• 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 pt 7

Lurch said:
Huh, indeed. How long did some woman get for illegally casting a single vote? Compare and contrast to an operative working at a very high level indeed to impact an election?
Click to expand...
Of course, Stone wasn't found guilty of working to subvert American democracy... he was found guilty of perjury (e.g. lying to congress) and witness tampering. You know, the type of crimes that we all do.
 
Stacyhs said:
Are you suggesting there's a link between the DOJ's declaration that Stone's sentencing is too extreme and the Trump tweet that had been posted just hours before? I'm SHOCKED! SHOCKED, I tell ya!
Click to expand...

Well... sounds like Barr just took over the sentencing. Nothing to be concerned about there, given Barr's history of shutting down Mueller Report related investigations and actively working to turn the DoJ into the DoSTI (Department of Serving Trump's Interests).
 
There's more.

In response to the change in sentencing recommendation all four prosecutors have resigned from the case, with Jonathan Kravis resigning his job entirely

Trump has personally withdrawn his recommendation for Jessie Liu to be Treasury undesecretary, seemingly based on the Stone recommendations, as she oversaw the case (as well as Flynn, Manafort, McCabe, etc.)

Barr is reported to have personally intervened in Stone's case (as well as Flynn's)

And Trump appears to be laying the groundwork to go after the judge: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1227408775855976449?s=20

Is this the Judge that put Paul Manafort in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT, something that not even mobster Al Capone had to endure? How did she treat Crooked Hillary Clinton? Just asking!
Click to expand...

Well, Susan Collins was right that impeachment taught him a lesson...
 
 
Aridas said:
Well... sounds like Barr just took over the sentencing. Nothing to be concerned about there, given Barr's history of shutting down Mueller Report related investigations and actively working to turn the DoJ into the DoSTI (Department of Serving Trump's Interests).
Click to expand...
Prediction: Barr is going to be disbarred for severe breach of ethics. This is a massive conflict of interest. He shouldn't have touched that issue with a 10-foot pole. It will be interesting if he pretends that he had nothing to do with that. Good luck with that, counselor.
 
Belz... said:
She's a ******* weakling.
Click to expand...

Why weakling? It's rather looking like her whole modus operandi is pretending to be moderate and actually concerned about things for the sake of gaining and keeping power, while actually being a partisan hack. Only voting with Democrats when it doesn't make a difference, in other words.
 
Last edited:
If Susan Collins is a weakling so is Nancy Pelosi. They've both had the same actual level of effect on anything Trump has done and the difference between Collin's 'Pretend I want to stop him even though I know in the end I don't" and Pelosi' "Pretend I can stop him even though I know in the end I can't" is meaningless on any practical level.

Someone once referred to Susan Collins as someone who always has to look at the menu for a half hour before always deciding to eat what Mitch McConnell is having. Nancy Pelosi is someone who looks at the menu, knows immediately what she wants, orders it, but realizes after the fact that Mitch McConnell already ordered for the whole table and she still has to eat it. But sometime she can sarcastically clap at him.

Mitch McConnell is still picking both women's meals in both metaphors. The only difference is how much they don't like it and Mitch McConnell don't care.
 
Last edited:
Minoosh said:
Prediction: Barr is going to be disbarred for severe breach of ethics. This is a massive conflict of interest. He shouldn't have touched that issue with a 10-foot pole. It will be interesting if he pretends that he had nothing to do with that. Good luck with that, counselor.
Click to expand...

Nixon's AG Mitchell actually wound up in prison. We can only hope.
 
JoeMorgue said:
If Susan Collins is a weakling so is Nancy Pelosi. They've both had the same actual level of effect on anything Trump has done and the difference between Collin's 'Pretend I want to stop him even though I know in the end I don't" and Pelosi' "Pretend I can stop him even though I know in the end I can't" is meaningless on any practical level.
Click to expand...

I guess the difference is one of them is only pretending to try.
 
Belz... said:
I guess the difference is one of them is only pretending to try.
Click to expand...

You're drowning in a rip-tide. Two lifeguards spot you. One starts sprinting toward you (In slow-mo while the theme song from Baywatch plays I'm assuming) but when he reaches the water's edge decides he'd rather let you drown. That's Susan Collins.

The other one starts to turn toward you, but when they reach the water's edge they remember they don't know how to swim and have to stand there and watch you drown. That's Nancy Pelosi.

You're drowning either way. And since a lifeguard's job is to save you from drowning the "I won't / I can't" distinction is academic.

If you won't stop Trump, you need to be voted out who will.. If you can't stop Trump you need to be voted out and replaced with someone who can.
 
JoeMorgue said:
If Susan Collins is a weakling so is Nancy Pelosi. They've both had the same actual level of effect on anything Trump has done and the difference between Collin's 'Pretend I want to stop him even though I know in the end I don't" and Pelosi' "Pretend I can stop him even though I know in the end I can't" is meaningless on any practical level.

Someone once referred to Susan Collins as someone who always has to look at the menu for a half hour before always deciding to eat what Mitch McConnell is having. Nancy Pelosi is someone who looks at the menu, knows immediately what she wants, orders it, but realizes after the fact that Mitch McConnell already ordered for the whole table and she still has to eat it. But sometime she can sarcastically clap at him.

Mitch McConnell is still picking both women's meals in both metaphors. The only difference is how much they don't like it and Mitch McConnell don't care.
Click to expand...

For the life of me I wish I could figure out what the hell this metaphor means. Pelosi did her job, which was represent her party's wishes in moving ahead with impeachment.

You've made it perfectly, and entirely clear that you were against impeachment because something, something, something Donald Trump gets re-elected. You've said it no where short of a thousand times, but not impeaching Trump for extremely impeachable behavior would be derelict. It would be asinine and it would be a failure. Collins failed in voting for removal, Pelosi didn't fail at moving forward with impeachment.
 
JoeMorgue said:
You're drowning in a rip-tide. Two lifeguards spot you. One starts sprinting toward you (In slow-mo while the theme song from Baywatch plays I'm assuming) but when he reaches the water's edge decides he'd rather let you drown. That's Susan Collins.

The other one starts to turn toward you, but when they reach the water's edge they remember they don't know how to swim and have to stand there and watch you drown. That's Nancy Pelosi.

You're drowning either way. And since a lifeguard's job is to save you from drowning the "I won't / I can't" distinction is academic.

If you won't stop Trump, you need to be voted out who will.. If you can't stop Trump you need to be voted out and replaced with someone who can.
Click to expand...

Intent may not make a practical difference, but that doesn't mean that intent counts for nothing.

If someone shoots at you with a potato gun and someone shoots at you with an AK-47 the two actions are not equivalent if both people miss, even though the practical end result is identical.
 
plague311 said:
You've said it no where short of a thousand times, but not impeaching Trump for extremely impeachable behavior would be derelict. It would be asinine and it would be a failure.
Click to expand...


No, it's failing to remove him form office that is derelict. Impeaching him has turned out to be a waste of time that has also contributed to winning the next election and keeping him in office. Impeachment, at least at the moment, appears to have been worse than a waste of time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom