• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Mueller Investigation pt5

Status
Not open for further replies.
eeyore1954 said:
I am going to go out on a limb about the release of the report.
Those who like Trump will claim it exonerates him. Those who don’t like Trump will say it shows he is guilty of both collusion and obstruction but Barr redacted the most damming parts that proved his guilt beyond doubt.
Click to expand...

I am going to go out on a limb and say if this part happens someone is going to blow the whistle on it, but people here won't believe this would happen.
 
Childlike Empress said:
I'm almost a bit afraid of asking, @newyorkguy, but what are those most basic values and ideals Russia is hostile to?
Click to expand...
I'll take a wild stab at it... free and fair elections, multi-party democracy, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, respect for international borders. That sort of stuff.
 
eeyore1954 said:
I am going to go out on a limb about the release of the report.
Those who like Trump will claim it exonerates him. Those who don’t like Trump will say it shows he is guilty of both collusion and obstruction but Barr redacted the most damming parts that proved his guilt beyond doubt.
Click to expand...

You are not out on a limb. This is the most likely scenario.
 
Childlike Empress, you linked a "Corbett Report" Youtube video. This is a source? The guy RationalWiki (mainstream news seems to ignore him) describes as-
James Corbett claims to detail scandalous corruption, injustices, and expose conspiracies, psy-ops, black-ops, and the covert "deep-state secret", "ghost politics", globalist control, and domination agendas of the New World Order advocating a "revolution of the mind" to counter-cultural brainwashing dogmas to ultimately foil all centralized govern...
Click to expand...

Okay, that's enough of that. If you ever decide to discuss this seriously, please give me a yell. ;)
 
newyorkguy said:
Childlike Empress, you linked a "Corbett Report" Youtube video. This is a source? The guy RationalWiki (mainstream news seems to ignore him) describes as-

......

Okay, that's enough of that. If you ever decide to discuss this seriously, please give me a yell. ;)
Click to expand...

Very fine people on both sides of the discussion. :)
 
Venom said:
I am going to go out on a limb and say if this part happens someone is going to blow the whistle on it, but people here won't believe this would happen.
Click to expand...
People where? This forum? No whistle need be blown, there are by now multiple copies of a report that all kinds of people have seen.

Maybe Mueller said obstruction had not been proven - but will be if the Trump administration tries to withhold key findings from congressional investigators :D
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
Last time: the answer is they can ask someone else that has possession of the report.
Click to expand...

That's not an answer to that question. It's an answer to a completely different question, which is: "How can they get the report if not through those people?", which I didn't aks.

Your hypothetical is unrealistic.
Click to expand...

Again: it's not unrealistic given the people we are discussing. Stop nay-saying me reflexively.

But if we ignore that, what you are really asking is what happens if there is a Constitutional Crisis.
Click to expand...

See how easy that was? Why not say that right off the bat?
 
Ziggurat said:
That was a joke. And obviously so.
Click to expand...

We're hearing this more and more as an excuse for Trump's association with illegal actions. Sanders is currently floating the "it was a joke!" excuse for how Trump could promote Wikileaks incessantly during the campaign and yet now Trump knows nothing about Wikileaks.

She's not saying that Trump is joking now about knowing nothing about Wikileaks. She's saying he was joking during the campaign about loving Wikileaks over and over and he genuinely knows nothing about the organization now.

To be fair, though, it is at least a laughable excuse.
 
Maybe when you're President of the United States, you shouldn't make silly jokes all the time. Especially when you use said joking MO as a universal get-out-of-jail-free-card to excuse all the times you say something you genuenly shouldn't.
 
Upchurch said:
We're hearing this more and more as an excuse for Trump's association with illegal actions. Sanders is currently floating the "it was a joke!" excuse for how Trump could promote Wikileaks incessantly during the campaign and yet now Trump knows nothing about Wikileaks.

She's not saying that Trump is joking now about knowing nothing about Wikileaks. She's saying he was joking during the campaign about loving Wikileaks over and over and he genuinely knows nothing about the organization now.

To be fair, though, it is at least a laughable excuse.
Click to expand...

Famous line that appears in almost all court cases where a witness has changed their testimony...

"Were you lying then, or are you lying now, and how can we tell?"
 
Has Trump ever owned up to be "just joking" about these things?

I don't think he has, because he is sincere when he says them. It's his apologists that make up the "he's just joking" lie.
 
As posted up thread, the White House is worried about what former White House counsel Donald McGahn told the Mueller investigation during more than thirty hours of testimony. How much of McGahn's testimony will be quoted in the Mueller report released to the public. Particular concern involves the president's efforts to obstruct justice. McGahn spent many hours with Trump in discussions about things like firing James Comey and even firing Robert Mueller. The fear is that McGahn may have referred to incendiary comments Trump may have made. Below are quotes from a New York Times article published last August.

Even if the president did nothing wrong, Mr. Burck told White House lawyers, the White House has to understand that a client like Mr. Trump probably made politically damaging statements to Mr. McGahn as he weighed whether to intervene in the Russia investigation.

At the same time, Mr. Trump was blaming Mr. McGahn for his legal woes, yet encouraging him to speak to investigators. Mr. McGahn and his lawyer grew suspicious. They began telling associates that they had concluded that the president had decided to let Mr. McGahn take the fall for decisions that could be construed as obstruction of justice, like the Comey firing, by telling the special counsel that he was only following shoddy legal advice from Mr. McGahn. Worried that Mr. Trump would ultimately blame him in the inquiry, Mr. McGahn told people he was determined to avoid the fate of the White House counsel for President Richard M. Nixon, John W. Dean, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to obstruct justice in the Watergate scandal. Link
Click to expand...

As another sign of how unprepared and inept the Trump administration often is, no one in the administration attempted to "debrief" McGahn last year, following his testimony. To find out what exactly he had been asked, what he had told Mueller, in order to come up with strategies to defend against it.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Has Trump ever owned up to be "just joking" about these things?

I don't think he has, because he is sincere when he says them. It's his apologists that make up the "he's just joking" lie.
Click to expand...

He's personally claimed that he was joking about asking the Russians for Hillary's emails and about his claim that global warming was a Chinese hoax.

IMO, in both cases, he was simply trying to have it both ways. With the email thing, he really wanted the Russians to give him the emails but didn't want the blame for actually asking for them. With global warming, well:
I know much about climate change. I'd be — received environmental awards. And I often joke that this is done for the benefit of China. Obviously, I joke. But this is done for the benefit of China . . .
Click to expand...

You decide.



It's possible that the word "joke" means something entirely different to Donald Trump than it does to the rest of us. His use certainly doesn't seem to have anything to do with humor.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Has Trump ever owned up to be "just joking" about these things?...
Click to expand...

CNN reported on comments Trump made when he first "asked" the Russians to find Clinton's missing emails.
In his July 2016 news conference, NBC News' Katy Tur asked Trump whether it was a problem to ask a foreign country to interfere in the election and hack an opponent's emails. "I'd like to have them released," Trump said. "No, it gives me no pause ... if Russia or China or any other country has those emails, I mean, to be honest with you, I'd love to see them." Link
Click to expand...

That doesn't seem like joking. At other times, a link was posted here previously, he admitted to an interviewer he wasn't joking.
 
Trump Tweets

Mueller, and the A.G. based on Mueller findings (and great intelligence), have already ruled No Collusion, No Obstruction. These were crimes committed by Crooked Hillary, the DNC, Dirty Cops and others! INVESTIGATE THE INVESTIGATORS!
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

Mueller, and the A.G. based on Mueller findings (and great intelligence), have already ruled No Collusion, No Obstruction. These were crimes committed by Crooked Hillary, the DNC, Dirty Cops and others! INVESTIGATE THE INVESTIGATORS!
Click to expand...

Lol wut?

Mueller, an investigator, had great intelligence but also needs to be investigated?!

This man is a grade A moron.
 
plague311 said:
Lol wut?

Mueller, an investigator, had great intelligence but also needs to be investigated?!

This man is a grade A moron.
Click to expand...

Well, his sentence structure and grammar is. I think Trump means "based on Mueller's finding (and [the AG's] great intelligence)".

Why does the AG have great intelligence? Because he is saving Trump's backside, of course.
 
Upchurch said:
Well, his sentence structure and grammar is. I think Trump means "based on Mueller's finding (and [the AG's] great intelligence)".

Why does the AG have great intelligence? Because he is saving Trump's backside, of course.
Click to expand...

That makes more sense. For the life of me I couldn't parse that statement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom