• 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!

Did a Mueller Grand Jury Subpoena Trump?

maxparrish

maxparrish

Conservatarian
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
15,160
Reaction score
11,403
Location
SF Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/14/politics/mueller-grand-jury-mysterious-friday/index.html

But this Friday, court officials went to extreme measures to ensure it was as difficult as possible to figure out what Mueller's team was doing as the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held a secret and mysterious argument about a grand jury subpoena challenge.

An entire floor of the courthouse was closed to the public and press for more than an hour. During that time, attorneys secretly entered the courthouse to argue before three federal appellate judges over a grand jury subpoena.
Click to expand...

Seems that the story dates back to September, when CNN saw several of Mueller's lawyers entering a courtroom to argue against a defense team.

My guess is, Yes its Trump
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
Trump's people have already said this has nothing to do with him.
Click to expand...

...and Trump's people are credible how?

Common Sense 1 said:
Well if CNN saw it it has to be true! ;)
Click to expand...

...far more likely than what Trump or his people tell us is true...

BTW, the news portion of CNN has a very high rating for factual integrity.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

"....Overall, we rate CNN left biased based on story selection that often favors the left. We rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to misinformation and failed fact checks from guests and pundits. However, CNN’s straight news reporting would earn a High rating for factual reporting...."

Most of what Trump wants to call "fake news" is later found to be true.

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/01/trumps-phony-fake-news-claims/
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
Trump's people have already said this has nothing to do with him.
Click to expand...

Not so sure...this level of secrecy wherein even the lawyers are snuck into the courthouse (nobody even saw them arrive or leave) suggests its not a small fish.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Well if CNN saw it it has to be true! ;)
Click to expand...

Could you point out where in the linked article CNN said the courthouse lockdown had anything to do with Trump? I'll wait.
 
upsideguy said:
...and Trump's people are credible how?
Click to expand...

shrug...

I just stated a fact. They made the statement. Whether you believe them or not is up to you.
 
maxparrish said:
Not so sure...this level of secrecy wherein even the lawyers are snuck into the courthouse (nobody even saw them arrive or leave) suggests its not a small fish.
Click to expand...

shrug...

Speculate away. That's all you can do.

I'll wait for facts.
 
Mycroft said:
shrug...

I just stated a fact. They made the statement. Whether you believe them or not is up to you.
Click to expand...

You and facts, like peas in a pod; peas and carrots............
 
RAMOSS said:
One person who was spotted in the area at the time was on Muellers team and his specialist is terrorism, and cyberterrorism. That reduces the chance it was about Trump directly.
Click to expand...

Yep, that would. But very curious...
 
RAMOSS said:
One person who was spotted in the area at the time was on Muellers team and his specialist is terrorism, and cyberterrorism. That reduces the chance it was about Trump directly.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking it has more to do with Roger Stone trying to avoid giving Grand Jury testimony. He's the alleged "link" between the campaign and wikileaks.
 
Mycroft said:
shrug...

I just stated a fact. They made the statement. Whether you believe them or not is up to you.
Click to expand...

Well, just pointing, based upon the historic record..... that your statement:

Mycroft said:
Trump's people have already said this has nothing to do with him.
Click to expand...

is nothing but words. Those words in a single sentence mean nothing because they are not sourced with anything trustworthy. Hence, your post adds nothing to the discussion.
 
RAMOSS said:
One person who was spotted in the area at the time was on Muellers team and his specialist is terrorism, and cyberterrorism. That reduces the chance it was about Trump directly.
Click to expand...
Zainab Ahmad?
170515_r29937.jpg

Muslim, born to immigrants from Pakistan. Was going to school for hospital administration. 9/11 happens, and she changes course to law, ends up prosecution terrorists. Sounds like a real patriot, compared to team-Trump.
She also got to help in the Michael Flynn case. I find that particularly satisfying. Remember how Flynn became a nutter at some point, and finally drank the kool-aid

Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL: please forward this to others: the truth fears no questions… https://t.co/NLIfKFD9lU
— General Flynn (@GenFlynn) February 27, 2016

Ahmad was one of the team members responsible for handling the case against Michael Flynn,[18] and appeared in court on behalf of the Special Counsel for Flynn's plea bargain.[19]

Make America proud you ****ing asshole Flynn, what a disgrace. I'm glad a Muslim woman helped seal your pleading guilty to a crime against the United States.

She has prosecuted 13 case, many high profile terrorist cases.
Won 13 cases.

Nice to hear about American success stories amidst the gutter trash of the right wing Republicans like Flynn, Manafort, Stone, Trump, Corsi, etc.

Anyway, I saw that they spotted her returning to Special Counsel HQ, and not on the scene. She could have just been coming back from lunch. But learning about her was worth the thread for me :p
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
Well, just pointing, based upon the historic record..... that your statement:



is nothing but words. Those words in a single sentence mean nothing because they are not sourced with anything trustworthy. Hence, your post adds nothing to the discussion.
Click to expand...

LOL!!

Every statement...no matter who makes it...is nothing but words. You saying my statement is also nothing but words isn't any kind of relevant revelation. You shouldn't try to emulate Captain Obvious.

Now...if you want me to source my statement, all you have to do is ask. Neither you, nor anyone else, has done so. Why not?

Oh...wait...you also raise the condition that a source must be "trustworthy". That's a cop out. Any source that quotes a named person saying something is trustworthy...at least as far as faithfully quoting that person. Evidently, you want to leave yourself the opportunity to dishonestly shoot a possible messenger.

On the other hand, there is always a question...even with a named person making a statement...with whether that person is believable or not. In regards to the statement I made, that's irrelevant. I simply said that Trump's people have already said this has nothing to do with him. Whether you believe Trump's people or not has no bearing on my statement.

As far as whether my statement adds to the discussion or not...that an opinion. Yours. Whether your opinion is based on reason or fact...or on nothing but irrational bias...that's up to you.

So...if you want to question whether my statement is factual or not, fine. Do so. Ask me for a source. I'll be happy to provide one. But don't bother me with irrelevant bull****. I'll also be happy to dismiss you.
 
Did a Mueller Grand Jury Subpoena Trump?
Click to expand...

Possibly. That's one plausible explanation for the "fifth floor" goings on this past Friday.
 
haymarket said:
Well, that settles that. :doh:roll:
Click to expand...

Actually, that DOESN'T settle anything. I simply made a statement of fact...that Trump's people said something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom