• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Newly Revealed Memo Details the Scope of Robert Mueller's Investigative Mandate

Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
13,406
Reaction score
8,258
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
A Newly Revealed Memo Details the Scope of Robert Mueller's Investigative Mandate

(WASHINGTON) — Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein explicitly authorized the Justice Department’s special counsel to investigate allegations that President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman colluded with the Russian government, according to a court filing late Monday night.


Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team of prosecutors included that detail in a memo defending the scope of their investigation, which so far has resulted in criminal charges against 19 people and three Russian companies.

________________


Likely the first time we have officially seen evidence of investigation of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Looking at the court filing we see the following blatantly stated (p. 281):

Allegations that Paul Manafort:​

Committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials with respect to the Russian government's efforts to interfere with the 2016 election for President of the United States, in violation of United States law,​

Committed a crime or crimes arising out of payments he received from the Ukrainian government before and during the tenure of President Viktor Yanukovich:​

[Redacted]​

This was approved by Rosenstein and put forward by Mueller, indicating that there is an official investigation into collusion between Manafort and the Russian government for collusion in the election.
 
A Newly Revealed Memo Details the Scope of Robert Mueller's Investigative Mandate

(WASHINGTON) — Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein explicitly authorized the Justice Department’s special counsel to investigate allegations that President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman colluded with the Russian government, according to a court filing late Monday night.


Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team of prosecutors included that detail in a memo defending the scope of their investigation, which so far has resulted in criminal charges against 19 people and three Russian companies.

________________


Likely the first time we have officially seen evidence of investigation of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Looking at the court filing we see the following blatantly stated (p. 281):

Allegations that Paul Manafort:​

Committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials with respect to the Russian government's efforts to interfere with the 2016 election for President of the United States, in violation of United States law,​

Committed a crime or crimes arising out of payments he received from the Ukrainian government before and during the tenure of President Viktor Yanukovich:​

[Redacted]​

This was approved by Rosenstein and put forward by Mueller, indicating that there is an official investigation into collusion between Manafort and the Russian government for collusion in the election.

In the end, there will be enough hard evidence to prove to the nation that Trump is one step away from treason .
 
In the end, there will be enough hard evidence to prove to the nation that Trump is one step away from treason .

In the end, unless the Dems get the senate and the house, the Republicans and Trump's supporters wouldn't care. The ends justify the means and his supporters have a "Burn American down" mentality. The Republicans will never act as a whole to impeach Trump even if he was caught red handed in the proverbial cookie jar.
 
Meanwhile: Bill and Hillary Clinton took cold hard cash (millions) from Russia and it was A-okay!

rotflmao!
 
Meanwhile: Bill and Hillary Clinton took cold hard cash (millions) from Russia and it was A-okay!

rotflmao!

What the hell does that post have to do with the OP? Four posts into the thread and you are already attempting to derail the thread with a "Whatabout the Clintons" post.

If you are that interested in discussion what the Clintons did or did not do WHY DON'T YOU START YOUR OWN THREAD TO DISCUSS IT? Jesus!
 
What the hell does that post have to do with the OP? Four posts into the thread and you are already attempting to derail the thread with a "Whatabout the Clintons" post.

If you are that interested in discussion what the Clintons did or did not do WHY DON'T YOU START YOUR OWN THREAD TO DISCUSS IT? Jesus!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...689a9f2d84e_story.html?utm_term=.8e7f282e8362

I don't blame you from not wanting to discuss the obvious hypocrisy. Yes, I will start another thread on the Clinton's paid collusion with Russia.

Thanks
 
Meanwhile: Bill and Hillary Clinton took cold hard cash (millions) from Russia and it was A-okay!

rotflmao!

That never ever happened- never! You are all bullshyte
 
That never ever happened- never! You are all bullshyte

Ahem...

Actually, the Clintons took payments from Russia/Russian interests (see below). Sadly, your investigation has found no evidence of this for Trump. yet it continues. However, I will start another thread on this subject so you guys can stick with the one-sided narrative in this thread that the Left is desperately clinging to! lol

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...689a9f2d84e_story.html?utm_term=.8e7f282e8362
 
According to the FOX news article, the memo was dated August 2, 2017.

The FBI raided Manafort's home on July 26, 2017.

?
 
In the end, there will be enough hard evidence to prove to the nation that Trump is one step away from treason .

You could have live video of Trump openly admitting it and his sheep won't believe it. Trump made racism ok again and parrots Fox News. Once he did that his sheep will never turn on him regardless of what he does.
 
In the end, unless the Dems get the senate and the house, the Republicans and Trump's supporters wouldn't care. The ends justify the means and his supporters have a "Burn American down" mentality. The Republicans will never act as a whole to impeach Trump even if he was caught red handed in the proverbial cookie jar.

The GOP is clearly asleep at the wheel. It seems that they might prefer the massive leadership void in the White House. I expect them to do nothing.

Manafort seems to believe that Trump will pardon him if Manafort doesn't talk. Mueller looks as if he is chipping away Manafort, however.

Trump should have been impeached before now but that isn't going to happen. In fact as Trump continues to fire "the world's best people" in his cabinet Trump will appoint grifters, suckers, dummies and people foolish or slimy enough to want to work in the administration. It will be easier to get these second and third tier choices to commit some sort of loyalty pledge to Trump and thus help insure Trump that he won't be impeached.

And then there's Pence, who in his own way may be worse than Trump.
 
In the end, there will be enough hard evidence to prove to the nation that Trump is one step away from treason .

I'm thinking closer to 50-60%, depending on the poll you choose.
 
Ahem...

Actually, the Clintons took payments from Russia/Russian interests (see below). Sadly, your investigation has found no evidence of this for Trump. yet it continues. However, I will start another thread on this subject so you guys can stick with the one-sided narrative in this thread that the Left is desperately clinging to! lol

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...689a9f2d84e_story.html?utm_term=.8e7f282e8362

Can you show the conviction of Clinton? From what is seems like you refuse to see the mountains of evidence with Trump and are desperately clinging to Clinton. You can pretend that Clinton colluded with Russia to steal an election but there is no proof of that. Especially once you consider that she didn't steal the election. She lost.
 
Let's stay on topic here.

Then why quote me to get me to return? All you have to do is quit quoting me and realize that when you do it, I'll remind you the Clinton's took cold hard cash from Russia and the Left is perfectly okay with it!

Weird hypocrisy there no?
 
Can you show the conviction of Clinton? From what is seems like you refuse to see the mountains of evidence with Trump and are desperately clinging to Clinton. You can pretend that Clinton colluded with Russia to steal an election but there is no proof of that. Especially once you consider that she didn't steal the election. She lost.

LOL

Steal the election? I never once said she was colluding with Russia to steal it so you've become a little lost on that one. She had the DNC do (steal) the nomination for her from Bernie and she still lost... lol

I only mention the FACT the Clinton's took payment (cash) from Russia and Russian interests and the Left seems to think that is okay.. but cling to a boogeyman BS investigation for Trump.

Okay guys, quit quoting me and you can go back to your Trump-Russia-Collusion fantasy all on your own.

Have a great day!
 
Meanwhile: Bill and Hillary Clinton took cold hard cash (millions) from Russia and it was A-okay!

rotflmao!

As usual when things look bad for Trump his worhippers have a standard tactic....Just Yell...



HILLARY!!!!
 
Meanwhile: Bill and Hillary Clinton took cold hard cash (millions) from Russia and it was A-okay!

rotflmao!

Lay off the lame whataboutism's. They are weak and usual fraught with ignorance, as is this.

In a whataboutism you are admitting you can not defend the allegations, so in this case you are acknowledging Trump's corruption. Those on this thread appreciate your acknowledgement you can not defend Trump here. We get it. It is indefensible.

.... and what makes this whataboutism particularly weak is that what you allege isn't even remotely in the same league as the allegations Trump. I assume you are either referring to the Uranium One deal and/or Clinton's Global Initiative. You do realize the Clinton's derived no personal gain from either. These were substantially "trumped" up allegations just to appeal to the ignorant masses. Neither had any traction because informed people could see through the shallowness of these.

