• 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!

Mueller Probes an Event With Nunes, Flynn, and Foreign Officials at Trump’s D.C. Hotel

joko104 said:
Team Mueller is doing every opposition research for the Democratic Party possible on taxpayer money and using government power to do so. This level of corruption is unprecedented in American political history.
Click to expand...

Nunes was part of Trump's transition team, well within scope.
 
HumblePi said:
The U.S. taxpayer just got a big bonus with the $40 - $60 million that will be recuperated from Manafort alone. Thanks Robert Mueller! He actually will show a profit for the U.S. taxpayer as the fruits of his investigation continue to show a profit.
Click to expand...

Link to the total cost of Mueller's investigations, trial and jailing costs if you think he is "turning a profit" and proof that Mueller has collected $40 to $60 million. All those are made up media numbers.
 
joko104 said:
What an absolutely worthless message. Don't you think everyone including you, all your family and friends should have a $100,000,000 investigation done to see if any of you and yours committed any crime? All Americans should - but only Americans. Anyone in the country who isn't a citizen of course shouldn't be bothered. Oh, and of course no Democrats.
Click to expand...

Sure, pretend that this is all out of the blue.
 
DiAnna said:
In conclusion, I submit... Khashoggi. The prosecution rests. ;)
Click to expand...

In semi-semi-conclusion I submit ...encrypted back channel with Russian spies.
 
joko104 said:
What an absolutely worthless message. Don't you think everyone including you, all your family and friends should have a $100,000,000 investigation done to see if any of you and yours committed any crime? All Americans should - but only Americans. Anyone in the country who isn't a citizen of course shouldn't be bothered. Oh, and of course no Democrats.
Click to expand...

I think if me or anyone in my family were running for President of the United States that we should be investigated as to where our campaign money is coming from and where our campaign manager is getting his money if he's working for me for free. I think our tax records for the past 10 years wouldn't be asking too much either. I would also never have any meetings with Russia before the election.
 
DiAnna said:
https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...eakfast-event-held-before-trumps-inauguration
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/01/is-devin-nunes-in-trouble-with-mueller
https://politicalwire.com/2019/01/14/mueller-probes-event-with-nunes-flynn-and-foreign-officials/

Google is your friend.

By the way, you might want to let DP Administrators know that rules for the "Breaking News, Non-MSM" Forum has changed, and posters must now provide three sources of non-MSM in order to be acceptable. You have been given four; hopefully, that makes the OP legal under said new rules.
Click to expand...

And reading the O/P's source is yours...
"Federal prosecutors in Manhattan and the special counsel's team are looking into a breakfast attended by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), former national security adviser Michael Flynn and dozens of foreign officials, three sources told the Daily Beast."

:2wave:
 
Last edited:
 
Deuce said:
Donald Trump surrounded himself completely with criminals, and you don't want investigators to even consider whether or not he might have been involved himself.

I mean goddamn. How do the right wing propaganda people pull this **** off?
Click to expand...

Dopamine is a helluva drug!
 
trixare4kids said:
Good Lord...
Do any of you ever read your own sources?

:roll:
Click to expand...

Do you have any specific point you'd care to debate, or are you just using up bandwidth with a pointless comment?
 
HumblePi said:
Do you have any specific point you'd care to debate, or are you just using up bandwidth with a pointless comment?
Click to expand...

Revisit my first post in the thread.
Care to show a smidge of intellectual honesty and refute what I wrote?
 
trixare4kids said:
Revisit my first post in the thread.
Care to show a smidge of intellectual honesty and refute what I wrote?
Click to expand...

Don't you know how to copy and paste yet?
 
HumblePi said:
Don't you know how to copy and paste yet?
Click to expand...

Red herring. I guess you're incapable of showing intellectual honesty.

Bye
:2wave:
 
trixare4kids said:
Red herring. I guess you're incapable of showing intellectual honesty.

Bye
:2wave:
Click to expand...

So many words without any context or meaning....

blah-by-rainy-bleu-dad3wwa.gif
 
Chomsky said:
"Opinion", "feel", "suspect", is what we do when we evaluate scenarios, but don't have - at least yet - hard evidence. You & I are not a jurors. We're members of an on-line discussion board.

Hey, fair enough.

Your feelings (and mine) do not constitute a mandate for federal investigations. But the feelings of the DOJ & Congress, may.

As to the bolded: Ken Starr et al.
Click to expand...

Ken Starr also went over the edge - way over the edge.
 
joko104 said:
Ken Starr also went over the edge - way over the edge.
Click to expand...
Well if you're being consistent in your opinion here, then I can respect that.

But with Trump, his campaign, and his hangers-on, there's just too much going-on there to not investigate it. Better safe than sorry. It's not like Trump is just some Joe Schmoe nobody, from down the block ...
 
Chomsky said:
Well if you're being consistent in your opinion here, then I can respect that.

But with Trump, his campaign, and his hangers-on, there's just too much going-on there to not investigate it. Better safe than sorry. It's not like Trump is just some Joe Schmoe nobody, from down the block ...
Click to expand...

Every member of the Mueller team is a partisan Democrat as notable as a forum lawyer for the Clinton foundation. Along the way, they keep leaking damaging inuendos with no evidence to the NYT, which certainly you would agree is left leaning.

What checks and balance are there on the Mueller investigation and team? Absolutely none. They can not be overseen by Congress because their answer to everything is they can not discuss the investigation (they can only leak anti-Trump gossip to the press.)

It is a fundamental corruption of the entire justice system to investigate in search of crimes against those just of one political party, rather than investigating actual crimes that occurred.

Yes, I am consistent. The trashing Comey did of Hilary Clinton - declaring there was no evidence supporting prosecution (at which time he should have said no more) - to continuing to call her a liar, incompetent, and all but calling her a traitor was outrageous and he should have been fired the next morning. But even team Obama is afraid of crossing the political power wing of the FBI. Every Democrat wanted Comey's hide - until he then set out to do the same to Trump and suddenly he was a Democrat hero. Now the same "deep state/insiders/establishment - pick your word - is again out to prove THEY run the government and they pick and control presidents. It is not about partisan politics. It is about power.

Upon leaks of the Mueller team of Democrats - all and only Democrats - there have been millions of words in the press and media of accusations and inuendo against president Trump, for which not ONE iota of evidence has been offered. Per se, this means the actions of the Mueller team so far have singularly been political propaganda against President Trump, his family, his campaign staff and his White House staff.

The most significant - and most ignored - statement anyone has ever made on all of this was Chuck Schumer when he publicly warned President Trump not to even think of defying anyone within the nearly half a million strong "intelligence community" because they have "6 ways from Sunday" to destroy any elected official. Nothing should more terrify Americans about their government than that statement, yet it has been forgotten.

Sorry for the length but you seem like rare intelligent opposition willing to actually discuss and debate to my opinions on issues with intellectual integrity.
 
Last edited:
Chomsky said:
Well if you're being consistent in your opinion here, then I can respect that.

But with Trump, his campaign, and his hangers-on, there's just too much going-on there to not investigate it. Better safe than sorry. It's not like Trump is just some Joe Schmoe nobody, from down the block ...
Click to expand...

The fundamental difference is undeniable: to suppose Mueller's investigation is a "witch hunt", we would have to assume that everyone who pled guilty did so willingly to damn Trump. That alone is not worth considering absent evidence that would shock me into the next century (not that I'll be around......or at least I hope I'm not around then).

The notion that this investigation is somehow too broad is belied not only by the Starr investigation, but ANY. The Code of Federal Regulations makes any special counsel investigation broad. A slew of crimes like obstruction are always in the cards, and moreover, every special counsel has the full authority and duty of a U.S. Attorney: they are not allowed to look the other way if they come across a crime.

So...maybe he thinks Starr went over the edge, but maybe he's wrong. Clinton did perjure himself. He did tamper with witnesses, and it doesn't matter to me that those were civil cases unrelated to the presidency so long as the tampering happened while in office. He shouldn't have been in a position to be asked about a blowjob before congress, but then, he did do more than just perjure himself about said act.



All that said, it does smell like the people around Trump are into even worse stuff, if we're comparing the scale of criminality. It'll be a near-miracle if Trump is clean and it just so happens that everyone around him was/is dirty as sin.
 
joko104 said:
Upon leaks of the Mueller team of Democrats - all and only Democrats - there have been millions of words in the press and media of accusations and inuendo against president Trump, for which not ONE iota of evidence has been offered. Per se, this means the actions of the Mueller team so far have singularly been political propaganda against President Trump, his family, his campaign staff and his White House staff.
Click to expand...

A lifelong Republican with a sterling reputation as prosecutor, both in terms of skill and apparent lack of bias, appointed by a Republican and overseen by Republican, is leading a "team of all and only Democrats"? Please. That's hardly any better than the notion that the law enforcement and intelligence agencies long-championed by "tough on crime" slash hawkish right wingers suddenly, as a group, decided to sell their careers down the river to *get* Trump with a frame-up.

And really, you're going to say "not ONE iota of evidence" has been offered?





You have no reasonable basis for expecting to hear any evidence against Trump himself until the investigation into Trump himself is complete. Your only reasonable expectation is to hear evidence as people around him are charged and flipped. In fact, you and those who came up with the "no evidence" angle did so specifically because you and they know what I just said is true.

And "propaganda"? What propaganda? As we just established, Mueller et. al. are not releasing evidence about Trump until the investigation is complete, nor are they releasing accusations against Trump. They are only releasing that information required to inform judges taking guilty pleas of people around Trump at the time in question, plus presenting what was required to convict Manafort. The only potential sources of "propaganda" are those announcing Trump's guilt as certain in advance, and those declaring his innocence in advance. But again, the fat lady hasn't sung. She isn't even warming up. Like Whitewater, this is likely to drag on. That is specifically because Mueller isn't part of some plot to take out Trump. I won't be surprised if we don't have anything on Trump until after 11/20, though I could be wrong on that front.

It'll be over when it's over. Until then, things look bad in general, but we have no direct evidence either way on Trump. And that's the way it should be. Just imagine what you'd find yourself saying if Mueller mentioned every last tidbit as it came in.






PS: There's a pretty funny South Park routine about the misuse of "per se".
 
Mr Person said:
A lifelong Republican with a sterling reputation as prosecutor, both in terms of skill and apparent lack of bias, appointed by a Republican and overseen by Republican, is leading a "team of all and only Democrats"? Please. That's hardly any better than the notion that the law enforcement and intelligence agencies long-championed by "tough on crime" slash hawkish right wingers suddenly, as a group, decided to sell their careers down the river to *get* Trump with a frame-up.

And really, you're going to say "not ONE iota of evidence" has been offered?





You have no reasonable basis for expecting to hear any evidence against Trump himself until the investigation into Trump himself is complete. Your only reasonable expectation is to hear evidence as people around him are charged and flipped. In fact, you and those who came up with the "no evidence" angle did so specifically because you and they know what I just said is true.

And "propaganda"? What propaganda? As we just established, Mueller et. al. are not releasing evidence about Trump until the investigation is complete, nor are they releasing accusations against Trump. They are only releasing that information required to inform judges taking guilty pleas of people around Trump at the time in question, plus presenting what was required to convict Manafort. The only potential sources of "propaganda" are those announcing Trump's guilt as certain in advance, and those declaring his innocence in advance. But again, the fat lady hasn't sung. She isn't even warming up. Like Whitewater, this is likely to drag on. That is specifically because Mueller isn't part of some plot to take out Trump. I won't be surprised if we don't have anything on Trump until after 11/20, though I could be wrong on that front.

It'll be over when it's over. Until then, things look bad in general, but we have no direct evidence either way on Trump. And that's the way it should be. Just imagine what you'd find yourself saying if Mueller mentioned every last tidbit as it came in.






PS: There's a pretty funny South Park routine about the misuse of "per se".
Click to expand...

Actually his rep included a tendency to be heavy handed and politically obtuse, what good rep he had he has driven South with his poor work in his current gig.
 
joko104 said:
Every member of the Mueller team is a partisan Democrat as notable as a forum lawyer for the Clinton foundation. Along the way, they keep leaking damaging inuendos with no evidence to the NYT, which certainly you would agree is left leaning.

What checks and balance are there on the Mueller investigation and team? Absolutely none. They can not be overseen by Congress because their answer to everything is they can not discuss the investigation (they can only leak anti-Trump gossip to the press.)

It is a fundamental corruption of the entire justice system to investigate in search of crimes against those just of one political party, rather than investigating actual crimes that occurred.

