|
Post by jld54 on Jan 19, 2019 9:23:27 GMT -5
Mueller’s statement is much more interesting for what it does not say. Any Trump camp member taking solace in that statement is whistling past the graveyard. It is in no way any type of exoneration. From the Washington Post, no less: www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/2019/01/18/b9c40d34-1b85-11e9-8813-cb9dec761e73_story.html?utm_term=.d03218cdd2aaSpecial counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s office on Friday denied an explosive report by BuzzFeed News that his investigators had gathered evidence showing President Trump directed his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, to lie to Congress about a prospective business deal in Moscow. The statement was remarkable on several levels — first, the special counsel’s office speaks exceedingly rarely, and second, the statement seemed to drive a stake through a sensational allegation that Democratic lawmakers suggested earlier in the day could spell the end of the Trump presidency. As earthshaking as the claims in the story were, no other media organizations were able to match them. I suggest that this is not about taking solace in the Mueller statement. An objective observer can see that the MSM, Dems and this Board ran with with a story that was implausible on its face and required the extraordinary step of a public statement by the Special Counsel. Again this BS allows Trump to credibly claim "Fake News": @realdonaldtrump 11h11 hours ago More Fake News is truly the ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE! 31,558 replies 33,137 retweets 119,343 likes Reply 32K Retweet 33K Like 119K In line with the current craze of "what if, if true" speculation if Mueller has the dagger to destroy Orange Man, this ain't it!
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,219
|
Post by hoya9797 on Jan 19, 2019 10:23:12 GMT -5
I don’t know how one can read that comment from Mueller’s office and conclude that the report is false. It seems to me that there would be a much more decisive and definitive refutation if it was completely false. Instead, it’s a very carefully worded statement which reads to me like they are saying this is not all correct but not wrong either.
Trump is still screwed. And Trump lovers will still refuse to believe it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2019 10:24:06 GMT -5
They’ll all vote for him again. The Trump haters are in peak delusional status. The real and proven collusion with Russia was DNC/HRC-> Perkins Coie->Fusion GPS->Steele -> Russian sources. All to influence the election, with the added bonus of use of Obama US intelligence and law enforcement apparatus. And the MCCabe/Strozk/Page insurance policy morphing into Mueller investigation.JLD54: "I am a lawyer and was trained that person making a claim must prove it." Can you prove this?
|
|
|
Post by jld54 on Jan 19, 2019 10:39:45 GMT -5
I don’t know how one can read that comment from Mueller’s office and conclude that the report is false. It seems to me that there would be a much more decisive and definitive refutation if it was completely false. Instead, it’s a very carefully worded statement which reads to me like they are saying this is not all correct but not wrong either. Trump is still screwed. And Trump lovers will still refuse to believe it. Maybe he is screwed, but not from this Buzzfeed BS. But keep looking on the bright side, right? You are respectfully grasping at straws.
|
|
|
Post by jld54 on Jan 19, 2019 10:48:48 GMT -5
The Trump haters are in peak delusional status. The real and proven collusion with Russia was DNC/HRC-> Perkins Coie->Fusion GPS->Steele -> Russian sources. All to influence the election, with the added bonus of use of Obama US intelligence and law enforcement apparatus. And the MCCabe/Strozk/Page insurance policy morphing into Mueller investigation.JLD54: "I am a lawyer and was trained that person making a claim must prove it." Can you prove this? Mueller kept Strozk and Page on the team until forced off by the fact that they exhibited bias against Trump. And now it turns out that top Mueller aide Weissman was in on the dossier as early as summer of 2016. And of course McCabe stayed on until fired for cause. So yes the "insurance policy crowd stayed on, and joined Muller members like Jennie Rhee: Wikipedia: "Previously, Rhee represented Hillary Clinton during the 2015 lawsuit regarding her private emails. Rhee also represented ex-Obama National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes and the Clinton Foundation in a 2015 racketeering case." With thousands of superbly qualified lawyers in and around DC, Mueller picks Rhee? And now about Weissman: "Mueller attorney praised Yates as DOJ official, email shows. www.cnn.com/2017/12/05/politics/mueller-emails-praise-doj-yates/index.htmlWashington (CNN)A lawyer on the special counsel team investigating Russian interference in the 2016 US election lavished praise on Sally Yates after her decision in January to defy President Donald Trump and not enforce his travel ban executive order, according to government emails published Tuesday by the conservative activist group Judicial Watch. "I am so proud," Andrew Weissman, then a top prosecutor in the Justice Department's criminal division, wrote to then-acting Attorney General Yates after the move. "And in awe. Thank you so much. All my deepest respects."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2019 10:54:56 GMT -5
JLD54: "I am a lawyer and was trained that person making a claim must prove it." Can you prove this? Mueller kept Strozk and Page on the team until forced off by the fact that they exhibited bias against Trump. And now it turns out that top Mueller aide Weissman was in on the dossier as early as summer of 2016. And of course McCabe stayed on until fired for cause. So yes the "insurance policy crowd stayed on, and joined Muller members like Jennie Rhee: Wikipedia: "Previously, Rhee represented Hillary Clinton during the 2015 lawsuit regarding her private emails. Rhee also represented ex-Obama National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes and the Clinton Foundation in a 2015 racketeering case." With thousands of superbly qualified lawyers in and around DC, Mueller picks Rhee? And now about Weissman: "Mueller attorney praised Yates as DOJ official, email shows. www.cnn.com/2017/12/05/politics/mueller-emails-praise-doj-yates/index.htmlWashington (CNN)A lawyer on the special counsel team investigating Russian interference in the 2016 US election lavished praise on Sally Yates after her decision in January to defy President Donald Trump and not enforce his travel ban executive order, according to government emails published Tuesday by the conservative activist group Judicial Watch. "I am so proud," Andrew Weissman, then a top prosecutor in the Justice Department's criminal division, wrote to then-acting Attorney General Yates after the move. "And in awe. Thank you so much. All my deepest respects." Wut? This is innuendo, not proof. Can you define precisely what their "insurance policy" is? How does Weissmann praising Sally Yates for not enforcing a travel ban = "the MCCabe/Strozk/Page insurance policy morphing into Mueller investigation.?"
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,213
|
Post by EtomicB on Jan 19, 2019 12:29:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jld54 on Jan 19, 2019 12:57:05 GMT -5
Mueller kept Strozk and Page on the team until forced off by the fact that they exhibited bias against Trump. And now it turns out that top Mueller aide Weissman was in on the dossier as early as summer of 2016. And of course McCabe stayed on until fired for cause. So yes the "insurance policy crowd stayed on, and joined Muller members like Jennie Rhee: Wikipedia: "Previously, Rhee represented Hillary Clinton during the 2015 lawsuit regarding her private emails. Rhee also represented ex-Obama National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes and the Clinton Foundation in a 2015 racketeering case." With thousands of superbly qualified lawyers in and around DC, Mueller picks Rhee? And now about Weissman: "Mueller attorney praised Yates as DOJ official, email shows. www.cnn.com/2017/12/05/politics/mueller-emails-praise-doj-yates/index.htmlWashington (CNN)A lawyer on the special counsel team investigating Russian interference in the 2016 US election lavished praise on Sally Yates after her decision in January to defy President Donald Trump and not enforce his travel ban executive order, according to government emails published Tuesday by the conservative activist group Judicial Watch. "I am so proud," Andrew Weissman, then a top prosecutor in the Justice Department's criminal division, wrote to then-acting Attorney General Yates after the move. "And in awe. Thank you so much. All my deepest respects." Wut? This is innuendo, not proof. Can you define precisely what their "insurance policy" is? How does Weissmann praising Sally Yates for not enforcing a travel ban t= "the MCCabe/Strozk/Page insurance policy morphing into Mueller investigation.?" The Weissmann comments refer to the political bias on the Myeller team. Al a Jennie Rhee. Will respond re: insurance policy later . But in the meantime, Ponder the significance of Pete’s text to Lisa Where and he stated that around election time he had been in southern Virginia, and could smell the stench of Trump supporters. And then ask yourself, is this a truly objective investigator, or is it, perhaps, a person with an agenda? As a trial attorney with nearly 40 years of experience, we always look for bias on the part of a witness. Please tell me whether you believe, objectively, that comments like these, and many others, do not bear upon the credibility of, and integrity of, these people?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2019 13:25:15 GMT -5
Wut? This is innuendo, not proof. Can you define precisely what their "insurance policy" is? How does Weissmann praising Sally Yates for not enforcing a travel ban t= "the MCCabe/Strozk/Page insurance policy morphing into Mueller investigation.?" The Weissmann comments refer to the political bias on the Myeller team. Al a Jennie Rhee. Will respond re: insurance policy later . But in the meantime, Ponder the significance of Pete’s text to Lisa Where and he stated that around election time he had been in southern Virginia, and could smell the stench of Trump supporters. And then ask yourself, is this a truly objective investigator, or is it, perhaps, a person with an agenda? As a trial attorney with nearly 40 years of experience, we always look for bias on the part of a witness. Please tell me whether you believe, objectively, that comments like these, and many others, do not bear upon the credibility of, and integrity of, these people? Ok, but none of this is "proof" of what you stated. It's not even close. As a trial attorney with 40 years of experience certainly you know that. Do you think every person who investigated the Clintons had a pure heart and no prior biases? Do you think they were all "objective investigators?" It's absurd to think that. Cops, lawyers, judges all have opinions just like every other human on this planet. Having an opinion isn't improper. As a lawyer do you let your opinions effect your work, or do you follow the law as written?
|
|
|
Post by jld54 on Jan 19, 2019 14:07:30 GMT -5
Wut? This is innuendo, not proof. Can you define precisely what their "insurance policy" is? How does Weissmann praising Sally Yates for not enforcing a travel ban t= "the MCCabe/Strozk/Page insurance policy morphing into Mueller investigation.?" The Weissmann comments refer to the political bias on the Myeller team. Al a Jennie Rhee. Will respond re: insurance policy later . But in the meantime, Ponder the significance of Pete’s text to Lisa Where and he stated that around election time he had been in southern Virginia, and could smell the stench of Trump supporters. And then ask yourself, is this a truly objective investigator, or is it, perhaps, a person with an agenda? As a trial attorney with nearly 40 years of experience, we always look for bias on the part of a witness. Please tell me whether you believe, objectively, that comments like these, and many others, do not bear upon the credibility of, and integrity of, these people? So you do not deny that Weissmann,Strzok, Page, Rhee etcal are biased against their target on a political basis, but that is OK. I respectfully disagree. And as an attorney I advocate my position within the bounds of law and ethics. I am not an investigator. Again I suggest that if persons who are openly biased against a candidate and President whom you liked you may not feel the same way as you do because you hate Trump. Cmon, admit it...😃
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2019 14:39:03 GMT -5
So you do not deny that Weissmann,Strzok, Page, Rhee etcal are biased against their target on a political basis, but that is OK. I respectfully disagree. And as an attorney I advocate my position within the bounds of law and ethics. I am not an investigator. Again I suggest that if persons who are openly biased against a candidate and President whom you liked you may not feel the same way as you do because you hate Trump. Cmon, admit it...😃 No, the point I’m making is even if you think that, that doesn’t mean the investigation is tainted. Can you provide an instance where Weissmann,Strzok, Page were guilty of operating outside the bounds of the law? Do you think all of the people investigating the Clintons did so with pure hearts and had no internal opinions of them? Finally, where is the proof of what you said earlier?
|
|
|
Post by jld54 on Jan 19, 2019 15:10:36 GMT -5
The Weissmann comments refer to the political bias on the Myeller team. Al a Jennie Rhee. Will respond re: insurance policy later . But in the meantime, Ponder the significance of Pete’s text to Lisa Where and he stated that around election time he had been in southern Virginia, and could smell the stench of Trump supporters. And then ask yourself, is this a truly objective investigator, or is it, perhaps, a person with an agenda? As a trial attorney with nearly 40 years of experience, we always look for bias on the part of a witness. Please tell me whether you believe, objectively, that comments like these, and many others, do not bear upon the credibility of, and integrity of, these people? Ok, but none of this is "proof" of what you stated. It's not even close. As a trial attorney with 40 years of experience certainly you know that. Do you think every person who investigated the Clintons had a pure heart and no prior biases? Do you think they were all "objective investigators?" It's absurd to think that. Cops, lawyers, judges all have opinions just like every other human on this planet. Having an opinion isn't improper. As a lawyer do you let your opinions effect your work, or do you follow the law as written? There is a concept known as the appearance of impropriety. I believe that Mueller has crossed the line by using these people. They have a clear animus against the target. I think that he was fully able to staff a team with qualified persons who have not demonstrated bias against the target of an inherently political investigation. For example, the IG found multiple improprieties in the Clinton investigation, yet Mueller just happens to hire the lawyer for HRC herself and the Clinton Foundation. Really? Orange Man has been proven guilty of one crime, the one that really matters: beating the Republican and Democratic establish as an outsider. He exposed the utter complacency and corruption of the bipartisan ruling cadre, and for this he must be punished. And I do not hold this view on a partisan basis -- both parties want him gone. The idiotic R establishment put hundreds of millions behind Jeb!, thinking that the country would accept a third Bush, especially after the disastrous Bush 43 presidency? And the Ds picked Hillary because "it was her turn", colluded against Sanders, and then she ran one of the worst campaigns in recent history. She ignored WI, MI but went to GA and AZ? And her idiotic comment about deplorables killed her -- it was worse than Romney's 47% comment, if that was at all possible. To be clear, Trump is a very flawed human being, but so were many others -- e.g, Bill C. getting a BJ from a 22 year old intern under the desk in the Oval Office?
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,213
|
Post by EtomicB on Jan 19, 2019 16:19:23 GMT -5
Ok, but none of this is "proof" of what you stated. It's not even close. As a trial attorney with 40 years of experience certainly you know that. Do you think every person who investigated the Clintons had a pure heart and no prior biases? Do you think they were all "objective investigators?" It's absurd to think that. Cops, lawyers, judges all have opinions just like every other human on this planet. Having an opinion isn't improper. As a lawyer do you let your opinions effect your work, or do you follow the law as written? There is a concept known as the appearance of impropriety. I believe that Mueller has crossed the line by using these people. They have a clear animus against the target. I think that he was fully able to staff a team with qualified persons who have not demonstrated bias against the target of an inherently political investigation. For example, the IG found multiple improprieties in the Clinton investigation, yet Mueller just happens to hire the lawyer for HRC herself and the Clinton Foundation. Really? Orange Man has been proven guilty of one crime, the one that really matters: beating the Republican and Democratic establish as an outsider. He exposed the utter complacency and corruption of the bipartisan ruling cadre, and for this he must be punished. And I do not hold this view on a partisan basis -- both parties want him gone. The idiotic R establishment put hundreds of millions behind Jeb!, thinking that the country would accept a third Bush, especially after the disastrous Bush 43 presidency? And the Ds picked Hillary because "it was her turn", colluded against Sanders, and then she ran one of the worst campaigns in recent history. She ignored WI, MI but went to GA and AZ? And her idiotic comment about deplorables killed her -- it was worse than Romney's 47% comment, if that was at all possible. To be clear, Trump is a very flawed human being, but so were many others -- e.g, Bill C. getting a BJ from a 22 year old intern under the desk in the Oval Office? Yaboy asked this question but I didn't see a clear response, can you answer for us? Can you provide an instance where Weissmann,Strzok, Page were guilty of operating outside the bounds of the law? Can you show us where their biases affected their work?
|
|
|
Post by badgerhoya on Jan 19, 2019 16:22:25 GMT -5
Mueller’s statement is much more interesting for what it does not say. Any Trump camp member taking solace in that statement is whistling past the graveyard. It is in no way any type of exoneration. I think this is exactly right. Let’s not forget that it’s the SDNY and not Mueller who has been running the Cohen criminal case. Taking the electronic files / computers / etc.
|
|
AvantGuardHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
"It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something."
Posts: 1,483
|
Post by AvantGuardHoya on Jan 19, 2019 16:40:40 GMT -5
Hold up, wait a minute... Did I just read that Agent Orange exposed the corruption of the ruling cadre? I must need to get my eyes checked.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2019 19:00:26 GMT -5
So you do not deny that Weissmann,Strzok, Page, Rhee etcal are biased against their target on a political basis, but that is OK. I respectfully disagree. And as an attorney I advocate my position within the bounds of law and ethics. I am not an investigator. Again I suggest that if persons who are openly biased against a candidate and President whom you liked you may not feel the same way as you do because you hate Trump. Cmon, admit it...😃 No, the point I’m making is even if you think that, that doesn’t mean the investigation is tainted. Can you provide an instance where Weissmann,Strzok, Page were guilty of operating outside the bounds of the law? Do you think all of the people investigating the Clintons did so with pure hearts and had no internal opinions of them? Finally, where is the proof of what you said earlier? jld54 I’ll assume it was an honest mistake on your part that you responded to the same comment twice and chose to ignore this. Can you give an answer here?
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,546
|
Post by tashoya on Jan 20, 2019 0:06:20 GMT -5
Is it better to have those investigating you to be for you or against you? Would it be preferable to have pro-Trump people investigating him? If you're innocent, it shouldn't matter much. If you're completely clean, you'd probably prefer those who are against you to try to find you guilty of anything. Regardless, as investigators and not defense attorneys, their political affiliations shouldn't matter very much. It's a convenient misdirection that an attorney might use in a trial but this isn't a trial. It's an investigation. There's no jury to convince. And it's pretty difficult to spin a paper trail or recordings where the goal isn't winning a case but finding evidence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2019 2:06:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jld54 on Jan 20, 2019 9:32:23 GMT -5
Is it better to have those investigating you to be for you or against you? Would it be preferable to have pro-Trump people investigating him? If you're innocent, it shouldn't matter much. If you're completely clean, you'd probably prefer those who are against you to try to find you guilty of anything. Regardless, as investigators and not defense attorneys, their political affiliations shouldn't matter very much. It's a convenient misdirection that an attorney might use in a trial but this isn't a trial. It's an investigation. There's no jury to convince. And it's pretty difficult to spin a paper trail or recordings where the goal isn't winning a case but finding evidence. Investigators should not be biased for against. True?
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,219
|
Post by hoya9797 on Jan 20, 2019 10:03:21 GMT -5
Investigators can be biased (seems impossible that they couldn't be given that they are human) but they can still conduct an unbiased investigation.
|
|