Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 11 Jun 2019, 15:10:01

^1+++
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 12 Jun 2019, 15:31:34

Now Mueller's case against Gen. Flynn is going south.

flynn-hires-sidney-powell-muellers-pit-bull-meets-his-match-again

Flynn fired his attorneys (the ones who arranged his plea bargain with Mueller on one perjury charge) and has hired an attorney with a history of standing up to the DOJ. The new attorney --- Sidney Powell ----- says she needs 90 days to review all the case files.

Now that we know there was no Russian collusion, the whole persecution of Flynn looks very odd, especially since the FBI agents who interviewed him thought he was truthful, and Flynn wasn't told that that by Mueller. That is known as "witholding exculpatory evidence", and normally a case gets thrown out if it can be shown the prosecutors withheld information from the defence. Mueller decided to ignore normal legal niceties and turn the screws on Flynn, and rumor has it that Flynn pleaded guilty to one count of perjury because Mueller was threatening to go after his son if Flynn didn't cooperate.

IMHO its unlikely that Flyn would fire his original attorneys and hire Ms. Powell just to re-submit his guilty plea. I wouldn't be surprised to see Flynn withdraw his guilty plea and ask to go to court, especially given all the odd things about his case. If he does withdraw his guilty plea, this will be a chance to put the Mueller investigation on trail. For instance, Flynn could ask to see the phone records from Peter Strzok----the FBI agent who interviewed him. Oh gosh....those emails were all destroyed by the Mueller investigation....so sorry!. And the original iPhone? Oh...the Mueller people smashed it into tiny pieces. Hmmmmm.....I wonder why.

CHeers!
"The people in power should listen.....its them I'm criticizing" Greta Thunberg, Lisbon, 12/4/19
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22863
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 26 Jun 2019, 01:16:05

Mueller has been suppoened by two house committees and presumably he will honor the subpoenas and testify in open session.

This should be excellent political theatre. The word from DC is that Mueller isn't quite as sharp as he used to be in younger days, hence his bizarre conclusions in his report and his one gobbledegook public statement about it.

Hopefully Mueller will pull it together for his public testimony and speak in a coherent way. Its even possible his testimony will help the Ds grow and spine and start impeachment hearings against Trump.

Image
I hope somebody asks Mueller why he didn't interview Julian Assange? And why didn't he even have the FBI examine the DNC sever? And when did he figure out that there was no collusion between Trump and the Russians? And why did he destroy the email records for Peter Strzok and Lisa Page during the time they worked for him----and if there any exculpatory information in those emails that he failed to provide to defendants? And why didn't Mueller investigate collusion between the Russians and the DNC and the Hillary campaign to pass off the Steele Dossier as verified intelligence data instead of Russian disinformation? And why didn't he look into the 3 million dollars the Ukrainians paid Hunter Biden right before the Ukrainians supplied misinformation to the FBI?

There are lots of questions that still need answers....BOb Mueller's got a lot of 'splaining to do.

CHEERS!
"The people in power should listen.....its them I'm criticizing" Greta Thunberg, Lisbon, 12/4/19
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22863
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Cog » Wed 26 Jun 2019, 06:01:35

Mueller said not even a month ago that his 400 page report speaks for itself. Why testify now? Mueller didn't indict anyone in this report and found insufficient evidence to proceed on collusion and obstruction by anyone. His job is over. Could it be that the Trump impeachment is going nowhere and the House Dems are trying get it back on track by Mueller adding some gasoline to the fire?

I agree Plant that Mueller has a lot to answer for and once again this is going to backfire spectacularly for the Dems. I'll be watching this one closely.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12836
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 26 Jun 2019, 16:14:35

Trump just accused Mueller of committing a crime when he deleted the anti-Trump text messages of Peter Strzok and his lover Lisa Page.

trump-slams-mueller-illegally-deleting-evidence-uncovered

Technically, I think Trump is right. When you are using a government owned phone, with the phone service paid by the government, the phone should only be used for official business. Mueller probably broke some "open records" law when he had the phones deleted and the government records (and the lovers personal sex talk and anti-Trump diatribes) destroyed. Mueller the "straight arrow" was pretty crooked it turns out.

A more serious problem is that those phones contained official records of parts of the Mueller investigation. Mueller has no right to selectively delete some records and not others---the fact he would do that shows bias. There is a good chance the phones contained exculpatory evidence showing that the investigators were biased against Trump and his fellow republicans.

In these cases normally the investigators aren't charged with a crime, but instead all charges against those prosecuted are dismissed due to the incompetence and/or overt bias of the investigators. I doubt that will happen here because the Mueller investigation is part of the D partisan witch hunt, and normal rules don't seem to apply any more in DC.
Last edited by Plantagenet on Wed 26 Jun 2019, 16:16:32, edited 1 time in total.
"The people in power should listen.....its them I'm criticizing" Greta Thunberg, Lisbon, 12/4/19
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22863
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby dissident » Wed 26 Jun 2019, 16:15:04

Cog wrote:Mueller said not even a month ago that his 400 page report speaks for itself. Why testify now? Mueller didn't indict anyone in this report and found insufficient evidence to proceed on collusion and obstruction by anyone. His job is over. Could it be that the Trump impeachment is going nowhere and the House Dems are trying get it back on track by Mueller adding some gasoline to the fire?

I agree Plant that Mueller has a lot to answer for and once again this is going to backfire spectacularly for the Dems. I'll be watching this one closely.


It's the same facts do not stand in the way of our agenda BS that we saw in the EU where accession referendums were held under the "correct" results were obtained (for the EU, aka EUSSR). Here the D. Party wants Trump impeached and for collusion to be "proven" even if no collusion was found by a pro D. Party hack. Even brazen bias in their favor is not enough for the D. Party.

Americans need to wake up and smell the coffee. This includes the Republicans. The behavior of the D. Party and the hordes of fake left SJWs is very ominous. The open targeting of moderate conservative voices in social media underscores some sort of creeping remodeling of the US political system and culture into a very nasty regime. I never thought I would see such a thing happening.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5633
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby dissident » Wed 26 Jun 2019, 16:24:35

Plantagenet wrote:Trump just accused Mueller of committing a crime when he deleted the anti-Trump text messages of Peter Strzok and his lover Lisa Page.

trump-slams-mueller-illegally-deleting-evidence-uncovered

Technically, I think Trump is right. When you are using a government owned phone, with the phone service paid by the government, the phone should only be used for official business. Mueller probably broke some "open records" law when he had the phones deleted.

A more serious problem is that those phones contained official records of parts of the Mueller investigation. Mueller has no right to selectively delete some records and not others---the fact he would do that shows bias. There is a good chance the phones contained exculpatory evidence showing that the investigators were biased against Trump and his fellow republicans.

In these cases normally the investigators aren't charged with a crime, but instead all charges against those prosecuted are dismissed due to the incompetence and/or overt bias of the investigators. I doubt that will happen here because the Mueller investigation is part of the D partisan witch hunt, and normal rules don't seem to apply any more in DC.


You don't have to guess. Government e-mails and phone messages cannot be deleted to comply with Freedom of Information laws. There is an expiry date, but not after several years. So Trump is right on target.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5633
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 24 Jul 2019, 12:19:26

Any one watching the testimony? How’s it going?
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Cog » Wed 24 Jul 2019, 14:53:53

Newfie wrote:Any one watching the testimony? How’s it going?


I watched it all. Both the intelligence committee and judicial committee. I'm not seeing anything not covered in the report. The Dems main thrust, since Mueller took collusion with Russia off the table, is to go for obstruction. How do you obstruct a crime that never took place and which you know you did not commit. A president can lawfully fire a FBI director and he did. He could have fired Mueller but did not.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12836
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Wed 24 Jul 2019, 14:57:24

Tanada wrote:Personally I would rather the congress did their jobs of repealing bad legislation and paying the bills that messing around with pointless time wasting political BS that does nothing except reveal just how incompetent they really are.

I agree.

Unfortunately, they believe far too many voters don't prioritize things that rationally, based on much of the circus they put on as "their job".
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 7324
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Cog » Wed 24 Jul 2019, 15:26:54

I think Dems look at these hearings as a way to damage Trump going into the 2020 elections since an impeachment is no closer than it ever was. What really matters is what type of Dem the Dems nominate. A far left socialist type will lose badly. But sadly that is probably the only Dem that can get the Democrat nomination.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12836
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 24 Jul 2019, 18:57:18

I wrote to a Lettie friend...

“So what’s your take on Muller? just curious.”

He responded.

I haven't seen it all, but I would be disappointed if I didn't have rather low expectations to start with. Really, it's pretty clear what Trump did and that it would meet the grounds for obstruction of justice. That's always been clear. It isn't because the Republicans don't see this that they don't want to impeach Trump. Nothing Mueller can say would change this. But he could have been more strident and given some help to the effort.


This gentleman is generally one of the less ideological amongst my old crowd, hence we converse have broad agreement on various issues. I find his response troubling because it is vague but certain. The way a true believer knows the “truth” but can’t explain it. A religious tenant.

So that I don’t classify myself in the same vein:
1- the investigation was about collusion, not obstruction of justice
2- if you are going to expand then also expand to include the origins of the investigation
3- it’s not clear to me that Trump committed obstruction. Yes he contemplated it, and his advisors pushed back. But he didn’t over rule his advisors. For some that is how they get feedback. It’s a murky distinction.
4- he says R’s are against impeachment, but gives no reason
5- he castigates Mueller for not assisting in the impeachment, picking sides

I wrote back asking:

“How do you explain why the investigation turned out so poorly?” Which I hope encourages him to think a bit more.

We shall see.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 24 Jul 2019, 19:06:13

We saw a short bit near the end of session #1. My Wife commented “I’ll bet he’s sorry he ever to in the role.” I think she is correct.

IMHO his demeanor gives credence to the rumors that he was not fully in command of the investigation. He powers are waxing by all accounts. Most folks can’t evaluate all the legal ins and outs but everybody has an opinion about someone else’s personality and state of health. I feel this testimony was damaging to the D’s.

Which makes one wonder why he was chosen for the role? Surely his condition was known, or should have been. Did he deteriorate rapidly? Was he intended to be merely a figurehead to a bit squad? Or was he completely drained by efforts to control the hit squad? Why in the world did the D’s insist on his testifying? Did the D’s want to street light Mueller so they can his report is flawed because of finished vigor?

Next up is Barr and his 3 investigations. The contrast could be alarming, no predictions, just possibilities.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Plantagenet » Thu 25 Jul 2019, 00:06:56

Mueller was pathetic. The weak, quavering, elderly, and easily confused poor old man couldn't even remember what was in his own report. He couldn't remember what the question was. He mumbled. He said nonsensical things. He was pathetic.

We always knew the Mueller investigation was a sham. Now we see the leading investigator himself is a shambolic shadow of the man he once was. It would be very sad if it wasn't all so ridiculous.

Even a few Ds are willing to admit that Mueller's TV performance was disastrous.

democrats-panning-frail-forgetful-mueller

Michael Moore wrote: "frail old man, unable to remember things, stumbling, refusing to answer basic questions...I said it in 2017 and Mueller confirmed it today," tweeted Moore, adding "All you pundits and moderates and lame Dems who told the public to put their faith in the esteemed Robert Mueller — just STFU from now on."

Image

Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22863
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby dissident » Thu 25 Jul 2019, 22:33:01

The talk about Trump obstructing anything is pure delusional fantasy. All the D. Party clowns who repeat this talking point should provide a concrete example. Trump let the D. Party run the investigation with their own biased investigators. But that is not enough for the D. Party because it did not get the result it wanted. So they, predictably, start making up "facts" to compensate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFc2H1Ja5Rs

Key D. Party politicians are pathological liars. They lie to create the reality they want. Never take anything these clowns say as fact. Not that any politician should be given the benefit of the doubt. But the D. Party has degenerated into a collection of lunatics. The mere fact that Obama and Hillary staged this fraud and abused their official power underlines this. Is the USA supposed only have the D. Party in power? Clearly, the D. Party thinks so.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5633
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby dissident » Fri 26 Jul 2019, 19:13:47

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JpCqStOG0E

So the pivotal piece of "evidence" (the phony Steele dossier that was used to hoodwink the FISA courts) is not something the Special Counsel was concerned with. Hmmm. Phony investigation based on phony evidence with basically a phony Special Counsel. And D. Party zealots bleat about Trump obstructing justice. How did he do that? By not confessing his crimes 1984 style?
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5633
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby dissident » Wed 31 Jul 2019, 20:03:51

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07- ... early-role

The UK was key in lubricating the anti-Trump tinfoil hat hysteria we have seen over the last 3 years. If you want to see an example of meddling take the role of MI5 as an example. A few twitter and facebook clickbait ads by private Russian companies likely tied to the Clintons is not meddling. Unless you think US voters are all drooling morons and out of the spew of ads on social media some tiny fraction managed to resonate. Of course you have to ignore the real and massive influence of administrative measures such as launching an investigation during an election campaign.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5633
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Newfie » Thu 01 Aug 2019, 04:19:30

However one has to remember that during said campaign Comey made his famous remarks, concluded the HRC investigation, then restarted it, and that HRC very pointedly accuses Comey of costing her the election.

In a full review of events it’s harder to blame accuse the FBI of being solidly on this side or that.

Two suppositions come to mind, neither very satisfying.

The FBI itself could have been trying to influence the election. The reason is hard to fathom.

The FBI leadership really, truly is that incompetent and hysterical. They don’t mean to be idiots, they just are.

PS: after writing the above I stumbled across this.

But the IG report, at least, reaffirms what has become painfully clear to Americans the past two years: Comey entered the FBI chief’s job with a reputation for excellence but ran a bureau that suffered from ineptitude, political shenanigans, leaking and significant human failings, all of which sharply contrast with the morality lectures he’s become famous for frequently offering since he was fired.



https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/4 ... or-leaking
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Newfie » Fri 02 Aug 2019, 09:45:50

Interesting critique of Mueller Report

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com ... 19790.html
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Special Counsel Thread Pt. 4

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 08 Sep 2019, 07:42:12

And a NY POST article on Mueller and 9/11.

https://nypost.com/2019/09/07/robert-mu ... acks-suit/
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

PreviousNext

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests