Mueller Investigation pt5

Status
Not open for further replies.
newyorkguy said:
It was posted here that the claim that the Russians had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton and were willing to provide it to the Trump campaign came only from one person, Rob Goldstone. It was also posted that Goldstone has admitted to making that up. But there were other people involved as well. This is from Rolling Stone:
Click to expand...


That has nothing to do with the Tower meeting we were discussing.
 
thaiboxerken said:
This doesn't explain why he said he would be fine with it going public a week ago.
Click to expand...
What's to explain? He's chicken**** and radiates guilt like a slimy space heater. A week ago a public release wasn't an option so he was fine with it, now it is and he isn't. Just like he was eager to have an interview with Mueller, right up until Mueller asked for a date and the gosh darned lawyers said no. And he'd be happy releasing his tax returns, really, but golly, that ongoing denied-by-the-IRS audit, right?
 
newyorkguy said:
It was posted here that the claim that the Russians had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton and were willing to provide it to the Trump campaign came only from one person, Rob Goldstone. It was also posted that Goldstone has admitted to making that up. But there were other people involved as well. This is from Rolling Stone:
Click to expand...


He blabbed to Alexander Downer, an Australian ex conservative politician, about it.
 
The fact that Barr didn't even mention the Counterintelligence part of the Mueller probe is probably not a good sign for Trump.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
The fact that Barr didn't even mention the Counterintelligence part of the Mueller probe is probably not a good sign for Trump.
Click to expand...
There's a lot of things in the Barr letter that sound good for Trump at first, until you take a closer look and realize they're very, very, bad for him. Like how narrowly-defined the "exonerating" bits are, and the lack of even that exoneration on other charges.

Trump & co are going to fight tooth and nail to keep any of this from seeing the light of day.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
There's a lot of things in the Barr letter that sound good for Trump at first, until you take a closer look and realize they're very, very, bad for him. Like how narrowly-defined the "exonerating" bits are, and the lack of even that exoneration on other charges.

Trump & co are going to fight tooth and nail to keep any of this from seeing the light of day.
Click to expand...

I hope the dems can find a way to get as much of it released as possible. The fact Trump gets to proof it is scary.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
If you replaced "Trump Jr." with "Podesta" and described the Trump Tower meeting to a Republican for the first time, do you really think they wouldn't be convinced of collusion by the evidence we already have?
Click to expand...

Depends on the Republican, I suppose. Limbaugh and Hannity would rant about it. Some senator or congressman would get in front of microphones and say something. It would look like a super big deal for all of a day. But nothing would be proven, nothing would come of it, and it would all blow over in a week.

Two years later, someone on this forum would bring it up as evidence of Democratic corruption and treason, "remember that time Podesta did..."

Everyone else here would laugh at him. "That time Podesta did what? You have nothing." And that would be that.
 
Oh! I get how this works!

Obama wasn't lying when he said, "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor". It was a joke! It just wasn't a good joke. It doesn't matter that some people took him seriously.


...or, maybe, someone who wants to hold the highest office in the land doesn't have the luxury of spouting off in stupid ways...
 
Belz... said:
Except that there is no gap. We know why the meeting took place, as we have prior communication between the parties. What was actually discussed is irrelevant, as the stated goals of the Trump side are plainly stated, and they are to conspire to acquire illegal information on US soil.
Click to expand...

What made the information illegal?

And what does US soil have to do with it?
 
theprestige said:
Depends on the Republican, I suppose. Limbaugh and Hannity would rant about it. Some senator or congressman would get in front of microphones and say something. It would look like a super big deal for all of a day. But nothing would be proven, nothing would come of it, and it would all blow over in a week.

Two years later, someone on this forum would bring it up as evidence of Democratic corruption and treason, "remember that time Podesta did..."

Everyone else here would laugh at him. "That time Podesta did what? You have nothing." And that would be that.
Click to expand...

I think you actually believe that.

I don't think anyone who saw the the years fo failed investigations into the same topics over and over again but the GOP would follow you in that belief. We see them chanting "Lock her up" at every one of his rallies. That you don't says more about you than the GOP.
 
theprestige said:
Depends on the Republican, I suppose. Limbaugh and Hannity would rant about it. Some senator or congressman would get in front of microphones and say something. It would look like a super big deal for all of a day. But nothing would be proven, nothing would come of it, and it would all blow over in a week.
Two years later, someone on this forum would bring it up as evidence of Democratic corruption and treason, "remember that time Podesta did..."

Everyone else here would laugh at him. "That time Podesta did what? You have nothing." And that would be that.
Click to expand...

Because yeah, I remember how that birther movement blew over in just a couple of days. LMFAO!!!


You really ought to consider joining the rest of us back here in reality.
 
Belz... said:
Because it's illegal in the US to seek favours from foreign nationals to influence US elections.

This has been explained to you hundreds of times.
Click to expand...

Quoting this before it disappears. We'll revisit this later.

Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Quoting this before it disappears.
Click to expand...

Why would it disappear? Have you ever seen me edit a post to hide something I said earlier? It's insulting that you'd even imply it, and I'd like you to retract that.

How about you address my post instead? Is it legal or not for election campaigns to coordinate with foreign powers to gain advantages in elections?
 
Cabbage said:
Because yeah, I remember how that birther movement blew over in just a couple of days. LMFAO!!!


You really ought to consider joining the rest of us back here in reality.
Click to expand...

There are still birthers around. There will probably always be birthers around. But as an issue that actually mattered outside the heads of birthers? That was over pretty quick.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom