ADVERTISEMENT

Might as well send the anti-Trump fanatics closer to the edge

When you are hired to find something, you keep going until you find something, or you make something up that is unrelated to what you started the investigation in the first place. We are seeing them attempt the 2nd right now.

In the end there isnt a lot they can do because Trump can choose to not answer questions, fire the counsel, ect. The only factor is if it drags out and the GOP lose seats giving control to dems for impeachment.
 
Piece by Clintonista about Mueller's probe.

Don't agree with all of it, but interesting to see his perspective.

http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/388549-stopping-robert-mueller-to-protect-us-all

One thing he says DOES sound reasonable to me. At least, I'd love to see it. He suggests Trump sit down with Mueller for questioning.....if it's televised live.

Close to the edge of what? You're repeated attempt at defending Trump and his idiot followers is laughable. If Mueller finds nothing on Trump then fine, but it still needs to be investigated based on the evidence. I can see you're a guy struggling with your vote. You voted for Trump and now you're whole agenda is to prove to yourself and others that you didn't vote for a traitor. So the best way for you to do that is to close your eyes and not want investigate it.

LC, I'm sure you make the right chose, you on the same side as OiT and the KKK.
 
When you are hired to find something, you keep going until you find something, or you make something up that is unrelated to what you started the investigation in the first place. We are seeing them attempt the 2nd right now.

In the end there isnt a lot they can do because Trump can choose to not answer questions, fire the counsel, ect. The only factor is if it drags out and the GOP lose seats giving control to dems for impeachment.

Why do you believe this? Why do you think it's all made up?
 
Close to the edge of what? You're repeated attempt at defending Trump and his idiot followers is laughable. If Mueller finds nothing on Trump then fine, but it still needs to be investigated based on the evidence. I can see you're a guy struggling with your vote. You voted for Trump and now you're whole agenda is to prove to yourself and others that you didn't vote for a traitor. So the best way for you to do that is to close your eyes and not want investigate it.

LC, I'm sure you make the right chose, you on the same side as OiT and the KKK.
One of the things I don't agree with in the linked piece is his basic premise, which is that the Mueller investigation should be ended. I think it should run its course.

I'm not struggling with my vote in any way. I voted for Trump for the reasons I've stated on numerous occasions here, and nothing since the election has changed those reasons.

You also seem to share a common misconception on this board.

If I were to write "I hope Iowa State goes to a bowl game this season," some of you would claim I was defending Trump because:

(a) Nothing in the sentence criticized him, and
(b) I wrote it.
 
When you are hired to find something, you keep going until you find something, or you make something up that is unrelated to what you started the investigation in the first place. We are seeing them attempt the 2nd right now.

In the end there isnt a lot they can do because Trump can choose to not answer questions, fire the counsel, ect. The only factor is if it drags out and the GOP lose seats giving control to dems for impeachment.

If Mueller is making things up it then he sure is convincing because people have been pleading guilty.
 
If Mueller is making things up it then he sure is convincing because people have been pleading guilty.

I agree with you there is some smoke but how much of it is directly related to what they were intended to go for. So far, not a lot and most of the major players are in trouble for things 5-10 years ago.
 
I couldn't get the link to open.
I didn't think "The Hill" was a banned site. I hate to do a cut-and-paste, but will if you want.

  • =======================

The “deep state” is in a deep state of desperation. With little time left before the Justice Department inspector general’s report becomes public, and with special counsel Robert Mueller having failed to bring down Donald Trump after a year of trying, they know a reckoning is coming.

At this point, there is little doubt that the highest echelons of the FBI and the Justice Department broke their own rules to end the Hillary Clinton“matter,” but we can expect the inspector general to document what was done or, more pointedly, not done. It is hard to see how a year-long investigation of this won’t come down hard on former FBI Director James Comey and perhaps even former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who definitely wasn’t playing mahjong in a secret “no aides allowed” meeting with former President Clinton on a Phoenix airport tarmac.


With this report on the way and congressional investigators beginning to zero in on the lack of hard, verified evidence for starting the Trump probe, current and former intelligence and Justice Department officials are dumping everything they can think of to save their reputations.


But it is backfiring. They started by telling the story of Alexander Downer, an Australian diplomat, as having remembered a bar conversation with George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign. But how did the FBI know they should talk to him? That’s left out of their narrative. Downer’s signature appears on a $25 million contribution to the Clinton Foundation. You don’t need much imagination to figure that he was close with Clinton Foundation operatives who relayed information to the State Department, which then called the FBI to complete the loop. This wasn’t intelligence. It was likely opposition research from the start.

In no way would a fourth-hand report from a Maltese professor justify wholesale targeting of four or five members of the Trump campaign. It took Christopher Steele, with his funding concealed through false campaign filings, to be incredibly successful at creating a vast echo chamber around his unverified, fanciful dossier, bouncing it back and forth between the press and the FBI so it appeared that there were multiple sources all coming to the same conclusion.

Time and time again, investigators came up empty. Even several sting operations with an FBI spy we just learned about failed to produce a Delorean-like video with cash on the table. But rather than close the probe, the deep state just expanded it. All they had were a few isolated contacts with Russians and absolutely nothing related to Trump himself, yet they pressed forward. Egged on by Steele, they simply believed Trump and his team must be dirty. They just needed to dig deep enough.

Perhaps the murkiest event in the timeline is Rod Rosenstein’s appointment of a special counsel after he personally recommended Comey’s firing in blistering terms. With Attorney General Jeff Sessionsshoved out of the way, Rosenstein and Mueller then ignored their own conflicts and took charge anyway. Rosenstein is a fact witness, and Mueller is a friend of Comey, disqualifying them both.

Flush with 16 prosecutors, including a former lawyer for the Clinton Foundation, and an undisclosed budget, the Mueller investigation has been a scorched-earth effort to investigate the entirety of the Trump campaign, Trump business dealings, the entire administration and now, if it was not Russia, maybe it’s some other country.

The president’s earlier legal team was naive in believing that, when Mueller found nothing, he would just end it. Instead, the less investigators found, the more determined and expansive they became. This president and his team now are on a better road to put appropriate limits on all this.

This process must now be stopped, preferably long before a vote in the Senate. Rather than a fair, limited and impartial investigation, the Mueller investigation became a partisan, open-ended inquisition that, by its precedent, is a threat to all those who ever want to participate in a national campaign or an administration again.

Its prosecutions have all been principally to pressure witnesses with unrelated charges and threats to family, or just for a public relations effect, like the indictment of Russian internet trolls. Unfortunately, just like the Doomsday Machine in “Dr. Strangelove” that was supposed to save the world but instead destroys it, the Mueller investigation comes with no “off” switch: You can’t fire Mueller. He needs to be defeated, like Ken Starr, the independent counsel who investigated President Clinton.

Finding the “off” switch will not be easy. Step one here is for the Justice Department inspector general report to knock Comey out of the witness box. Next, the full origins of the investigation and its lack of any real intelligence needs to come out in the open. The attorney general, himself the target of a secret investigation, needs to take back his Justice Department. Sessions needs to act quickly, along with U.S. Attorney John Huber, appointed to conduct an internal review of the FBI, on the Comey and McCabe matters following the inspector general report, and then announce an expanded probe into other abuses of power.

The president’s lawyers need to extend their new aggressiveness from words to action, filing complaints with Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility on the failure of Mueller and Rosenstein to recuse themselves, and going into court to question the tactics of the special counsel, from selective prosecutions on unrelated matters, illegally seizing Government Services Administration emails, covering up the phone texts of FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and operating without a scope approved by the attorney general. (The regulations call for the attorney general to recuse himself from the investigation but appear to still leave him responsible for the scope.)

The final stopper may be the president himself, offering two hours of testimony, perhaps even televised live from the White House. The last time America became obsessed with Russian influence in America was the McCarthy hearings in the 1950s. Those ended only when Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-Wis.) attacked an associate of the U.S. Army counsel, Joseph Welch, and Welch famously responded: “Sir, have you no decency?” In this case, virtually every associate and family member of the president has been subject to smears conveniently leaked to the press.

Stopping Mueller isn’t about one president or one party. It’s about all presidents and all parties. It’s about cleaning out and reforming the deep state so that our intelligence operations are never used against opposing campaigns without the firmest of evidence. It’s about letting people work for campaigns and administrations without needing legal defense funds. It’s about relying on our elections to decide our differences.

Mark Penn served as pollster and adviser to President Clinton from 1995 to 2000, including during his impeachment. He is chairman of the Harris Polland author of “Microtrends Squared.” Follow him on Twitter @Mark_Penn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Titus Andronicus
One of the things I don't agree with in the linked piece is his basic premise, which is that the Mueller investigation should be ended. I think it should run its course.

I'm not struggling with my vote in any way. I voted for Trump for the reasons I've stated on numerous occasions here, and nothing since the election has changed those reasons.

You also seem to share a common misconception on this board.

If I were to write "I hope Iowa State goes to a bowl game this season," some of you would claim I was defending Trump because:

(a) Nothing in the sentence criticized him, and
(b) I wrote it.

Then maybe you don't realize you're doing it, but you always seem to post things that are related to proving Trump innocent or stopping the investigation. That's why people have the opinion about you.
 
Then maybe you don't realize you're doing it, but you always seem to post things that are related to proving Trump innocent or stopping the investigation. That's why people have the opinion about you.
No, I frequently post things that question his critics' motives, statements or actions. The reason people have the opinion that I'm defending Trump is that they think anybody who isn't criticizing him is defending him.
 
mueller should finish on his own timeframe. The facts of Russian infiltration into our political system need to be highlighted. A good report from his team describing events will help bring facts to the political argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lone Clone
mueller should finish on his own timeframe. The facts of Russian infiltration into our political system need to be highlighted. A good report from his team describing events will help bring facts to the political argument.

I agree. But I also agree there is a lot of smoke that the Obama admin used our government to weaponize against a competitors campaign and transition. To me that is WAY more important to get to the bottom of regardless of party affiliation.
 
If Mueller is making things up it then he sure is convincing because people have been pleading guilty.

A lot of rich people at that. People who have the resources to get good attorney's to defend themselves, not some crappy overworked public defender.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
The “deep state” is in a deep state of desperation. With little time left before the Justice Department inspector general’s report becomes public, and with special counsel Robert Mueller having failed to bring down Donald Trump after a year of trying, they know a reckoning is coming.

Let's start with this opening paragraph: what in this paragraph is "factual" to you?

The “deep state” is in a deep state of desperation.
That's a cute opening line, but the scoreboards indicate we have >20 indictments, >70 criminal charges, 5 or more guilty pleas and multiple witnesses flipped.

That's "desperation"? Seriously?

With little time left before the Justice Department inspector general’s report becomes public, and with special counsel Robert Mueller having failed to bring down Donald Trump after a year of trying, they know a reckoning is coming.

What "reckoning"? It took > 2 years to "take down Nixon". This case is FAR more complex, and the primary focus of the investigation is counter-intelligence - NOT EVEN CRIMINAL CHARGES.....

Experts have indicated that Mueller's investigation is one of the most efficient in modern history. So, I don't really need to go any further into your "op ed" here to know this is fluff.

Just keep reminding yourself that it is primarily REPUBLICAN investigators running the show here. Repeat that until it sinks in.
 
No, I frequently post things that question his critics' motives, statements or actions. The reason people have the opinion that I'm defending Trump is that they think anybody who isn't criticizing him is defending him.

Here's what gets you into trouble. You're posting articles that question the critics and most of those articles tend to be one sided (to Trump). For example the one you posted in this thread. As you have already noted, it mentions stopping the investigation. In your initial post you didn't mentioned anything about disagreeing with it. So for anyone reading your post and the link, the impression is that's how you feel. You wouldn't take the time to link it if you didn't strongly agree (or disagree) with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
On what 'factual basis' is any of this true:

This process must now be stopped, preferably long before a vote in the Senate. Rather than a fair, limited and impartial investigation, the Mueller investigation became a partisan, open-ended inquisition that, by its precedent, is a threat to all those who ever want to participate in a national campaign or an administration again.
 
I agree. But I also agree there is a lot of smoke that the Obama admin used our government to weaponize against a competitors campaign and transition. To me that is WAY more important to get to the bottom of regardless of party affiliation.

Both are pretty important. Unfortunately a bunch of E-mails disappeared at the IRS so we didn't get to see how far up the chain that went.

I personally doubt it went all the way up to Obama however. Just didn't seem like it involved much coordination and was only one agency within one department. And apparently some of it, the flagging of political groups started happening all the way back in 2004.

The Russia thing however. . . we do know that Trump's own son lied about the purpose of a meeting with a Russian agent. So maybe this doesn't get all the way up to Donald Trump, but it certainly looks like his son was involved.
 
On what 'factual basis' is any of this true:

This process must now be stopped, preferably long before a vote in the Senate. Rather than a fair, limited and impartial investigation, the Mueller investigation became a partisan, open-ended inquisition that, by its precedent, is a threat to all those who ever want to participate in a national campaign or an administration again.

partisan because its all run by republicans.
 
Both are pretty important. Unfortunately a bunch of E-mails disappeared at the IRS so we didn't get to see how far up the chain that went.

I personally doubt it went all the way up to Obama however. Just didn't seem like it involved much coordination and was only one agency within one department. And apparently some of it, the flagging of political groups started happening all the way back in 2004.

The Russia thing however. . . we do know that Trump's own son lied about the purpose of a meeting with a Russian agent. So maybe this doesn't get all the way up to Donald Trump, but it certainly looks like his son was involved.
It isnt just that that IRS emails were deleted. There were 7 hard drives that all crashed and were destroyed all around the same time. Amazing quite frankly. Then, they all took the 5th.
 
It isnt just that that IRS emails were deleted. There were 7 hard drives that all crashed and were destroyed all around the same time. Amazing quite frankly. Then, they all took the 5th.

Trust me I'm aware of how fishy that all was.

Looking back at it on Wikipedia, Learner stated that she didn't break any laws and then proceeded immediately to invoke the 5th.

In all honesty I don't see how one can claim to not have broken a law and then invoke the 5th. Invoking the 5th is pretty much an admission that you broke the law, we just don't know what law or how.
 
Last edited:
I would start off and say I disagree with the author’s original accusation that Robert Mueller is “trying” to bring down Trump. Mueller may or may not like Trump, but I don’t believe he has a personal axe to grind with him.


I can agree that the IG should come down hard on Comey & Lynch. Comey’s actions in particular have been embarrassing, frankly, to all those in intelligence leadership. Number one he screwed over Hillary with his announcement of her email investigation. Then his recent book tour and one-man act trashing Trump, while I completely agree with trashing him at every step, is very unbecoming of someone with his background. Lynch, while we don’t know for certain what the meeting with Bill entailed, one could certainly surmise there was something fishy.


I disagree that the investigation should stop now. It should stop when it is finished. Like most investigations of this nature, the evidence takes them wherever it goes. If that leads to some personal ties of Trump and/or his associates dating back several years, then those ties need to be investigated.


The author cannot reasonably conclude Mueller and, by extension, Rosenstein have failed because the investigation is not complete. Because of the nature of the investigation, Sessions has been correct in maintaining his distance from it and should not extend any influence on it. If he wants to investigate other aspects of the Justice Department and possible malfeasance, that’s certainly within his purview.


Trump himself is the reason he is a target of these accusations of collusion. Just based on what’s been released thus far, there is little doubt (in my opinion) he and/or his associates consorted with Russian officials in order to (a) secure the GOP nomination (I’m a believer, that some evidence will come out about Russian influence to get him the nomination instead of other mainstream GOP candidates), and (b) achieve an electoral college victory over Hillary Clinton.


As far as the author (Mark Penn) is concerned, I have my own opinions of him. There’s something about him and his writing style the past year or so that makes him come across as ‘jilted’ (at least in my opinion) and I have to take what he says with a grain of salt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Let's start with this opening paragraph: what in this paragraph is "factual" to you?

The “deep state” is in a deep state of desperation.
That's a cute opening line, but the scoreboards indicate we have >20 indictments, >70 criminal charges, 5 or more guilty pleas and multiple witnesses flipped.

That's "desperation"? Seriously?

With little time left before the Justice Department inspector general’s report becomes public, and with special counsel Robert Mueller having failed to bring down Donald Trump after a year of trying, they know a reckoning is coming.

What "reckoning"? It took > 2 years to "take down Nixon". This case is FAR more complex, and the primary focus of the investigation is counter-intelligence - NOT EVEN CRIMINAL CHARGES.....

Experts have indicated that Mueller's investigation is one of the most efficient in modern history. So, I don't really need to go any further into your "op ed" here to know this is fluff.

Just keep reminding yourself that it is primarily REPUBLICAN investigators running the show here. Repeat that until it sinks in.
 
Once again, you ignore the reality of the situation. I linked a piece that clearly was the author's opinion, and said I didn't agree with all he said, specifically not the subject line.
 
Trust me I'm aware of how fishy that all was.

Looking back at it on Wikipedia, Learner stated that she didn't break any laws and then proceeded immediately to invoke the 5th.

In all honesty I don't see how one can claim to not have broken a law and then invoke the 5th. Invoking the 5th is pretty much an admission that you broke the law, we just don't know what law or how.
You can't; that was pointed out at the time by a few legal experts. But the committee let her skate. Why, I haven't a clue.
 
No, I frequently post things that question his critics' motives, statements or actions. The reason people have the opinion that I'm defending Trump is that they think anybody who isn't criticizing him is defending him.
Plus, it's raining so you can't go golfing. Gotta ward off the boredom somehow. I like that you post on here that you are above such pot stirring, feign wounded indignation, then post pot stirring pieces.
 
Here's what gets you into trouble. You're posting articles that question the critics and most of those articles tend to be one sided (to Trump). For example the one you posted in this thread. As you have already noted, it mentions stopping the investigation. In your initial post you didn't mentioned anything about disagreeing with it. So for anyone reading your post and the link, the impression is that's how you feel. You wouldn't take the time to link it if you didn't strongly agree (or disagree) with it.
I should have said in my initial post, when I said I didn't agree with everything he says, that I didn't agree the Mueller probe should be ended before it's finished. I (mistakenly, it appears) assumed that since I have frequently and consistently said I oppose prematurely ending the probe, it wasn't necessary to repeat myself. I erred -- as I shouldn't have, considering the subject line of the linked piece.

I linked it because I think he makes some excellent points. And because I knew it would cause mass hysteria among the usual suspects here. Hence the subject line I chose to put on my post.
 
FWIW here is an analysis of an earlier pro Trump article written by the same author.

"Why did Penn write his piece? It’s not clear, but the undercurrents are revealing. He is clearly sympathetic to Trump, a guy who ran the campaign that Penn wanted to see from Clinton in 2008. He likes to play the contrarian. And he’s going out of his way to lure Trump supporters to his cause.

If you want to believe that the polls are wrong and Trump is generally popular, feel free. But Penn’s analysis shouldn’t convince you that’s true."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...porters/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b658abe6efe9
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
One of the things I don't agree with in the linked piece is his basic premise, which is that the Mueller investigation should be ended. I think it should run its course.

I'm not struggling with my vote in any way. I voted for Trump for the reasons I've stated on numerous occasions here, and nothing since the election has changed those reasons.

You also seem to share a common misconception on this board.

If I were to write "I hope Iowa State goes to a bowl game this season," some of you would claim I was defending Trump because:

(a) Nothing in the sentence criticized him, and
(b) I wrote it.

You can justify it with "But Hillary", but the fact is, a turnip would be doing a better job. He literally does nothing good, ever.
 
Close to the edge of what? You're repeated attempt at defending Trump and his idiot followers is laughable. If Mueller finds nothing on Trump then fine, but it still needs to be investigated based on the evidence. I can see you're a guy struggling with your vote. You voted for Trump and now you're whole agenda is to prove to yourself and others that you didn't vote for a traitor. So the best way for you to do that is to close your eyes and not want investigate it.

LC, I'm sure you make the right chose, you on the same side as OiT and the KKK.
And you are an idiot.
 
When you are hired to find something, you keep going until you find something, or you make something up that is unrelated to what you started the investigation in the first place. We are seeing them attempt the 2nd right now.

In the end there isnt a lot they can do because Trump can choose to not answer questions, fire the counsel, ect. The only factor is if it drags out and the GOP lose seats giving control to dems for impeachment.

You mean like Ken Starr did with the Bill Clinton Whitewater investigation? By the way, trump ain't going to sit down and talk to Mueller. The way I know that is he has said multiple times that he wants to if his lawyers will let him, which is just another little lie. Since when does anyone, lawyers included, dictate to him what he can and cannot do? He's using another lie to save his worthless ass from incriminating himself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
ADVERTISEMENT