• 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 pt4

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Big Dog said:
Cool! Now, let’s walk through that. The lying to Congress did not arise out Mueller’s investigation. It allegedly happened in front of the House Intelligence Committee. So explain how that fits within the scope.
Click to expand...

OF COURSE IT DID. How did Mueller discover Stone was lying to Congress? Through his investigation.

Man, that was easy.
 
3point14 said:
Why would he think that? Has Trump ever, in his whole life, covered anyone's back?
Click to expand...

If you say things, people will believe them. - Summarization of Trump quote.

SuburbanTurkey said:
Popehat is great. He's a steady hand at the wheel while the waves of wishful thinking come crashing down. Be warned though, he is equally deflating for left-wing wishful thinking as he is for right wing. If you want to hear that Mueller is going to kick in the white house door and drag Trump out by his hairpiece, Ken's not your man.
Click to expand...

With that said... I actually don't think that I've heard much of anyone expect that Mueller would be able to do anything more than expose criminal activity. There are, on the other hand, a lot of people being seemingly excessively hopeful that enough Republican Senators would actually vote to remove Trump if such criminal activity were demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt.
 
Paul2 said:
No need to apologize, I think you missed my sarcasm indicator, /s.
Click to expand...

I didn't know what that was. I love sarcasm...It's always appreciated. I just never want to be that guy....although some times I am.

Edited by Agatha: 
Removed personalisation
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Big Dog said:
really? I have posted a link to a document that says he registered under the LDA in a timely and proper fashion.

You appear to have a different opinion?

When did he register under the LDA? Looking for a date, that is all:
Click to expand...

I'm sure we've proceeded several pages and you've probably been called on this "convenient" fiction. Yes he registered as a lobbying firm hiding behind the sooper sekret incorporation of Inova in the Netherlands. What he was being called to task for and what is in the 2017 affirmation is that he never properly registered as an agent of a foreign country. There is a difference between lobbying for Bob's Terraforming Co., Inc. and "The Government of Turkey".

You keep repeating this,.... ignoring that a mere lobbyist is not allowed to represent a foreign government unless he registers as an agent of said foreign government(s).

Now if you could just show us where and when he actually did this, why you could win the internet.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Curious you left out Dersh's quote on Fox News:



That seems pretty clear to me that he is stating that lying to the FBI isn't a crime if it doesn't mislead the FBI, which is not the way the courts see things and Alan must certainly know that. Popehat's point that Dershowitz conflates his personal opinion with the actual law seems pretty valid. Calling him a liar seems appropriate.
Click to expand...

Actually, I'd characterise that statement as "Lying to the FBI isn't a crime if they know it's a lie", which imho better sums up the vacuousness of the argument.
 
Paul2 said:
You know, I could have done that myself. /s
Click to expand...

That would suggest that Mueller has determined that he lied to Congress before mueller saw the testimony to Congress.

And OF COURSE that does not answer my question about Mueller's scope particularly given the fact that lying to Congress is ordinarily referred to the USDC.

As such, that would suggest that perhaps Mueller is getting the testimony not for a process violation but perhaps for something more substantive related to the Russian investigation?

Edited by Agatha: 
Removed personalisation
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stone lying to Congress is the best Sir Robert the Mule can do?

What was it a day that ended in "y'?
 
The Big Dog said:
That would suggest that Mueller has determined that he lied to Congress before mueller saw the testimony to Congress.

And OF COURSE that does not answer my question about Mueller's scope particularly given the fact that lying to Congress is ordinarily referred to the USDC.
Click to expand...

If Mueller has come across information that indicates that Stone may have lied to Congress then he has probable cause of a crime, and since his mandate is to investigate any crimes that might arise in the investigation, then he is duty bound to investigate as to if Stone did in fact lie to Congress.
 
The Big Dog said:
Stone lying to Congress is the best Sir Robert the Mule can do?

What was it a day that ended in "y'?
Click to expand...

Seems to be a good place to start when you want to flip someone, or investigate them more to find out what else they have been up to.
 
PhantomWolf said:
If Mueller has come across information that indicates that Stone may have lied to Congress then he has probable cause of a crime, and since his mandate is to investigate any crimes that might arise in the investigation, then he is duty bound to investigate as to if Stone did in fact lie to Congress.
Click to expand...

backwards..

He allegedly has information and now wants to investigate whether Stone lied to Congress about that information. Show me the man, and I will show you the crime. -Stalin
 
The Big Dog said:
backwards..

He allegedly has information and now wants to investigate whether Stone lied to Congress about that information. Show me the man, and I will show you the crime. -Stalin
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's just like how it's backwards when the cops get information that a person might have committed a murder and then they investigate that person to see if they did commit a murder.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Yeah, it's just like how it's backwards when the cops get information that a person might have committed a murder and then they investigate that person to see if they did commit a murder.
Click to expand...

That is typically not how that works. Think more along the lines of: the cops get information relating to something that is not illegal and then go looking for inaccurate statements in order to gin up a crime.

See, Flynn, General for a recent example.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom