Mueller hunt for Russia collusion turns into circus show with Stone

[trixare4kids]

Somebody didn't actually read the memo.

View attachment 67248913

University of Chicago and Northwestern legal expert, Turley, read the memo.

Where did you get your law degree from?'

Jonathan Turley opined:

The media has long described Stone as the possible Trump campaign conduit to WikiLeaks and the Russians, citing his presumed communications with Julian Assange and his advance knowledge of the Democratic Party and Clinton campaign email hacks.

Yet, none of that was confirmed or even suggested in the indictment. There was no charge of collusion. No hint of meetings or arrangements with Assange. Not even a charge as an unregistered foreign agent of the Russians. Just collateral crimes with nary a mention of collusion and a defendant who alternatively presents himself as the tragically comic and the comically tragic figure mired in the special counsel investigation

 

[trixare4kids]

Impeached and tossed out by who? The Republican cowards Congress? You're kidding, right?

That would be the majority, 2/3 of the senate to convict.
Why would anyone kid about this? :doh

 

[lwf]

When the NEW USAG tells Mueller to **** or get off the pot.

37 indictments would seem to indicate that the investigation is bearing fruit, yes?

 

[jnug]

So is this thread and Turley's piece a comment on breathless an mostly just ratings hungry Cable News? If so, my simple comment back would be No**** Sherlock!

 

[trixare4kids]

37 indictments would seem to indicate that the investigation is bearing fruit, yes?

rotten fruit.
Nothing that even resembles high crimes.

 

[Cardinal]

University of Chicago and Northwestern legal expert, Turley, read the memo.

Where did you get your law degree from?

University of Chicago and Northwestern legal expert, Jonathan Turley, had this to say:

"The media has long described Stone as the possible Trump campaign conduit to WikiLeaks and the Russians, citing his presumed communications with Julian Assange and his advance knowledge of the Democratic Party and Clinton campaign email hacks.

Yet, none of that was confirmed or even suggested in the indictment. "

This means that Jonathan Turley, University of Chicago and Northwesternal legal expert, did not actually read the memo he wrote an opinion piece on.

Also, Jonathan Turley, ace legal expert, had this to say:

"There was no charge of collusion..."

Jonathan Turley, legal expert extraordinaire, appears to be unaware that collusion is not a legal term.

 

[lwf]

rotten fruit.
Nothing that even resembles high crimes.

Doesn't matter. Crimes discovered in the course of any investigation are fair game.

 

[trixare4kids]

University of Chicago and Northwestern legal expert, Jonathan Turley, had this to say:

"The media has long described Stone as the possible Trump campaign conduit to WikiLeaks and the Russians, citing his presumed communications with Julian Assange and his advance knowledge of the Democratic Party and Clinton campaign email hacks.

Yet, none of that was confirmed or even suggested in the indictment. "

This means that Jonathan Turley, University of Chicago and Northwesternal legal expert, did not actually read the memo he wrote an opinion piece on.

Also, Jonathan Turley, ace legal expert, has this to say:

"There was no charge of collusion..."

Jonathan Turley, legal expert extraordinaire, appears to be unaware that collusion is not a legal term.

Not so fast, Mr. armchair legal expert...

Legal expert Turley opined:

"A close review of the indictment reveals there is less than meets the eye to both Stone and his alleged crimes. The indictment contains the same collateral crimes used against every person who is not Russian charged by Mueller with false statements or unrelated crimes. Stone was charged on five overlapping claims of false statements in an indictment of seven counts. For example, Mueller alleges that Stone lied when he denied communicating through texts or emails with a WikiLeaks intermediary."

Whether Stone is found guilty of lying to investigators or tampering with witnesses, nothing in the indictment suggests he took part in Russia collusion.

SOSDD, Mueller's circus show.

 

[trixare4kids]

Doesn't matter. Crimes discovered in the course of any investigation are fair game.

And so where are they?

 

[Cardinal]

rotten fruit.
Nothing that even resembles high crimes.

Why should anybody convince you which crimes are important enough and big enough?

 

[Cardinal]

Not so fast, Mr. armchair legal expert...

Legal expert Turley opined:
"A close review of the indictment reveals there is less than meets the eye to both Stone and his alleged crimes. The indictment contains the same collateral crimes used against every person who is not Russian charged by Mueller with false statements or unrelated crimes. Stone was charged on five overlapping claims of false statements in an indictment of seven counts. For example, Mueller alleges that Stone lied when he denied communicating through texts or emails with a WikiLeaks intermediary."

SOSDD, Mueller's circus show.

Again, Jonathan Turley, Expert Law Hero of the Seven Seas, did not actually read the memo he's opining on, so why should anybody care what he thinks?

 

[Helix]

i like presidents who don't have close advisors who witness tamper by threatening pets.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

They don't care about actual evidence. They are counting on being able to impeach Trump based on perception.

What a deliciously absurd bit of dishonest tripe.

You should really consider familiarizing yourself with the whole Mueller probe so that you can avoid making statements like that.

 

[lwf]

And so where are they?

lying to the FBI
acting as an unregistered foreign agent
money laundering
conspiracy against the United States
conspiracy to obstruct Justice
identity fraud
unauthorized access to a protected computer
tax fraud
bank fraud
campaign finance violations
lying to Congress
witness tampering...

Is that enough?

 

[Mycroft]

What a deliciously absurd bit of dishonest tripe.

You should really consider familiarizing yourself with the whole Mueller probe so that you can avoid making statements like that.

The Mueller probe is essentially irrelevant to the House, except insofar as they can find stuff to spin.

Seriously...are you aware of the plan Pelosi and her House Dems have constructed? It's not a secret, you know.

 

[Mycroft]

lying to the FBI
acting as an unregistered foreign agent
money laundering
conspiracy against the United States
conspiracy to obstruct Justice
identity fraud
unauthorized access to a protected computer
tax fraud
bank fraud
campaign finance violations
lying to Congress
witness tampering...

Is that enough?

Most of that is a result of Mueller's investigative tactics and none of it involves Trump, his campaign or the Russians.

Oh...and some of them are just plain bogus allegations.

But hey...that's all Mueller has been able to find/create.

 

[Athanasius68]

University of Chicago and Northwestern legal expert, Jonathan Turley, had this to say:

"The media has long described Stone as the possible Trump campaign conduit to WikiLeaks and the Russians, citing his presumed communications with Julian Assange and his advance knowledge of the Democratic Party and Clinton campaign email hacks.

Yet, none of that was confirmed or even suggested in the indictment. "

This means that Jonathan Turley, University of Chicago and Northwesternal legal expert, did not actually read the memo he wrote an opinion piece on.

Also, Jonathan Turley, ace legal expert, had this to say:

"There was no charge of collusion..."

Jonathan Turley, legal expert extraordinaire, appears to be unaware that collusion is not a legal term.

Collusion means conspiracy of some sort. No such indictment.
Moreover, Turkey seems correct that there is nothing in his indictment indicating that he had advanced knowledge.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

The Mueller probe is essentially irrelevant to the House, except insofar as they can find stuff to spin.

More delusional dishonest not based in reality. Yay!

Seriously...are you aware of the plan Pelosi and her House Dems have constructed? It's not a secret, you know.

Seriously, are you aware that the GOP house utterly failed in its responsibility for oversight over the executive branch, even running interference for it, and now the Dems are actually going to do the work the House is supposed to do?

I can see what that frightens some people to death.

I look forward to a very, very painful year for Trump and his sycophants.

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

That would be the majority, 2/3 of the senate to convict.
Why would anyone kid about this? :doh

Yep, so why are you saying if Trump was really guilty he'd be gone by now?? lol

Who's going to throw him out? Guilty or not, not the Senate.

 

[Mycroft]

Again, Jonathan Turley, Expert Law Hero of the Seven Seas, did not actually read the memo he's opining on, so why should anybody care what he thinks?

What memo?

 

[Carleen]

The Mueller probe is essentially irrelevant to the House, except insofar as they can find stuff to spin.

Seriously...are you aware of the plan Pelosi and her House Dems have constructed? It's not a secret, you know.

You have no idea as does anyone else exactly what Mueller has found and we won’t until the investigation is done.

 

[Athanasius68]

You have no idea as does anyone else exactly what Mueller has found and we won’t until the investigation is done.

Of course we do. We know Mueller is not indicting anyone from the Trump campaign for conspiring to throw the 2016 election. We can at least conclude that this is because nobody in the Trump campaign conspired with Russia to throw the 2016 election.

 

[Mycroft]

More delusional dishonest not based in reality. Yay!

Seriously, are you aware that the GOP house utterly failed in its responsibility for oversight over the executive branch, even running interference for it, and now the Dems are actually going to do the work the House is supposed to do?

I can see what that frightens some people to death.

I look forward to a very, very painful year for Trump and his sycophants.

LOL!!

WHATABOUT!!!

Moving on...

 

[Carleen]

Of course we do. We know Mueller is not indicting anyone from the Trump campaign for conspiring to throw the 2016 election. We can at least conclude that this is because nobody in the Trump campaign conspired with Russia to throw the 2016 election.

It isn’t over yet.

 

[Mycroft]

You have no idea as does anyone else exactly what Mueller has found and we won’t until the investigation is done.

Of course. I haven't said otherwise.