Here, maybe you could learn something about each of these. If you still have issues, feel free to start a thread discussing it, though I doubt anyone is interested as those ships have sailed (and hit rocks in the harbor)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_One
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Foundation


Since you could not defend Trump, you should have just stayed silent. That reminds me, do you know who is responsible for this quote:

"..... Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt...."?

It seems to be some difference of opinion.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/17/remain-silent/
I
 
Last edited:
A Newly Revealed Memo Details the Scope of Robert Mueller's Investigative Mandate

(WASHINGTON) — Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein explicitly authorized the Justice Department’s special counsel to investigate allegations that President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman colluded with the Russian government, according to a court filing late Monday night.


Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team of prosecutors included that detail in a memo defending the scope of their investigation, which so far has resulted in criminal charges against 19 people and three Russian companies.

________________


Likely the first time we have officially seen evidence of investigation of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Looking at the court filing we see the following blatantly stated (p. 281):

Allegations that Paul Manafort:​

Committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials with respect to the Russian government's efforts to interfere with the 2016 election for President of the United States, in violation of United States law,​

Committed a crime or crimes arising out of payments he received from the Ukrainian government before and during the tenure of President Viktor Yanukovich:​

[Redacted]​

This was approved by Rosenstein and put forward by Mueller, indicating that there is an official investigation into collusion between Manafort and the Russian government for collusion in the election.

The court filing says that he should look into these allegations, not that there is evidence that these allegations are true. The outcome of that angle of the investigation could be anything from nothingburger/closed to ermahgerd/treason. It makes for fun speculation and conversation, if that's your thing.

In the end, this "development" only means that collusion was on the list of things Mueller was supposed to look into, and I thought that was already known.
 
How many people have been convicted of treason in the history of the US?
 
The court filing says that he should look into these allegations, not that there is evidence that these allegations are true. The outcome of that angle of the investigation could be anything from nothingburger/closed to ermahgerd/treason. It makes for fun speculation and conversation, if that's your thing.

In the end, this "development" only means that collusion was on the list of things Mueller was supposed to look into, and I thought that was already known.

It shows that Mueller is specifically looking into Manafort's possible collusion with Russia.
 
It shows that Mueller is specifically looking into Manafort's possible collusion with Russia.

But wasn't he asked to look into everyone's possible collusion with Russia? Wasn't that the point of the investigation?
 
Can you show the conviction of Clinton? From what is seems like you refuse to see the mountains of evidence with Trump and are desperately clinging to Clinton. You can pretend that Clinton colluded with Russia to steal an election but there is no proof of that. Especially once you consider that she didn't steal the election. She lost.

So far there is no evidence against trump.
There is evidence or possible evidence against people in his campaign, but nothing against trump himself.

yet we have a ton of evidence that clintons and the DNC paid Fusion which in turned paid russian operatives for dirt.
interesting so where is your howling for an investigation on that one?

i will wait for crickets.
 
Lay off the lame whataboutism's. They are weak and usual fraught with ignorance, as is this.

In a whataboutism you are admitting you can not defend the allegations, so in this case you are acknowledging Trump's corruption. Those on this thread appreciate your acknowledgement you can not defend Trump here. We get it. It is indefensible.

.... and what makes this whataboutism particularly weak is that what you allege isn't even remotely in the same league as the allegations Trump. I assume you are either referring to the Uranium One deal and/or Clinton's Global Initiative. You do realize the Clinton's derived no personal gain from either. These were substantially "trumped" up allegations just to appeal to the ignorant masses. Neither had any traction because informed people could see through the shallowness of these.

Since you could not defend Trump, you should have just stayed silent. That reminds me, do you know who is responsible for this quote:

"..... Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt...."?

It seems to be some difference of opinion.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/17/remain-silent/
I

Well turnabout is definitely fair play. Consider what you wrote and realize that the Left cannot defend the Clintons taking cold hard cash from Russia to hide in their SlushFundation.

Now think about how quickly your side would send Trump to the gallows now if you uncovered the same thing with him? Be honest about that and this discussion can end here.

I will say that if the same (as I described above) were found with Trump even I would call it a payoff and stand right with you wanting it investigated.

See...
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom