Current Events > Mueller: Trump not currently a criminal target in Russia probe

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3
Capn Circus 04/04/18 1:29:51 AM #51:	0AbsoluteZero0 posted... Capn Circus posted... 0AbsoluteZero0 posted... Even if the investigators have strong suspicions of Trump, that doesnt mean he necessarily has to be a criminal target currently. Others have already mentioned this ITT. Im not sure how youre getting tripped up on that word, its very basic. In addition, I wouldnt be surprised if they made that statement to placate Trump for a bit, since hes been throwing embarrassing tantrums about the investigation on Twitter every couple of days. For Mueller to tell Trump's lawyers Trump isn't under criminal investigation at this point for collusion is a big deal. There is no "Mueller just saying that to Trump's lawyers to placate Trump". I'd imagine Mueller lying about that would have ramifications. If Mueller truly had something on Trump regarding collusion, he'd stay silent and eventually issue subpoenas, etc. It's not hard to figure out. And as far as me getting "tripped up" on the word, "currently",--- I'm not. Anything is possible in the future, but for an investigation that seems to have stopped charging and issuing subpoenas for people connected (at some point) with Trump--- time is running short. And the people Mueller has already allegedly made deals with or charged for some sort of crime are included in his statement that Trump isn't under criminal investigation for collusion. So where to next to find that Trump colluded with the Russians? If Trump isn't under criminal investigation now, when will he be? It's not looking too good for the "Mueller will bring Trump down with collusion!" camp right now. Believe what you will, but I believe that the way the statement is worded leaves the possibility of future Trump charges on the table without lying. Aside from that, Im not sure how time is running short when this investigation has progressed much more quickly than similar ones in the past. Anyway, as I said Im fine if no charges against Trump ever materialize. While he is a moronic manchild and an absolute disgrace to his office, the GOP is similarly abhorrent, and I believe hes proving to be an effective anchor on the party. What I mean by time running short is, the supposed key players in this whole thing have already been charged, talked to Mueller, made their deals, etc. So the theory of them saying "Yes, it's true! Trump colluded! Cut me a deal!" is over unless Mueller starts bringing new charges to new people. Unless, of course, you want to believe the theory that Trump is actually under criminal investigation for collusion and Mueller was lying to Trump's lawyers. --- "I think that man will be president right about the time when spaceships come down filled with dinosaurs in red capes" - Tom Hanks <cite>Capn Circus posted [p:899024321] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>0AbsoluteZero0 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Capn Circus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>0AbsoluteZero0 posted...</cite> <quote>Even if the investigators have strong suspicions of Trump, that doesnt mean he necessarily has to be a criminal target currently. Others have already mentioned this ITT. Im not sure how youre getting tripped up on that word, its very basic. In addition, I wouldnt be surprised if they made that statement to placate Trump for a bit, since hes been throwing embarrassing tantrums about the investigation on Twitter every couple of days.</quote> For Mueller to tell Trump's lawyers Trump isn't under criminal investigation at this point for collusion is a big deal. There is no "Mueller just saying that to Trump's lawyers to placate Trump". I'd imagine Mueller lying about that would have ramifications. If Mueller truly had something on Trump regarding collusion, he'd stay silent and eventually issue subpoenas, etc. It's not hard to figure out. And as far as me getting "tripped up" on the word, "currently",--- I'm not. Anything is possible in the future, but for an investigation that seems to have stopped charging and issuing subpoenas for people connected (at some point) with Trump--- time is running short. And the people Mueller has already allegedly made deals with or charged for some sort of crime are included in his statement that Trump isn't under criminal investigation for collusion. So where to next to find that Trump colluded with the Russians? If Trump isn't under criminal investigation now, when will he be? It's not looking too good for the "Mueller will bring Trump down with collusion!" camp right now.</quote> Believe what you will, but I believe that the way the statement is worded leaves the possibility of future Trump charges on the table without lying. Aside from that, Im not sure how time is running short when this investigation has progressed much more quickly than similar ones in the past. Anyway, as I said Im fine if no charges against Trump ever materialize. While he is a moronic manchild and an absolute disgrace to his office, the GOP is similarly abhorrent, and I believe hes proving to be an effective anchor on the party.</quote> What I mean by time running short is, the supposed key players in this whole thing have already been charged, talked to Mueller, made their deals, etc. So the theory of them saying "Yes, it's true! Trump colluded! Cut me a deal!" is over unless Mueller starts bringing new charges to new people. Unless, of course, you want to believe the theory that Trump is actually under criminal investigation for collusion and Mueller was lying to Trump's lawyers.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
loafy013 04/04/18 2:10:41 AM #52:	Capn Circus posted... What happened to all of these people arrested that were supposedly going to flip on Trump? Completely spill the beans and tell all the details? Looks like that theory didn't pan out You mean the people who were talking to Mueller for months and nobody knew about it? He is running a tight ship with little to no leaks. Do you really believe what they reported would suddenly go mainstream? --- The ball is round, the game lasts 90 minutes. That's fact. Everything else, is theory. <cite>loafy013 posted [p:899025707] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Capn Circus posted...</cite> <quote>What happened to all of these people arrested that were supposedly going to flip on Trump? Completely spill the beans and tell all the details? Looks like that theory didn't pan out</quote> You mean the people who were talking to Mueller for months and nobody knew about it? He is running a tight ship with little to no leaks. Do you really believe what they reported would suddenly go mainstream?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Capn Circus 04/04/18 12:06:42 PM #53:	loafy013 posted... Capn Circus posted... What happened to all of these people arrested that were supposedly going to flip on Trump? Completely spill the beans and tell all the details? Looks like that theory didn't pan out You mean the people who were talking to Mueller for months and nobody knew about it? He is running a tight ship with little to no leaks. Do you really believe what they reported would suddenly go mainstream? If they told Mueller anything incriminating about Trump Mueller could use, don't you think he'd be under criminal investigation by now? --- "I think that man will be president right about the time when spaceships come down filled with dinosaurs in red capes" - Tom Hanks <cite>Capn Circus posted [p:899042772] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>loafy013 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Capn Circus posted...</cite> <quote>What happened to all of these people arrested that were supposedly going to flip on Trump? Completely spill the beans and tell all the details? Looks like that theory didn't pan out</quote> You mean the people who were talking to Mueller for months and nobody knew about it? He is running a tight ship with little to no leaks. Do you really believe what they reported would suddenly go mainstream?</quote> If they told Mueller anything incriminating about Trump Mueller could use, don't you think he'd be under criminal investigation by now?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 04/04/18 12:11:45 PM #54:	Seems like it may have been a tactical error for Democrats to rest so much on the hope of Trump being shown to have colluded with Russia when that time and political capital could have been spent making the less falsifiable case that Trump is a cruel buffoon running an obviously corrupt administration. But that's just my opinion. --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:899043010] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>Seems like it may have been a tactical error for Democrats to rest so much on the hope of Trump being shown to have colluded with Russia when that time and political capital could have been spent making the less falsifiable case that Trump is a cruel buffoon running an obviously corrupt administration. But that's just my opinion.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 04/04/18 12:32:08 PM #55:	The special counsel also told Trumps lawyers that he is preparing a report about the presidents actions while in office and potential obstruction of justice, according to two people with knowledge of the conversations. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:899044055] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>The special counsel also told Trumps lawyers that he is preparing a report about the presidents actions while in office and potential obstruction of justice, according to two people with knowledge of the conversations.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 04/04/18 12:36:23 PM #56:	Also, Nixon was never a "target." He resigned before it got that far. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:899044262] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>Also, Nixon was never a "target." He resigned before it got that far.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkjedilink 04/04/18 1:14:33 PM #57:	ImaAskAQuestion posted... Fam_Fam posted... i think most people know trump didnt mastermind some epic collusion with a foreign government to win the presidency. he just won because of idiots Putin has dirt on him. We all know it. Putin got dirt, told Trump to run or he will release it. Promised to do all the work to oversee that he wins. Trump did so. Trump won because Russians influenced the election. Trump isn't stained due to letting the Russians do it without direct association. Has to stay buddy-buddy with Putin because if he denounces him badly in any way, Trump's deep dark secret might be unveiled. That's kind of what's going on. Trump wouldn't even have won the nomination if not for the DNC and Clinton working with the news media to push him. --- 'It's okay that those gangbangers stole all my personal belongings and cash at gunpoint, cuz they're building a rec center!' - OneTimeBen <cite>darkjedilink posted [p:899046350] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>ImaAskAQuestion posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Fam_Fam posted...</cite> <quote>i think most people know trump didnt mastermind some epic collusion with a foreign government to win the presidency. he just won because of idiots</quote> Putin has dirt on him. We all know it. Putin got dirt, told Trump to run or he will release it. Promised to do all the work to oversee that he wins. Trump did so. Trump won because Russians influenced the election. Trump isn't stained due to letting the Russians do it without direct association. Has to stay buddy-buddy with Putin because if he denounces him badly in any way, Trump's deep dark secret might be unveiled. That's kind of what's going on.</quote> Trump wouldn't even have won the nomination if not for the DNC and Clinton working with the news media to push him.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Great Muta 22 04/04/18 1:23:56 PM #58:	Capn Circus posted... If they told Mueller anything incriminating about Trump Mueller could use, don't you think he'd be under criminal investigation by now? You really seem to be unable to grasp how the word "currently" works, or, as I said before, announcing publicly he's under criminal investigation without any other recourse. Because we all know that if he was to do such a thing Trump certainly wouldn't flip shit or make a move to dismiss him directly or anything. Jfc Not to mention you seem to be confused on how long these types of investigations take, being that you think this has been dragged on forever when it hasn't even been a year since Mueller launched his probe. But that's okay, all your crying and flailing about doesn't change or end anything. And until the investigation is complete there's no point to speculate. --- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXezjbuzh14 <cite>The Great Muta 22 posted [p:899046866] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Capn Circus posted...</cite> <quote>If they told Mueller anything incriminating about Trump Mueller could use, don't you think he'd be under criminal investigation by now? </quote> You really seem to be unable to grasp how the word "currently" works, or, as I said before, announcing publicly he's under criminal investigation without any other recourse. Because we all know that if he was to do such a thing Trump certainly wouldn't flip shit or make a move to dismiss him directly or anything. Jfc Not to mention you seem to be confused on how long these types of investigations take, being that you think this has been dragged on forever when it hasn't even been a year since Mueller launched his probe. But that's okay, all your crying and flailing about doesn't change or end anything. And until the investigation is complete there's no point to speculate.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
creativerealms 04/04/18 1:26:02 PM #59:	Actually no surprise. Really Trump is incompetent, everyone around him could have been working for the Russians to get him into office and he wouldn't realize it. His Ego would make that impossible. So yeah no surprise here. --- No sig. <cite>creativerealms posted [p:899046982] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>Actually no surprise. Really Trump is incompetent, everyone around him could have been working for the Russians to get him into office and he wouldn't realize it. His Ego would make that impossible. So yeah no surprise here.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
creativerealms 04/04/18 1:29:05 PM #60:	Capn Circus posted... If they told Mueller anything incriminating about Trump Mueller could use, don't you think he'd be under criminal investigation by now? . Most Special Investigations moved much slower then this one. This is one of the quicker ones. That said if there is no reason to investigate Trump fine. --- No sig. <cite>creativerealms posted [p:899047133] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><quote><cite>Capn Circus posted...</cite> If they told Mueller anything incriminating about Trump Mueller could use, don't you think he'd be under criminal investigation by now? .</quote> Most Special Investigations moved much slower then this one. This is one of the quicker ones. That said if there is no reason to investigate Trump fine.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Capn Circus 04/04/18 1:29:58 PM #61:	The Great Muta 22 posted... Capn Circus posted... If they told Mueller anything incriminating about Trump Mueller could use, don't you think he'd be under criminal investigation by now? You really seem to be unable to grasp how the word "currently" works, or, as I said before, announcing publicly he's under criminal investigation without any other recourse. Because we all know that if he was to do such a thing Trump certainly wouldn't flip shit or make a move to dismiss him directly or anything. Jfc Not to mention you seem to be confused on how long these types of investigations take, being that you think this has been dragged on forever when it hasn't even been a year since Mueller launched his probe. But that's okay, all your crying and flailing about doesn't change or end anything. And until the investigation is complete there's no point to speculate. I was responding to the person insinuating the ones already charged have been talking to Mueller and admitting Trump colluded with Russia. Of course the investigation is still on going, but it seems he did not get incriminating testimony from those who were charged. Unless Mueller lied to Trump's attorneys, which I doubt. It seems Mueller will need to charge new people to "flip" on Trump because the ones currently charged clearly haven't. --- "I think that man will be president right about the time when spaceships come down filled with dinosaurs in red capes" - Tom Hanks <cite>Capn Circus posted [p:899047179] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>The Great Muta 22 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Capn Circus posted...</cite> <quote>If they told Mueller anything incriminating about Trump Mueller could use, don't you think he'd be under criminal investigation by now? </quote> You really seem to be unable to grasp how the word "currently" works, or, as I said before, announcing publicly he's under criminal investigation without any other recourse. Because we all know that if he was to do such a thing Trump certainly wouldn't flip shit or make a move to dismiss him directly or anything. Jfc Not to mention you seem to be confused on how long these types of investigations take, being that you think this has been dragged on forever when it hasn't even been a year since Mueller launched his probe. But that's okay, all your crying and flailing about doesn't change or end anything. And until the investigation is complete there's no point to speculate.</quote> I was responding to the person insinuating the ones already charged have been talking to Mueller and admitting Trump colluded with Russia. Of course the investigation is still on going, but it seems he did not get incriminating testimony from those who were charged. Unless Mueller lied to Trump's attorneys, which I doubt. It seems Mueller will need to charge new people to "flip" on Trump because the ones currently charged clearly haven't.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
andel 04/04/18 1:32:27 PM #62:	Capn Circus posted... The Great Muta 22 posted... Capn Circus posted... If they told Mueller anything incriminating about Trump Mueller could use, don't you think he'd be under criminal investigation by now? You really seem to be unable to grasp how the word "currently" works, or, as I said before, announcing publicly he's under criminal investigation without any other recourse. Because we all know that if he was to do such a thing Trump certainly wouldn't flip shit or make a move to dismiss him directly or anything. Jfc Not to mention you seem to be confused on how long these types of investigations take, being that you think this has been dragged on forever when it hasn't even been a year since Mueller launched his probe. But that's okay, all your crying and flailing about doesn't change or end anything. And until the investigation is complete there's no point to speculate. I was responding to the person insinuating the ones already charged have been talking to Mueller and admitting Trump colluded with Russia. Of course the investigation is still on going, but it seems he did not get incriminating testimony from those who were charged. Unless Mueller lied to Trump's attorneys, which I doubt. It seems Mueller will need to charge new people to "flip" on Trump because the ones currently charged clearly haven't. nah, but your desperation is delicious. trump is corrupt and mueller isnt anywhere near done --- I am thinking about just walking into the river now that Megaupload is gone and condoms are in porn.-Fubonis <cite>andel posted [p:899047327] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Capn Circus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>The Great Muta 22 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Capn Circus posted...</cite> <quote>If they told Mueller anything incriminating about Trump Mueller could use, don't you think he'd be under criminal investigation by now? </quote> You really seem to be unable to grasp how the word "currently" works, or, as I said before, announcing publicly he's under criminal investigation without any other recourse. Because we all know that if he was to do such a thing Trump certainly wouldn't flip shit or make a move to dismiss him directly or anything. Jfc Not to mention you seem to be confused on how long these types of investigations take, being that you think this has been dragged on forever when it hasn't even been a year since Mueller launched his probe. But that's okay, all your crying and flailing about doesn't change or end anything. And until the investigation is complete there's no point to speculate.</quote> I was responding to the person insinuating the ones already charged have been talking to Mueller and admitting Trump colluded with Russia. Of course the investigation is still on going, but it seems he did not get incriminating testimony from those who were charged. Unless Mueller lied to Trump's attorneys, which I doubt. It seems Mueller will need to charge new people to "flip" on Trump because the ones currently charged clearly haven't.</quote> nah, but your desperation is delicious. trump is corrupt and mueller isnt anywhere near done</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#63	Post #63 was unavailable or deleted.
GFaceKillah1280 04/04/18 1:38:58 PM #64:	This topic shows a complete misunderstanding of criminal investigations. Capn Circus has repeatedly stated that Trump is "not under criminal investigation." In fact, the article clearly states that Trump is a subject in the investigation. That means that he is under criminal investigation. What the article actually states is that Trump is not yet a target of the investigation. All that means is that Mueller is not planning to bring charges against Trump... yet. It doesn't tell us much about the state of the evidence against him. --- Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them. -Hume <cite>GFaceKillah1280 posted [p:899047682] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>This topic shows a complete misunderstanding of criminal investigations. Capn Circus has repeatedly stated that Trump is "not under criminal investigation." In fact, the article clearly states that Trump is a subject in the investigation. That means that he is under criminal investigation. What the article actually states is that Trump is not yet a target of the investigation. All that means is that Mueller is not planning to bring charges against Trump... yet. It doesn't tell us much about the state of the evidence against him.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
voldothegr8 04/04/18 1:41:31 PM #65:	ledbowman posted... We'll get him next time guys! --- Oda break tracker 2018- 2 (1) \| THE Ohio State: 11-2 \| Oakland Raiders: 6-10 Super Mario Maker Profile: 1237-0000-0073-02FE <cite>voldothegr8 posted [p:899047818] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote>We'll get him next time guys!</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Great Muta 22 04/04/18 1:43:00 PM #66:	GFaceKillah1280 posted... This topic shows a complete misunderstanding of criminal investigations. Capn Circus has repeatedly stated that Trump is "not under criminal investigation." In fact, the article clearly states that Trump is a subject in the investigation. That means that he is under criminal investigation. What the article actually states is that Trump is not yet a target of the investigation. All that means is that Mueller is not planning to bring charges against Trump... yet. It doesn't tell us much about the state of the evidence against him. "Pfft semantics. Who cares what the actual definition of words or what the article says, it's far easier to just infer what I want to be true then hold to that point to matter how many times people point out it's wrong." --- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXezjbuzh14 <cite>The Great Muta 22 posted [p:899047911] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>GFaceKillah1280 posted...</cite> <quote>This topic shows a complete misunderstanding of criminal investigations. Capn Circus has repeatedly stated that Trump is "not under criminal investigation." In fact, the article clearly states that Trump is a subject in the investigation. That means that he is under criminal investigation. What the article actually states is that Trump is not yet a target of the investigation. All that means is that Mueller is not planning to bring charges against Trump... yet. It doesn't tell us much about the state of the evidence against him.</quote> "Pfft semantics. Who cares what the actual definition of words or what the article says, it's far easier to just infer what I want to be true then hold to that point to matter how many times people point out it's wrong."</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 04/04/18 1:48:05 PM #67:	voldothegr8 posted... ledbowman posted... We'll get him next time guys! He clearly obstructed. Tick tock. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:899048226] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>voldothegr8 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote>We'll get him next time guys!</quote></quote> He clearly obstructed. Tick tock.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkjedilink 04/04/18 1:52:56 PM #68:	ledbowman posted... voldothegr8 posted... ledbowman posted... We'll get him next time guys! He clearly obstructed. Tick tock. How? --- 'It's okay that those gangbangers stole all my personal belongings and cash at gunpoint, cuz they're building a rec center!' - OneTimeBen <cite>darkjedilink posted [p:899048517] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>voldothegr8 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote>We'll get him next time guys!</quote></quote> He clearly obstructed. Tick tock.</quote> How?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
andel 04/04/18 1:54:02 PM #69:	darkjedilink posted... ledbowman posted... voldothegr8 posted... ledbowman posted... We'll get him next time guys! He clearly obstructed. Tick tock. How? firing comey specifically because of the investigation for one --- I am thinking about just walking into the river now that Megaupload is gone and condoms are in porn.-Fubonis <cite>andel posted [p:899048575] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkjedilink posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>voldothegr8 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote>We'll get him next time guys!</quote></quote> He clearly obstructed. Tick tock.</quote> How?</quote> firing comey specifically because of the investigation for one</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkjedilink 04/04/18 1:58:58 PM #70:	GFaceKillah1280 posted... This topic shows a complete misunderstanding of criminal investigations. Capn Circus has repeatedly stated that Trump is "not under criminal investigation." In fact, the article clearly states that Trump is a subject in the investigation. That means that he is under criminal investigation. What the article actually states is that Trump is not yet a target of the investigation. All that means is that Mueller is not planning to bring charges against Trump... yet. It doesn't tell us much about the state of the evidence against him. The investigation STARTED with the intent of proving Trump worked with the Russians to win the election. After a year and a half, we now know that the only confirmed contact between his campaign and the Russians was: - his son and lawyer talking to Russians that claimed to have dirt on Hillary, that had nothing actually happen - Trump had Flynn contact Russia after the election. Only one indictment resulted from either, and it was for lying to a federal agent. Every other indictment of Trump staffers was for crimes that had nothing to do with the election - one was for tax improprieties from the early '90's. They're scraping the bottom of the barrel to get ANYTHING. It isn't a scenario of 'yet.' --- 'It's okay that those gangbangers stole all my personal belongings and cash at gunpoint, cuz they're building a rec center!' - OneTimeBen <cite>darkjedilink posted [p:899048837] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>GFaceKillah1280 posted...</cite> <quote>This topic shows a complete misunderstanding of criminal investigations. Capn Circus has repeatedly stated that Trump is "not under criminal investigation." In fact, the article clearly states that Trump is a subject in the investigation. That means that he is under criminal investigation. What the article actually states is that Trump is not yet a target of the investigation. All that means is that Mueller is not planning to bring charges against Trump... yet. It doesn't tell us much about the state of the evidence against him.</quote> The investigation STARTED with the intent of proving Trump worked with the Russians to win the election. After a year and a half, we now know that the only confirmed contact between his campaign and the Russians was: - his son and lawyer talking to Russians that claimed to have dirt on Hillary, that had nothing actually happen - Trump had Flynn contact Russia after the election. Only one indictment resulted from either, and it was for lying to a federal agent. Every other indictment of Trump staffers was for crimes that had nothing to do with the election - one was for tax improprieties from the early '90's. They're scraping the bottom of the barrel to get ANYTHING. It isn't a scenario of 'yet.'</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkjedilink 04/04/18 2:03:18 PM #71:	andel posted... darkjedilink posted... ledbowman posted... voldothegr8 posted... ledbowman posted... We'll get him next time guys! He clearly obstructed. Tick tock. How? firing comey specifically because of the investigation for one Comey's firing didn't slow the investigation in any way, so that's not obstruction. Besides, claiming that a superior firing someone doing an investigation is obstruction would set a VERY dangerous precedent for law enforcement - such a claim would guarantee a conviction against the Clintons and Susan Rice over the tarmac meeting. --- 'It's okay that those gangbangers stole all my personal belongings and cash at gunpoint, cuz they're building a rec center!' - OneTimeBen <cite>darkjedilink posted [p:899049069] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>andel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>darkjedilink posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote><cite>voldothegr8 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ledbowman posted...</cite> <quote>We'll get him next time guys!</quote></quote> He clearly obstructed. Tick tock.</quote> How?</quote> firing comey specifically because of the investigation for one</quote> Comey's firing didn't slow the investigation in any way, so that's not obstruction. Besides, claiming that a superior firing someone doing an investigation is obstruction would set a VERY dangerous precedent for law enforcement - such a claim would guarantee a conviction against the Clintons and Susan Rice over the tarmac meeting.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Caution999 04/04/18 2:23:28 PM #72:	The Great Muta 22 posted... GFaceKillah1280 posted... This topic shows a complete misunderstanding of criminal investigations. Capn Circus has repeatedly stated that Trump is "not under criminal investigation." In fact, the article clearly states that Trump is a subject in the investigation. That means that he is under criminal investigation. What the article actually states is that Trump is not yet a target of the investigation. All that means is that Mueller is not planning to bring charges against Trump... yet. It doesn't tell us much about the state of the evidence against him. "Pfft semantics. Who cares what the actual definition of words or what the article says, it's far easier to just infer what I want to be true then hold to that point to matter how many times people point out it's wrong." Every media outlet has stated that Trump remains a figure of the investigation, but is not under criminal investigation. I just heard it on the friggin radio. --- "Impossible is just a word to let people feel good about themselves when they quit." - Vyse, Skies of Arcadia <cite>Caution999 posted [p:899050160] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>The Great Muta 22 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>GFaceKillah1280 posted...</cite> <quote>This topic shows a complete misunderstanding of criminal investigations. Capn Circus has repeatedly stated that Trump is "not under criminal investigation." In fact, the article clearly states that Trump is a subject in the investigation. That means that he is under criminal investigation. What the article actually states is that Trump is not yet a target of the investigation. All that means is that Mueller is not planning to bring charges against Trump... yet. It doesn't tell us much about the state of the evidence against him.</quote> "Pfft semantics. Who cares what the actual definition of words or what the article says, it's far easier to just infer what I want to be true then hold to that point to matter how many times people point out it's wrong."</quote> Every media outlet has stated that Trump remains a figure of the investigation, but is not under criminal investigation. I just heard it on the friggin radio.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GFaceKillah1280 04/04/18 2:29:03 PM #73:	darkjedilink posted... The investigation STARTED with the intent of proving Trump worked with the Russians to win the election. After a year and a half, we now know that the only confirmed contact between his campaign and the Russians was: - his son and lawyer talking to Russians that claimed to have dirt on Hillary, that had nothing actually happen - Trump had Flynn contact Russia after the election. You're forgetting at least three other important contacts: -Foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos had extensive contacts with Russian intelligence and MFA officials. He was encouraged by senior members of the campaign. His contacts told him of "dirt" that the Russians had on Clinton in the form of "thousands of emails." He was encouraged to make a trip to Moscow or another European city to meet with senior Russian officials, although he apparently never made the trip. He later lied about these contacts to the FBI. -Foreign policy adviser Carter Page traveled to Moscow and met with senior Kremlin and Rosneft officials. Although Page and the Trump campaign publicly claimed the trip had no relation to the campaign, Page discussed the details of the trip with the campaign before and after. A reliable private intelligence source wrote that he heard separately from two sources that Page discussed lifting sanctions with Igor Sechin, and kompromat on Clinton and Trump with a high-ranking Kremlin official. In Page's testimony before congressional investigators, he came awfully close to lying about his trip. -Campaign chairman Paul Manafort had extensive contact with his former deputy Konstantin Kilimnick, a former Russian intelligence officer believed to still have ties to Russian intelligence. The contacts were primarily about Manafort using his campaign position to pay back Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch with ties to the Kremlin and organized crime whom Manafort owed millions of dollars. Manafort offered Deripaska "private briefings" about the campaign. Manafort and Kilimnick met in person to meet about "the future of his country" of the man who gave Manafort his "biggest jar of black caviar." We still don't know what they ended up discussing that day. A few days after the meeting, Deripaska was recorded on his private yacht discussing US politics with the deputy prime minister of Russia. Oh, there's also the Michael Cohen-Felix Sater connection, where Sater said he would "get Putin's team to buy in" on making Trump president. --- Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them. -Hume <cite>GFaceKillah1280 posted [p:899050450] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkjedilink posted...</cite> <quote>The investigation STARTED with the intent of proving Trump worked with the Russians to win the election. After a year and a half, we now know that the only confirmed contact between his campaign and the Russians was: - his son and lawyer talking to Russians that claimed to have dirt on Hillary, that had nothing actually happen - Trump had Flynn contact Russia after the election.</quote> You're forgetting at least three other important contacts: -Foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos had extensive contacts with Russian intelligence and MFA officials. He was encouraged by senior members of the campaign. His contacts told him of "dirt" that the Russians had on Clinton in the form of "thousands of emails." He was encouraged to make a trip to Moscow or another European city to meet with senior Russian officials, although he apparently never made the trip. He later lied about these contacts to the FBI. -Foreign policy adviser Carter Page traveled to Moscow and met with senior Kremlin and Rosneft officials. Although Page and the Trump campaign publicly claimed the trip had no relation to the campaign, Page discussed the details of the trip with the campaign before and after. A reliable private intelligence source wrote that he heard separately from two sources that Page discussed lifting sanctions with Igor Sechin, and kompromat on Clinton and Trump with a high-ranking Kremlin official. In Page's testimony before congressional investigators, he came awfully close to lying about his trip. -Campaign chairman Paul Manafort had extensive contact with his former deputy Konstantin Kilimnick, a former Russian intelligence officer believed to still have ties to Russian intelligence. The contacts were primarily about Manafort using his campaign position to pay back Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch with ties to the Kremlin and organized crime whom Manafort owed millions of dollars. Manafort offered Deripaska "private briefings" about the campaign. Manafort and Kilimnick met in person to meet about "the future of his country" of the man who gave Manafort his "biggest jar of black caviar." We still don't know what they ended up discussing that day. A few days after the meeting, Deripaska was recorded on his private yacht discussing US politics with the deputy prime minister of Russia. Oh, there's also the Michael Cohen-Felix Sater connection, where Sater said he would "get Putin's team to buy in" on making Trump president.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Disrespector 04/04/18 2:32:54 PM #74:	Guys what does the word "currently" mean? Why would Mueller add that word?? --- "Dammit, Smithers! This isn't rocket science, it's brain surgery!" <cite>Disrespector posted [p:899050671] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>Guys what does the word "currently" mean? Why would Mueller add that word??</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
GFaceKillah1280 04/04/18 2:33:49 PM #75:	Caution999 posted... The Great Muta 22 posted... GFaceKillah1280 posted... This topic shows a complete misunderstanding of criminal investigations. Capn Circus has repeatedly stated that Trump is "not under criminal investigation." In fact, the article clearly states that Trump is a subject in the investigation. That means that he is under criminal investigation. What the article actually states is that Trump is not yet a target of the investigation. All that means is that Mueller is not planning to bring charges against Trump... yet. It doesn't tell us much about the state of the evidence against him. "Pfft semantics. Who cares what the actual definition of words or what the article says, it's far easier to just infer what I want to be true then hold to that point to matter how many times people point out it's wrong." Every media outlet has stated that Trump remains a figure of the investigation, but is not under criminal investigation. I just heard it on the friggin radio. You can call it whatever you like. Mueller is actively investigating potential criminal acts committed by Trump. --- Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them. -Hume <cite>GFaceKillah1280 posted [p:899050716] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Caution999 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>The Great Muta 22 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>GFaceKillah1280 posted...</cite> <quote>This topic shows a complete misunderstanding of criminal investigations. Capn Circus has repeatedly stated that Trump is "not under criminal investigation." In fact, the article clearly states that Trump is a subject in the investigation. That means that he is under criminal investigation. What the article actually states is that Trump is not yet a target of the investigation. All that means is that Mueller is not planning to bring charges against Trump... yet. It doesn't tell us much about the state of the evidence against him.</quote> "Pfft semantics. Who cares what the actual definition of words or what the article says, it's far easier to just infer what I want to be true then hold to that point to matter how many times people point out it's wrong."</quote> Every media outlet has stated that Trump remains a figure of the investigation, but is not under criminal investigation. I just heard it on the friggin radio.</quote> You can call it whatever you like. Mueller is actively investigating potential criminal acts committed by Trump.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
bover_87 04/04/18 2:34:27 PM #76:	lol @ the extreme lack of reading comprehension ITT --- I...I shall consume. Consume...consume everything. ~ [FFRK] rcr6 - Chosen Traveler/Forbidden Power/Divine Combo <cite>bover_87 posted [p:899050754] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>lol @ the extreme lack of reading comprehension ITT</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
voldothegr8 04/04/18 2:38:23 PM #77:	Disrespector posted... Guys what does the word "currently" mean? Why would Mueller add that word?? Next time --- Oda break tracker 2018- 2 (1) \| THE Ohio State: 11-2 \| Oakland Raiders: 6-10 Super Mario Maker Profile: 1237-0000-0073-02FE <cite>voldothegr8 posted [p:899050995] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Disrespector posted...</cite> <quote>Guys what does the word "currently" mean? Why would Mueller add that word??</quote> Next time</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Admiral 04/04/18 2:42:36 PM #78:	--- - The Admiral <cite>The Admiral posted [p:899051234] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Caution999 04/04/18 2:43:23 PM #79:	^ LOL that is getting saved to my phone. --- "Impossible is just a word to let people feel good about themselves when they quit." - Vyse, Skies of Arcadia <cite>Caution999 posted [p:899051269] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>^ LOL that is getting saved to my phone.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ledbowman 04/04/18 3:09:57 PM #80:	Witness v Person of interest v Subject v Target v Arrest warrant Movin on up. --- I wish we all waved <cite>ledbowman posted [p:899052665] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>Witness v Person of interest v Subject v Target v Arrest warrant Movin on up.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Capn Circus 04/04/18 3:20:13 PM #81:	Can you imagine if I went in a topic that said "Trump is currently under criminal investigation in the Russian probe" and said, "The investigation isn't over. And 'currently' does not mean permenantly."? --- "I think that man will be president right about the time when spaceships come down filled with dinosaurs in red capes" - Tom Hanks <cite>Capn Circus posted [p:899053198] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>Can you imagine if I went in a topic that said "Trump is currently under criminal investigation in the Russian probe" and said, "The investigation isn't over. And 'currently' does not mean permenantly."?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#82	Post #82 was unavailable or deleted.
SomeonesAlt 04/04/18 3:29:57 PM #83:	https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/2000/10/31/op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf Did anyone bring this up? A sitting president can not be targeted or indicted. The language used here really makes it seem like Mueller is baiting Trump for that sit down meeting. --- But Whose? <cite>SomeonesAlt posted [p:899053726] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/2000/10/31/op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf Did anyone bring this up? A sitting president can not be targeted or indicted. The language used here really makes it seem like Mueller is baiting Trump for that sit down meeting.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Giant_Aspirin 04/04/18 4:28:26 PM #84:	Muellers description of the presidents status has sparked friction within Trumps inner circle as his advisers have debated his legal standing. The president and some of his allies seized on the special counsels words as an assurance that Trumps risk of criminal jeopardy is low. Other advisers, however, noted that subjects of investigations can easily become indicted targets and expressed concern that the special prosecutor was baiting Trump into an interview that could put the president in greater legal peril. --- Playing: Shadow of the Colossus (PS4) *(~);} - Get out the pans, don't just stand there dreamin' - {;(~)* <cite>Giant_Aspirin posted [p:899057105] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>Muellers description of the presidents status has sparked friction within Trumps inner circle as his advisers have debated his legal standing. The president and some of his allies seized on the special counsels words as an assurance that Trumps risk of criminal jeopardy is low. Other advisers, however, noted that subjects of investigations can easily become indicted targets and expressed concern that the special prosecutor was baiting Trump into an interview that could put the president in greater legal peril.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ammonitida 04/04/18 4:36:14 PM #85:	That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. <cite>Ammonitida posted [p:899057552] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Giant_Aspirin 04/04/18 4:37:24 PM #86:	Ammonitida posted... That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. it seems pretty clear cut that the campaign colluded with Russia. it's just a matter of determining if ol' Trumpy was in on it. and then there's his finances ..... --- Playing: Shadow of the Colossus (PS4) *(~);} - Get out the pans, don't just stand there dreamin' - {;(~)* <cite>Giant_Aspirin posted [p:899057615] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote>That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia.</quote> it seems pretty clear cut that the campaign colluded with Russia. it's just a matter of determining if ol' Trumpy was in on it. and then there's his finances .....</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SomeonesAlt 04/04/18 4:41:23 PM #87:	Ammonitida posted... That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. Considering how much of a break Gates got, he definitely gave Mueller something. Whether or not it can be directly tied to Trump is the question. His campaign almost certainly colluded, what is in question is whether or not he knew anything, or was in fact too stupid to collude, as was one of his earliest defenses. --- But Whose? <cite>SomeonesAlt posted [p:899057855] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote>That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia.</quote> Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. Considering how much of a break Gates got, he definitely gave Mueller something. Whether or not it can be directly tied to Trump is the question. His campaign almost certainly colluded, what is in question is whether or not he knew anything, or was in fact too stupid to collude, as was one of his earliest defenses.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ammonitida 04/04/18 4:46:02 PM #88:	Giant_Aspirin posted... Ammonitida posted... That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. it seems pretty clear cut that the campaign colluded with Russia. it's just a matter of determining if ol' Trumpy was in on it. and then there's his finances ..... There's no such clarity here. The plea deals are not producing the goods. That much is clear. No pleas to any conspiracy charges directly related to collusion or hacking for any of the key players, and Flynn's son is still insisting NO COLLUSION on twitter (he's close to his dad and would know his thinking on the matter). Then there's the fact that the dossier is filled with variably false information, especially in regards to Michael Cohen. I am also 100% certain that Carter Page is completely innocent based on his transcript with the GOP intelligence committee. He was reluctant to say things that may conflict with the FISA surveillance (citing faulty memory and fear of being charged with perjury), but one thing he was 100% sure about, something that he would certainly remember, something that did not invoke fear of perjury charges -- he did not collude with Russia to release Podesta's emails, or strike a deal with that Russian bank for 13%. This gave his testimony the air of credibility. <cite>Ammonitida posted [p:899058136] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Giant_Aspirin posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote>That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia.</quote> it seems pretty clear cut that the campaign colluded with Russia. it's just a matter of determining if ol' Trumpy was in on it. and then there's his finances .....</quote> There's no such clarity here. The plea deals are not producing the goods. That much is clear. No pleas to any conspiracy charges directly related to collusion or hacking for any of the key players, and Flynn's son is still insisting NO COLLUSION on twitter (he's close to his dad and would know his thinking on the matter). Then there's the fact that the dossier is filled with variably false information, especially in regards to Michael Cohen. I am also 100% certain that Carter Page is completely innocent based on his transcript with the GOP intelligence committee. He was reluctant to say things that may conflict with the FISA surveillance (citing faulty memory and fear of being charged with perjury), but one thing he was 100% sure about, something that he would certainly remember, something that did not invoke fear of perjury charges -- he did not collude with Russia to release Podesta's emails, or strike a deal with that Russian bank for 13%. This gave his testimony the air of credibility.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ammonitida 04/04/18 4:48:33 PM #89:	SomeonesAlt posted... Ammonitida posted... That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. No it hasn't. You're relying on anonymous sources to the CNN. <cite>Ammonitida posted [p:899058307] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>SomeonesAlt posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote>That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia.</quote> Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. </quote> No it hasn't. You're relying on anonymous sources to the CNN.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SomeonesAlt 04/04/18 4:50:16 PM #90:	Ammonitida posted... SomeonesAlt posted... Ammonitida posted... That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. No it hasn't. You're relying on anonymous sources to the CNN. You realize that this topic's premise is based on anonymous sources, right? --- But Whose? <cite>SomeonesAlt posted [p:899058424] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SomeonesAlt posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote>That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia.</quote> Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. </quote> No it hasn't. You're relying on anonymous sources to the CNN.</quote> You realize that this topic's premise is based on anonymous sources, right?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ammonitida 04/04/18 4:51:31 PM #91:	SomeonesAlt posted... Ammonitida posted... SomeonesAlt posted... Ammonitida posted... That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. No it hasn't. You're relying on anonymous sources to the CNN. You realize that this topic's premise is based on anonymous sources, right? Yes, but I trust the Washington Post/Daily Caller more than CNN. CNN is fake news. <cite>Ammonitida posted [p:899058489] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>SomeonesAlt posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SomeonesAlt posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote>That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia.</quote> Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. </quote> No it hasn't. You're relying on anonymous sources to the CNN.</quote> You realize that this topic's premise is based on anonymous sources, right?</quote> Yes, but I trust the Washington Post/Daily Caller more than CNN. CNN is fake news.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#92	Post #92 was unavailable or deleted.
SomeonesAlt 04/04/18 4:59:13 PM #93:	Ammonitida posted... SomeonesAlt posted... Ammonitida posted... SomeonesAlt posted... Ammonitida posted... That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. No it hasn't. You're relying on anonymous sources to the CNN. You realize that this topic's premise is based on anonymous sources, right? Yes, but I trust the Washington Post/Daily Caller more than CNN. CNN is fake news. Convenient --- But Whose? <cite>SomeonesAlt posted [p:899058896] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SomeonesAlt posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SomeonesAlt posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote>That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia.</quote> Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. </quote> No it hasn't. You're relying on anonymous sources to the CNN.</quote> You realize that this topic's premise is based on anonymous sources, right?</quote> Yes, but I trust the Washington Post/Daily Caller more than CNN. CNN is fake news.</quote> Convenient</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Great Muta 22 04/04/18 4:59:17 PM #94:	Ammonitida posted... Yes, but I trust the Washington Post/Daily Caller more than CNN. CNN is fake news. That just makes you stupid, especially considering the examples from all of them of just spouting bullshit. --- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXezjbuzh14 <cite>The Great Muta 22 posted [p:899058901] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote>Yes, but I trust the Washington Post/Daily Caller more than CNN. CNN is fake news.</quote> That just makes you stupid, especially considering the examples from all of them of just spouting bullshit.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The Great Muta 22 04/04/18 5:01:12 PM #95:	Capn Circus posted... Can you imagine if I went in a topic that said "Trump is currently under criminal investigation in the Russian probe" and said, "The investigation isn't over. And 'currently' does not mean permenantly."? You'd be completely correct and logical to say that, so I don't see why you feel that's some big "gotcha" --- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXezjbuzh14 <cite>The Great Muta 22 posted [p:899059006] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Capn Circus posted...</cite> <quote>Can you imagine if I went in a topic that said "Trump is currently under criminal investigation in the Russian probe" and said, "The investigation isn't over. And 'currently' does not mean permenantly."?</quote> You'd be completely correct and logical to say that, so I don't see why you feel that's some big "gotcha"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ammonitida 04/04/18 5:06:22 PM #96:	SomeonesAlt posted... Ammonitida posted... SomeonesAlt posted... Ammonitida posted... SomeonesAlt posted... Ammonitida posted... That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. No it hasn't. You're relying on anonymous sources to the CNN. You realize that this topic's premise is based on anonymous sources, right? Yes, but I trust the Washington Post/Daily Caller more than CNN. CNN is fake news. Convenient Inconvenient for you that CNN is the only source for this "flip", and even then this source may be wrong about Mueller's thinking. On the other hand, we have multiple sources speaking to multiple outlets that strongly suggest Mueller is lacking the goods to nail Trump for collusion. He appears to be making a case around obstruction, which no one will care about if there is no "there there". <cite>Ammonitida posted [p:899059302] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>SomeonesAlt posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SomeonesAlt posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SomeonesAlt posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote>That Mueller is composing a report about "obstruction" only (and other activities post-election), and that his questions for Trump almost entirely relate to "obstruction", is a very strong indication that the plea deals he struck with Gates, Flynn, etc have not produced any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia.</quote> Highly disagree with this analysis. It just recently came out that Gates was specifically flipped for his knowledge of collusion rather than to nail Manafort as had been previously suspected. </quote> No it hasn't. You're relying on anonymous sources to the CNN.</quote> You realize that this topic's premise is based on anonymous sources, right?</quote> Yes, but I trust the Washington Post/Daily Caller more than CNN. CNN is fake news.</quote> Convenient</quote> Inconvenient for you that CNN is the only source for this "flip", and even then this source may be wrong about Mueller's thinking. On the other hand, we have multiple sources speaking to multiple outlets that strongly suggest Mueller is lacking the goods to nail Trump for collusion. He appears to be making a case around obstruction, which no one will care about if there is no "there there".</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#97	Post #97 was unavailable or deleted.
Phantom_Nook 04/04/18 5:59:30 PM #98:	https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/2000/10/31/op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf According to this, the sitting POTUS can't officially be the target of a criminal investigation. --- When a girl has sex with a bunch of guys, they call her a slut, but when a guy does it, they call him gay. ~ Antifar <cite>Phantom_Nook posted [p:899062355] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/2000/10/31/op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf According to this, the sitting POTUS can't officially be the target of a criminal investigation.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SomeonesAlt 04/04/18 6:01:18 PM #99:	Phantom_Nook posted... https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/2000/10/31/op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf According to this, the sitting POTUS can't officially be the target of a criminal investigation. Exactly, so Mueller telling Trump's lawyers this is redundant and he knows it. It implies that Mueller has a reason for doing so. We've already seen that Mueller is a very smart individual not prone to party politicking or pointless gestures --- But Whose? <cite>SomeonesAlt posted [p:899062457] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote><cite>Phantom_Nook posted...</cite> <quote>https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/2000/10/31/op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf According to this, the sitting POTUS can't officially be the target of a criminal investigation.</quote> Exactly, so Mueller telling Trump's lawyers this is redundant and he knows it. It implies that Mueller has a reason for doing so. We've already seen that Mueller is a very smart individual not prone to party politicking or pointless gestures</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DifferentialEquation 04/04/18 6:02:25 PM #100:	Get rekt, liberals. Trump has been the most law abiding president we've ever had. --- There's no business to be taxed. <cite>DifferentialEquation posted [p:899062520] in Mueller: T... [t:76482777]...</cite> <quote>Get rekt, liberals. Trump has been the most law abiding president we've ever had.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3

Current Events > Mueller: Trump not currently a criminal target in Russia probe (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Mueller: Trump not currently a criminal target in Russia probe