Yes, I am consistent. The trashing Comey did of Hilary Clinton - declaring there was no evidence supporting prosecution (at which time he should have said no more) - to continuing to call her a liar, incompetent, and all but calling her a traitor was outrageous and he should have been fired the next morning. But even team Obama is afraid of crossing the political power wing of the FBI. Every Democrat wanted Comey's hide - until he then set out to do the same to Trump and suddenly he was a Democrat hero. Now the same "deep state/insiders/establishment - pick your word - is again out to prove THEY run the government and they pick and control presidents. It is not about partisan politics. It is about power.

Upon leaks of the Mueller team of Democrats - all and only Democrats - there have been millions of words in the press and media of accusations and inuendo against president Trump, for which not ONE iota of evidence has been offered. Per se, this means the actions of the Mueller team so far have singularly been political propaganda against President Trump, his family, his campaign staff and his White House staff.

The most significant - and most ignored - statement anyone has ever made on all of this was Chuck Schumer when he publicly warned President Trump not to even think of defying anyone within the nearly half a million strong "intelligence community" because they have "6 ways from Sunday" to destroy any elected official. Nothing should more terrify Americans about their government than that statement, yet it has been forgotten.

Sorry for the length but you seem like rare intelligent opposition willing to actually discuss and debate to my opinions on issues with intellectual integrity.
Click to expand...
Sorry about the delayed reply.

As to Democrats being on the investigatory team, so what? The Constitution provides for free association. It's their performance that counts. To appoint investigators by political affiliation would not be Constitutional, to say nothing of wrong.


As to Special Counsels having too much power: Like I said, if you believe that as a general tenant - I believe you do - then I can respect that.

But as we saw with Nixon, at times SC's may be needed. And it's clear it was needed here, Trump notwithstanding. There has to be some mechanism to allow non-partisan investigations of this sort, that are independent of Presidential & Congressional politics. Unfortunately, an office of this nature will not be perfect and has it's own inherent risk.
 
Mr Person said:
The fundamental difference is undeniable: to suppose Mueller's investigation is a "witch hunt", we would have to assume that everyone who pled guilty did so willingly to damn Trump. That alone is not worth considering absent evidence that would shock me into the next century (not that I'll be around......or at least I hope I'm not around then).

The notion that this investigation is somehow too broad is belied not only by the Starr investigation, but ANY. The Code of Federal Regulations makes any special counsel investigation broad. A slew of crimes like obstruction are always in the cards, and moreover, every special counsel has the full authority and duty of a U.S. Attorney: they are not allowed to look the other way if they come across a crime.

So...maybe he thinks Starr went over the edge, but maybe he's wrong. Clinton did perjure himself. He did tamper with witnesses, and it doesn't matter to me that those were civil cases unrelated to the presidency so long as the tampering happened while in office. He shouldn't have been in a position to be asked about a blowjob before congress, but then, he did do more than just perjure himself about said act.



All that said, it does smell like the people around Trump are into even worse stuff, if we're comparing the scale of criminality. It'll be a near-miracle if Trump is clean and it just so happens that everyone around him was/is dirty as sin.
Click to expand...
The bolded is the crux of the matter, here. The problem seems to be Trump having surrounding himself with a gaggle of individuals that are ensconced in criminal activity, and have a propensity to perjurer themselves. It is a Trump problem, not a Mueller problem.

But I must say that regardless of where Mueller is going with his report, I'm done with Trump. He needs to be impeached, even if only for the obstruction he does right in front of our eyes, to say nothing of his attacks on our democratic institutions - including law enforcement. I'm throwing in the towel. It's just too much. The details aren't even worth arguing, anymore. The whole (Trump) package en total is just overwhelming.
 
joko104 said:
What checks and balance are there on the Mueller investigation and team? Absolutely none.
Click to expand...

That's false.

Anyone can read that you're wrong:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_prosecutor

They are checked and balanced by the DOJ, the same institution that oversees all similar criminal investigations and law enforcement for the entire United States.

The primary difference is that they are designed for use in times when their investigation subjects would present a conflict of interest, extraordinary circumstances, and in the public interest. All three of those are met in this circumstance.

If the president was being investigated, you do not want the president able to control the investigation, that would be stupid.

Hence, special counsel. It's been around in one form or another since 1875 when the Department of Justice itself was created.

The United States Attorney General* has full authority over the Special Counsel.
Special Counsel is now, as of 1999, handled entirely within the United States Department of Justice, and has to follow the same rules that the entirety of our U.S. DOJ sets forth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom