Cont: Mueller Investigation pt3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ziggurat said:
I'm not excusing anyone's behavior. I'm criticizing the FBI's. Do you understand the difference? Do you not get why the FBI shouldn't be routinely pursuing people on process charges when there's no underlying crime?
Click to expand...

Thar you keep referring to serious crimes as process charges demonstrates just how much of the Koolaid you've consumed. Lying to investigators is serious.
 
Ziggurat said:
And this is one of the reasons that the FBI's tactics are worth criticizing. Because that's exactly what's going to happen: everybody with any sense is going to refuse to answer questions from the FBI, even if they aren't guilty, even if their testimony could help catch some other real criminal. Long term, this is counter-productive.
Click to expand...

No its not.
 
Barry bonds conviction for obstructing was reversed.

He was prosecuted for giving a long winded answer.

Seriously.
 
Ziggurat said:
I'm not excusing anyone's behavior. I'm criticizing the FBI's. Do you understand the difference? Do you not get why the FBI shouldn't be routinely pursuing people on process charges when there's no underlying crime?
Click to expand...

How can they know there was no underlying crime without conducting an investigation that includes accurate accounts of facts known to the witnesses? And talking to the FBI is always voluntary. They can't make you lie. That's always a choice. In some of these cases -- I suspect Flynn is a sure one -- the plea to lying is a much less significant charge than crimes for which they could actually be prosecuted. George P. got 14 days. You think he couldn't have been liable for much more?
 
Another way of interacting with the FBI would be to do this:

Tell the truth.
 
johnny karate said:
Yes, the finest legal minds all use Futurama memes in their arguments.
Click to expand...

Lolz, he is very well known and respected attorney who writes in an easily accessible and very entertaining fashion.

Look up Popehat.

Or contradict anything he wrote.

I’m kidding about the last part because there is no chance that will ever happen.
 
I don’t think it’s a coincidence that conservatives struggle with the concept of not lying as a general practice. Just look at who they voted for and continue to defend and support.
 
kellyb said:
Another way of interacting with the FBI would be to do this:

Tell the truth.
Click to expand...

From my link written by a former federal prosecutor who practices criminal defense in federal court everyday

“9 "Just tell the truth" presumes trustworthy questioners with pure motives and enlightened, near-perfect witnesses. Neither assumption is warranted.
/10 In short, "just tell the truth" is not something that competent criminal defense counsel say. Giving a statement may be warranted, but it must be approached as the grave risk that it is.

Stop this nonsense instanter.”
 
Ziggurat said:
It's not counter-productive to have nobody willing to talk to the FBI?
Click to expand...

Your premise is wrong. People talk to the FBI. You can always choose not to. Very very few people are charged with lying to them even when it's obvious that they have. The ability to charge someone of such a crime gives the FBI a necessary hammer to discourage those who would.
 
The Big Dog said:
From my link written by a former federal prosecutor who practices criminal defense in federal court everyday

“9 "Just tell the truth" presumes trustworthy questioners with pure motives and enlightened, near-perfect witnesses. Neither assumption is warranted.
/10 In short, "just tell the truth" is not something that competent criminal defense counsel say. Giving a statement may be warranted, but it must be approached as the grave risk that it is.

Stop this nonsense instanter.”
Click to expand...

And just where in your link does this former federal prosecutor suggest lying to the FBI?
 
Trebuchet said:
I'd like her better if she'd just take a damn DNA test and, if it shows no Native American heritage just say so and move on.
Click to expand...

quadraginta said:
A DNA test for descent from that many generations back would not be necessarily establish anything. It is quite possible for someone to not have any detectable DNA from an ancestor that far removed.
Click to expand...

I don't and can't understand why you or anyone would care about this. Even if it could be proved, (and it is questionable that it could) what does it prove beyond her being mistaken about something entirely irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
Trebuchet said:
I'd like her better if she'd just take a damn DNA test and, if it shows no Native American heritage just say so and move on.
Click to expand...

I'm still seriously wondering why anyone cares about that topic? If she had dishonestly used claims of such to get ahead, that would be something to work with. Nothing compared to so many other people that have been put into high offices lately, but something. By the look of it, though, she didn't use such claims to get ahead (when the actual evidence was seriously reviewed, at least, as opposed to what political opponents fabricated) and was working with family stories from the start as a basis for her self-identification as a Native American (family stories that don't actually rule out the possibility that they were lied to, no less). Personally, given these things, I find it to be a total non-issue.

Trebuchet said:
Back on topic, does Trump really think that Papa's short sentence is some sort of victory for him? Can he really be that stupid, or is it just spin?
Click to expand...

He knows that he can try to spin it to attack the investigation. It's hard to take much more than that from it. Regardless, though, I would expect a pointedly light sentence for Papadopoulos, given how much he's supposedly cooperated with investigators.
 
The Big Dog said:
Lolz, he is very well known and respected attorney who writes in an easily accessible and very entertaining fashion.

Look up Popehat.

Or contradict anything he wrote.

I’m kidding about the last part because there is no chance that will ever happen.
Click to expand...

johnny karate said:
If the cartoon memes prove too cerebral for you, maybe you can request sock puppets.
Click to expand...

Say, you deleted part of my post. That is odd. It is almost as if one did not want people to realize that one was ducking the question.

Did ya hear that follks, Popehat used a funny meme.

And yet he is 100% correct.

Huh.
 
quadraginta said:
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
I'd like her better if she'd just take a damn DNA test and, if it shows no Native American heritage just say so and move on.
Click to expand...

<snip>

A DNA test for descent from that many generations back would not be necessarily establish anything. It is quite possible for someone to not have any detectable DNA from an ancestor that far removed.
Click to expand...

This is absolutely true. My 4X great grandmother was Native American (Creek )as established by federal censuses and Indian Censuses of Oklahoma. My lineage from her is well documented through birth/death records, censuses, obituaries, etc. However, my Ancestry.com DNA results showed zero Native American DNA.

Even full siblings will show somewhat different DNA results as not all DNA passed down is the same even from the same parents. My full sister's DNA test results are similar to mine, but hers shows some mine do not and vice versa.

Warren may well have NA ancestry that does not show up in her results.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom