not bright enough for any grand conspiracies. He was Putin's useful idiot.
 
Now that Mueller has completed his work without charging Trump with obstruction of justice, will Trump now feel that it's safe to pardon Manafort?
 
Last edited:
TellyKNeasuss said:
Now that Mueller has completed his work without charging Trump with obstruction of justice, will Trump now feel that it's safe to pardon Manafort?
Click to expand...

Mueller was never going to charge a sitting president with anything. Both the FBI and the DOJ have repeatedly made that clear. Dealing with a criminal president is congress' responsibility, and forcing congress to live up to it's responsibility is the electorate's responsibility.

He won't pardon Manafort. He doesn't need Manafort to keep quiet any more. Under the bus he goes. Remember, Trump hates people who get captured.

He'd take a political hit if he pardoned Manafort, plus New York has filed 16 pardon-proof indictments against Manafort,
 
Last edited:
I'm waiting to see what happens when Mueller testifies before the House of Reps. They will subpoena him and he will answer honestly any questions put to him. I just hope they ask the right questions.
 
a_unique_person said:
The report looks to be like what I was expecting. Trump is not bright enough for any grand conspiracies. He was Putin's useful idiot.
Click to expand...

I think the Mueller report will confirm Mitt Romney' s claim that Trump is a Con man, fake, phony and fraud. Trump is not an idiot or mad but probably the world's greatest fraud.
 
Toontown said:
He'd take a political hit if he pardoned Manafort, plus the SDNY has filed 6 pardon-proof indictments against Manafort,
Click to expand...


Just a trifling technicality.

SDNY is an office of the FBI, so if they have made new charges, they would be pardonable because they are still federal indictments.

However, there have been 16 charges made by the Manhattan DA, and those are pardon-proof NY State charges.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
Now that Mueller has completed his work without charging Trump with obstruction of justice, will Trump now feel that it's safe to pardon Manafort?
Click to expand...

Remember that Trump could still face charges related to his businesses in New York on his departure from the presidency, whenever that might be. Manafort could still be a witness for the Manhattan DA.

Also, its worth pointing out that while the DoJ has a policy of not indicting POTUS, State prosecutors do not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom