Mueller Investigation pt 6

[Upchurch]

And many are completely obsessed with him.

Chris B.

I don't know about obsessed. It is more than a bit concerning when the most powerful man in the government is desperately hiding his connections to hostile foreign nations and giving security clearances to his relatives who have their own entanglements with different hostile foreign nations. Don't you think?

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

The FBI questioning is not the point of this thread. And you didn't answer my question.

You said that you presume Barr told the truth because he was under oath. Do you uniformly apply that presumption? I know you say she was obligated to do so, but do you presume she did so?

I'll answer if you truly want to hear my opinion on Hillary. Here ya go. I think her past conduct of deleting emails, destroying equipment, throwing interns under the bus, pay for play etc all come at a cost. To me this would deem her testimony as questionable whether under oath or not. Evidence would need to be presented along with any statement Hillary makes in order to assign belief IMO.

Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I don't know about obsessed. It is more than a bit concerning when the most powerful man in the government is desperately hiding his connections to hostile foreign nations and giving security clearances to his relatives who have their own entanglements with different hostile foreign nations. Don't you think?

Having contacts in a foreign Country is not a crime. I would be far more concerned if Trump was selling Uranium to Russia, wouldn't you?

Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I'm wondering what these Republicans think the intelligence agencies were supposed to do when their surveillance operations started finding contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

Were they supposed to stop investigating just because it became political?

It will be interesting to find out exactly what they did and compare those facts with what they could legally do. It's the only way to make sure these intelligence agencies didn't overstep their authority. I don't want Big Brother listening to my phone conversations without legal cause or warrant.

Chris B.

 

[Brainache]

It will be interesting to find out exactly what they did and compare those facts with what they could legally do. It's the only way to make sure these intelligence agencies didn't overstep their authority. I don't want Big Brother listening to my phone conversations without legal cause or warrant.

Chris B.

Didn't Edward Snowden already blow the whistle on that?

 

[smartcooky]

Having contacts in a foreign Country is not a crime.

It is if you don't declare them, and then make income from them, without also declaring it.

It is also illegal under The Logan Act (18 USC § 953) for private citizens to have and make contacts with foreign governments.

When Trump was a candidate, he was a private citizen. He had direct contacts with the Kremlin

I would be far more concerned if Trump was selling Uranium to Russia, wouldn't you?

I would be also, however, I would be even more concerned if he was trying to sell Uranium to Saudi Arabia.... oh, hang on!

 

[smartcooky]

I don't want Big Brother listening to my phone conversations.

That actually doesn't happen, at least, not in the way you are inferring here.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Yeah, that's the point. How about the rest? Talking or taking action on impeachment might not change minds on the extremes, but what about the moderates?

The moderates are not Trump supporters and would likely vote Trump out if they see that the merits of impeachment are substantiated.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Internet Tough Guy™ is always an effective counter-argument.

It's not even a Tough Guy argument. Fire-arms are weapons that are deadly in the hands of even the most wimpiest of toddlers. It's just a straight up, psychopath/murderer argument.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

It's not even a Tough Guy argument. Fire-arms are weapons that are deadly in the hands of even the most wimpiest of toddlers. It's just a straight up, psychopath/murderer argument.

You guys should really think about renting a sense of humor.

Chris B.

 

[Ziggurat]

It is also illegal under The Logan Act (18 USC § 953) for private citizens to have and make contacts with foreign governments.

You are misrepresenting the act. It doesn’t criminalize mere contact. Furthermore, no one has ever been charged under the Logan act, and it is probably unconstitutional. Many people on both sides of the aisle would be in jeopardy if it was actually enforced.

 

[Ziggurat]

I don't have any problem with the fact that McCabe lied, its been a known for a year, although ChrisBFRPKY's reasons for bringing it up are more a case of whataboutism than the presentation of counter facts.

I think he brought it up at least in part to show the FBI does conduct some interviews under oath. You can get in trouble by lying to them even if you aren’t under oath, but some testimony to the FBI is still sworn.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Logan act probably unenforceable. Because of Trump's obstruction, evidence for conspiracy isn't enough. However, Trump should be impeached because of obstruction, which is a crime in and of itself.

 

[thaiboxerken]

You guys should really think about renting a sense of humor.

Chris B.

I don't think it's the other people who lack a sense of humor if your jokes aren't funny.

 

[Cabbage]

If someone robbed my house the only difficulty would be deciding whether to shoot them with one of my AR-15's or one of my AK-47's. The culprit would be easy to locate, however my wife would probably disapprove of the red stains on the new carbonized bamboo flooring.

Chris B.

Hilarious!

 

[Belz...]

The moderates are not Trump supporters and would likely vote Trump out if they see that the merits of impeachment are substantiated.

If.

 

[phiwum]

I'll answer if you truly want to hear my opinion on Hillary. Here ya go. I think her past conduct of deleting emails, destroying equipment, throwing interns under the bus, pay for play etc all come at a cost. To me this would deem her testimony as questionable whether under oath or not. Evidence would need to be presented along with any statement Hillary makes in order to assign belief IMO.

And yet the reason you believe Barr is equally applicable to the testimony of Hillary or pretty much anyone testifying before Congress.

"'Spinning' there would likely put himself in jeopardy, why would he do that?"

People, including, perhaps, Hillary, "spin" before Congress. They put things in a particular way to give impressions, given that such spin does not entail a provable lie under oath. "I think spying occurred," is a good example. There is literally no reason that Barr would fear consequences of saying this, since there are no consequences. Unless there are memos written by Barr saying that he does not believe spying occurred, no one could prove that this is a lie whether or not it is.

What jeopardy do you see for Barr saying that he thinks spying occurred when he does not? The term "spying" is itself vague. If surveillance counts as spying, then surely he's right. There was some surveillance of Trump campaign members, if I'm not mistaken. But "spying" makes it sound rather sinister, just as his boss would like it.

 

[phiwum]

Having contacts in a foreign Country is not a crime. I would be far more concerned if Trump was selling Uranium to Russia, wouldn't you?

Chris B.

Ignoring the pivot to Hillary, Upchurch didn't say that having contacts is a crime. He was speaking about overriding security concerns given actual financial interests in foreign nations is a genuine concern.

 

[Craig4]

Barr is on the record as saying "spying did occur". It will be interesting to find out the facts of his statement to Congress. I believe most Americans want to know the exact details of how this investigation began, what evidence was used to warrant "spying" on an opponent's political campaign and where the evidence came from. If nobody did anything wrong then there's no problem. If wrongdoing is found to have been committed by senior FBI officials, then the clean hands doctrine is out the window and the Mueller investigation would have been illegal from the start. Something to think about.

Chris B.

Perhaps if Trump was less of a dirty Russian whore, the FBI would not have monitored his attempts at collusion.

 

[Craig4]

It will be interesting to find out exactly what they did and compare those facts with what they could legally do. It's the only way to make sure these intelligence agencies didn't overstep their authority. I don't want Big Brother listening to my phone conversations without legal cause or warrant.

Chris B.

But I do want them to investigate attempts at collusion with Russia.