Mueller Investigation pt 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
plague311 said:
I won't argue with that at all, but just because it's his invention doesn't mean it isn't partially true or that it won't convince people.

Yes, he did something wrong. We're talking about a President who has broken a myriad of laws and has suffered no consequences. Campaign finance, paying off fines, even clear misconduct regarding investigations into the Trump University.

And? As bad as it sucks to say, it really doesn't appear anyone in government or in a position to do anything about it really gives a ****.
Click to expand...


Forgive me, I'm going to go on a little digression, hopefully my point will be clear by the end.

Years ago I was one of those really annoying Dawkins fan atheists. And I happen to be working a job where I was on the road, sharing a hotel room with a very nice guy who happened to be an evangelical Christian who was very unconvinced of evolution among other things. We had a lot of conversations. I was really curious why he could hold beliefs that seemed so absurd to me and I wanted to know why and how that worked.

One night, I gave him a bunch of hypotheticals, asking if any kind of evidence would change his religious beliefs. What if they found rampant mistranslations from the original bible, what if they found a body still in the cave in the only place Jesus could have been buried, marked "Jesus". What if the heavens opened up and Ganesha came down, answered any question you could have about the universe and demonstrated the truth of hinduism to any standard you could ask. I threw in anything I could think of.

To each of these he answered "They would not change my belief".

I was flabberghasted. To me, belief was constructed around evidence, and ready to change with new evidence. That's sort of the core on knowing things, isn't it?

Then I thought to ask, "What would change your belief?" And he answered that if anything bad happened to his son, he would have to question his beliefs.

I was flabberghasted again. Bad things happen to children every day. Bad things happen to Christian children every day. Bad things had happened to the children of his christian friends."Something happening to my kid" seemed like a totally illogical basis for believing facts about the universe, but there it was.

And over the years, I've seen it again and again. People who seemed totally dug in and immune to grand canyon's worth of evidence, open to turning on a dime based on things that did not seem to be epistemologically relevant to me. Even moreso than my religious co-worker, I've seen people who seemed dug in ACTUALLY change their views based on a changed choice of word, a new (but seemingly to me identical) example. It's not too rare that I see someone change their mind over something seemingly irrelevant and I think "That's what changed your view?".

Now if we knew the magic key for Trump's supporters to see their emperor isn't wearing any clothes, that would be great.

But the two things I do know are that it isn't impossible (at least for some of them) and if it comes it will probably not be something we rationally see as meaningfully different from something they've heard a million times before.
 
Cavemonster said:
*snipped for brevity* But the two things I do know are that it isn't impossible (at least for some of them) and if it comes it will probably not be something we rationally see as meaningfully different from something they've heard a million times before.
Click to expand...

I'll gladly hope that you're right. I don't believe that to be the case, but if it happens I'll be the first one to cheer.
 
plague311 said:
I'll gladly hope that you're right. I don't believe that to be the case, but if it happens I'll be the first one to cheer.
Click to expand...

Look at it this way, Trump has managed to make supposedly "conservative" heartland Americans anti-football, and pro-russian. That in the least should show us their opinions are malleable.

Would you have imagined they would flip on football or Russia? To say that flipping on Trump is impossible is to say that he's somehow the most powerful loyalty magnet in the world. But if football can be up for grabs, so can he.
 
Upchurch said:
Q: "Are the acts of obstruction outlined in your report indictable against those who aren't sitting presidents?"
Click to expand...

Q: In hindsight, given that you have stated in your report that you chose not to look into campaign finance violations in general, under a line of reasoning that had been specifically disallowed by Congress and shown to be untenable in the courts and despite the clear evidence presented in your report that multiple criminal violations of those laws were committed, would you have handled that part of the investigation differently?

The Great Zaganza said:
The best chance for Dems is that the Republicans will embarrass themselves and Trump with stupid questions they don't really want the answer to.
Click to expand...

Q: Did you find any evidence that claimed tapes like the "prostitutes peeing on a bed that Obama slept in at Trump's direction" tape exist?

In related news...


One day before Robert Mueller is set to appear before Congress, the DOJ is trying to shut him up

Finally, the letter warns Mueller against saying anything else related to the report, because everything is related to the report. According to the DOJ, Mueller may not talk about “investigative steps or decisions made during your investigation” or anything that is “potentially open.”
Click to expand...

:jaw-dropp

Yet another giant waving red flag.
 
Last edited:
plague311 said:
To be fair, Mueller sent them a letter on the 10th literally asking what he can talk about. They didn't send him that letter out of right field to intimidate him not to saying anything. It was an answer to the question Mueller asked.
Click to expand...

When the answer is "You're not allowed to discuss... anything beyond the specific contents of your report," and that even disallows just about every point of clarification that even could potentially be asked - that's a bit like screaming "cover-up."

But then, Democrats had offered a start of 60 questions, some of which were multiple part questions before all this.

A few of which include (Quoting random arbitrary questions from that) -

To what degree was the office able to determine whether any of the efforts to obtain Clinton's emails resulted in contact with foreign intelligence services or Russian hackers, as had been proposed by Trump allies? Did the investigation examine whether individuals involved in these efforts had engaged in criminal misconduct?

To what degree was your investigation able to determine whether the Trump Tower Moscow project was part of an effort to gain influence over Donald Trump?

To what degree was your investigation able to determine whether the Kremlin encouraged any other efforts to develop personal and business ties to Donald Trump?

Did Barr ever tell you that he intended to make a traditional prosecution decision? If so, did you and Barr discuss Barr's intention to do so, or what his decision would be?
Click to expand...
 
I'm loving the Q&A over the past couple pages.

Remember how Aaron Sorkin responded to the Bush presidency by giving progressives a fantasy universe where the nation was instead presided over by Magical Al Gore?

Maybe he can use some of this material to develop a comforting alternative reality where Magical Nancy Pelosi asks the hard questions and impeaches Magical Donald Trump. Call it "The Hill", or something. Kick off the pilot episode with one of the characters making a witticism about it "not being the hill to die on". Classic Sorkin!
 
The GOP is gearing up, including making a 'war room', which isn't the least bit awkward to say.

Per the article:

On the sidelines will be a political operation that rivals the counter-messaging from Republicans during Democratic presidential primary debates. This week, the Trump campaign and Republican National Committee are working together on a “multi-day bracketing effort” involving a rapid response team and full social media and digital presence.
Click to expand...

Seems like that shouldn't be needed for someone that is "NO OBSTRUCTION! NO COLLUSION!1!!!11!ELEVENTY!1!11!!" Although, hearing about a rapid response team for this seems hilarious. I'd love to see them in real time.

It sounds like being told that Mueller can't speak out of the bounds of the report might bite a few GOP members too:

One Republican source told Fox News they expect Mueller “to try to get out of answering a lot of those questions,” claiming they are “outside the bounds” of his report—specifically on the issue of how the FBI could have used the dossier to obtain FISA warrants. The source said he may also say that “those questions are subject to ongoing investigation.”
Click to expand...

Just more of the DEEP STATE block the #TRUTH from coming out! NO COLLUSION! NO OBSTRUCTION!
 
plague311 said:
I'll gladly hope that you're right. I don't believe that to be the case, but if it happens I'll be the first one to cheer.
Click to expand...
This is where you get crafty.

Ask him "once Mr. Trump leaves office, do you believe he will be at risk of criminal liabilities for any actions he has taken as described in the report?"

Because if he uses the "hypothetical" side-step on that question, that will not go down well.
 
Last edited:
Delphic Oracle said:
This is where you get crafty.

Ask him "once Mr. Trump leaves office, do you believe he will be at risk of criminal liabilities for any actions he has taken as described in the report?"

Because if he uses the "hypothetical" side-step on that question, that will not go down well.
Click to expand...

That's true, and probably phrased the most likely to be successful. Though, I'd expect another non-answer. "I came to speak about the published statements in the report, not about blah, blah, blah."

I still say, I'll be wicked psyched if they get him to state something definitive that would give the American public the most complete and transparent view into the investigation. From everything I've read in all of the news it's really starting to seem like that's not going to be the case.

I don't know what this last minute swearing in of the aide means either. If he's afraid of saying something he shouldn't or what the case might be.
 
Cavemonster said:
Now if we knew the magic key for Trump's supporters to see their emperor isn't wearing any clothes, that would be great.

But the two things I do know are that it isn't impossible (at least for some of them) and if it comes it will probably not be something we rationally see as meaningfully different from something they've heard a million times before.
Click to expand...
I agree and wonder what it will be. Assuming that he does fall from grace. It will not be the fresh scandals that erupt week after week based on something provocative he's said, but something else, relatively minor or obscure.

I have heard people say they know there's a God because of some personal escape from a brush with death. I always wonder, so if they had died, would that mean God doesn't exist?
 
Of course, Mueller is a private citizen now; he is no longer a DoJ employee, so he does not have to follow DoJ policy or advice or instructions.

He could answer every question put to him (except if it involves revealing the content of GJ testimony) and there is not thing one that the DoJ and that corrupt AG Barr can do to punish him.....but he probably won't because he is a stickler for the rules.
 
Delphic Oracle said:
This is where you get crafty.

Ask him "once Mr. Trump leaves office, do you believe he will be at risk of criminal liabilities for any actions he has taken as described in the report?"

Because if he uses the "hypothetical" side-step on that question, that will not go down well.
Click to expand...
Where do you get the impression Mueller is stupid enough to fall for that?
 
smartcooky said:
Of course, Mueller is a private citizen now; he is no longer a DoJ employee, so he does not have to follow DoJ policy or advice or instructions.

He could answer every question put to him (except if it involves revealing the content of GJ testimony) and there is not thing one that the DoJ and that corrupt AG Barr can do to punish him.....but he probably won't because he is a stickler for the rules.
Click to expand...


Seriously. All the talk about phrasing the question the right way to trick Mueller in to an answer is just way out there. But if he's changed his mind, it won't be necessary to trick him. If he has changed his mind he'd have probably said so already.
 
Mueller has much more to lose than just his reputation as a straight-shooter: if he alienates his fellow Republicans too much, he might not be as welcome at the Country Club...
 
Belz... said:
That's why calling him to testify is pointless. Hearings like this pretty much always end up the same unless the witness is on the same side as the committee anyway. They should be able to compel a testimony.
Click to expand...
It's not pointless. The general public needs the information especially to counter the Trump propaganda train.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom