[W:63]Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

[Mycroft]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

That's part of the reason why there is an investigation, consciousness of guilt is evidence. So you support the investigation, to understand those answers?
Why are they obstructing the investigation?
That's another bit of evidence of consciousness of guilt.
Why are they willing to lie to congress..break the law, just to hide what they were doing?
Yet more reason to continue investigating.

Why has Trump not sat down with investigators to tell him his side? Instead, he stonewalled for over a year, and then only agreed to a handful of written questions?
Yet more reason they have to investigate, they are getting no direct help from Trump.

Why are they attack the investigation, the investigators, trying to tamper with witnesses, etc?
Yet more reason to investigate.

I could go on.

Dershowitz is not investigating. Again...why would anyone ask him?

 

[Mach]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

Dershowitz is not investigating. Again...why would anyone ask him?

Why would anyone listen to him?
Or you?
So many questions?

Wait!!! Why are you not ranting about him being just another talking potato head? I must know Mycroft!

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

Why would anyone listen to him?

You should direct your question to the forum member who asked.

 

[Nickyjo]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

Why should anyone ask Dershowitz that? He doesn't know and neither do you?

I think you misunderstood my point. Mueller is hired to investigate X. People keep lying about X. There are implications to that. It creates a “negative inference,”’as lawyers say. It suggests that X exists. “What do you, Alan D, infer from all this obstruction?” is a legit question.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

I think you misunderstood my point. Mueller is hired to investigate X. People keep lying about X. There are implications to that. It creates a “negative inference,”’as lawyers say. It suggests that X exists. “What do you, Alan D, infer from all this obstruction?” is a legit question.

What do you think "X" is?

 

[srexob715]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

What do you think "X" is?

And conservatives are baffled as to how we know they are low information voters? LMAO! They just can't figure out simple questions.

 

[Nickyjo]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

What do you think "X" is?

My guesses: best case for the country scenario, Russians tried to interfere with the election and had some, but not any dispositive effect; worst case for the country scenario, Russians succeeded in swinging the election and/or Trump traded their prospective election help for promises on sanctions, his investments, or some other thing. It doesn't seem that Trump has been able to deliver if the latter was the case, thanks to all the public knowledge of his Rusdian leanings. I suspect the truth is somewhere in between, tho I have this perverse fantasy (for a liberal) that Mueller will end things by saying, "I got nothin'. Don't know why you bothered. It was a waste up of time"

What scares me, however, are two past Trump comments: first that Russia was not in Ukraine, which I suppose one could chalk up to his lack of knowledge of the world; second and more serious was his suggestion that the Soviets invaded Afghanistan because of cross-border terrorist attacks, basically as I understand following recent Russion revision of history. Even Trump could not be that ignorant.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

This is what bothers me the most about this and that it could happen to any candidate, any political lean. It seems to throw cold water on any decent candidate thinking about top public service and the risk of the new level of dirty politics.

LOL. New level of dirty politics???

Bill Clinton was investigated for some business dealing he had before he was elected. It was the Whitewater investigation. They found nothing except an affair he covered up. Republicans voted to impeach him. Republicans voted to remove him from office but they didn't have enough votes.

Hillary Clinton was investigated over the Benghazi controversy. They subpoenaed her emails and dug through them but found nothing about Benghazi. They did find that she had mishandled her email security. They wanted to throw her in prison.

If we followed the Republican standards of the past, Trump would already be impeached. Conservatives are acting like little children. One minute they're shouting "lock her up! lock her up!" full of enthusiasm for political prosecution. Now suddenly, when its one of their own, they change their tune?

Grow up.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

And conservatives are baffled as to how we know they are low information voters? LMAO! They just can't figure out simple questions.

A person using an expression..."X", in this case...should be able to define it, don't you think?

Or would you rather that expression be ambiguous?

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

My guesses: best case for the country scenario, Russians tried to interfere with the election and had some, but not any dispositive effect; worst case for the country scenario, Russians succeeded in swinging the election and/or Trump traded their prospective election help for promises on sanctions, his investments, or some other thing. It doesn't seem that Trump has been able to deliver if the latter was the case, thanks to all the public knowledge of his Rusdian leanings. I suspect the truth is somewhere in between, tho I have this perverse fantasy (for a liberal) that Mueller will end things by saying, "I got nothin'. Don't know why you bothered. It was a waste up of time"

What scares me, however, are two past Trump comments: first that Russia was not in Ukraine, which I suppose one could chalk up to his lack of knowledge of the world; second and more serious was his suggestion that the Soviets invaded Afghanistan because of cross-border terrorist attacks, basically as I understand following recent Russion revision of history. Even Trump could not be that ignorant.

???

All you have are "guesses"? And you think Dershowitz should come up with an answer to a question based on your guesses?

I think Dershowitz would tell you to quit wasting his time with your questions.

 

[Athanasius68]

Again speculation. Mueller doesn't have to show all his cards in the indictment so saying there's nothing there doesn't make it so.

The indictment is the charge. It's not like Mueller has the proof that Stone participated in the hacking of the DNC and is holding back. He doesn't. Hence it's NOT speculation that Mueller has no evidence of collusion.

 

[Athanasius68]

LOL. New level of dirty politics???

Bill Clinton was investigated for some business dealing he had before he was elected. It was the Whitewater investigation. They found nothing except an affair he covered up. Republicans voted to impeach him. Republicans voted to remove him from office but they didn't have enough votes.

Hillary Clinton was investigated over the Benghazi controversy. They subpoenaed her emails and dug through them but found nothing about Benghazi. They did find that she had mishandled her email security. They wanted to throw her in prison.

If we followed the Republican standards of the past, Trump would already be impeached. Conservatives are acting like little children. One minute they're shouting "lock her up! lock her up!" full of enthusiasm for political prosecution. Now suddenly, when its one of their own, they change their tune?

Grow up.

Both Clinton's were investigated for specific alleged crimes for which there was evidence presented to justify the actions.
. No crimes have been alleged against Trump. Heck, we don't even know if he is even being criminally nvestigated.
So the correct analiogy of standards of applying the Trump standards to both Clinton's. s that 42 would have been convicted in the Senate and removed from office, and that his wife would have been charged with a crime.

 

[Mason66]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

I don't understand why any of these people testified to anything.

Why didn't they learn from the Hillary Clinton school of testifying and to say "I don't remember" to everything?

 

[Fishking]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

I don't get the point? Is Mueller supposed to come out on a weekly basis and tell the press what he knows, give the american people an update? I'm pretty sure investigations don't work that way. Anything about Mueller is pure speculation.

No...but we see what are the charges, that tells us enough about what he knows and doesn't know.

 

[Mach]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

I don't understand why any of these people testified to anything.
Why didn't they learn from the Hillary Clinton school of testifying and to say "I don't remember" to everything?

It is perplexing isn't it. Why all these Trump bozos were dumb enough to commit felonies in lying about all this, rather than simply stay quiet, or in many cases just tell the truth (which wasn't a problem if they did!).

Michael Flynn, I mean, they were basically done investigating him, he was in the clear, but word was out he was lying in public, so they dropped by to get his official accounting. He lied(!). He could have just told them everything, it wasn't a crime.

Some think they are pretty sophisticated. Investigators typically know the answers before they question people...that's just so foreign to our daily lives for someone to question on us on things they already know the answer to.

They also don't like to appear to be "uncooperative". In their mind, if the stonewall investigators, investigators will suspect something. Fear of acting suspicious drives them to lie rather than refuse to answer questions.
So sadly their decision to avoid acting suspiciously, is to commit a crime. It's a bad play.

 

[Mason66]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

It is perplexing isn't it. Why all these Trump bozos were dumb enough to commit felonies in lying about all this, rather than simply stay quiet, or in many cases just tell the truth (which wasn't a problem if they did!).

Michael Flynn, I mean, they were basically done investigating him, he was in the clear, but word was out he was lying in public, so they dropped by to get his official accounting. He lied(!). He could have just told them everything, it wasn't a crime.

Some think they are pretty sophisticated. Investigators typically know the answers before they question people...that's just so foreign to our daily lives for someone to question on us on things they already know the answer to.

They also don't like to appear to be "uncooperative". In their mind, if the stonewall investigators, investigators will suspect something. Fear of acting suspicious drives them to lie rather than refuse to answer questions.
So sadly their decision to avoid acting suspiciously, is to commit a crime. It's a bad play.

In a situation like this I don't talk to them.

They can think anything they want. let them go investigate and if they find something, they can come back to me, but I am not going to lie to them just to make them think I am cooperating, that is just stupid.

 

[Common Sense 1]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

And now for the Captain Adverse Confirmation Bias Show!

Insult when nothing worth while to say? Oh yea....

 

[trixare4kids]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

I don't understand why any of these people testified to anything.

Why didn't they learn from the Hillary Clinton school of testifying and to say "I don't remember" to everything?

:bravo:

:lol:

 

[AlbqOwl]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

I don't get the point? Is Mueller supposed to come out on a weekly basis and tell the press what he knows, give the american people an update? I'm pretty sure investigations don't work that way. Anything about Mueller is pure speculation.

It isn't speculation when the text of the indictments are posted on line for anybody who cares about the truth to read.

 

[bongsaway]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

It isn't speculation when the text of the indictments are posted on line for anybody who cares about the truth to read.

I'm talking about day to day with the Mueller investigation. He doesn't leak, so when people speculate the end of his investigation is near, it's purely speculation. An indictment isn't speculation, lying to congress, obstruction and witness tampering, very clear.

 

[vesper]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

Yes Mueller keeps finding process crimes to charge committed after he was appointed special counsel like lying. Even though they are process crimes none the less they are criminal. I just wished if they are going after such crimes under Mueller, why aren't there a number in Obama's administration that lied before Congress and the American people have never been prosecuted and the friggen list is long.

There clearly is a double standard and the people see it.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Re: [W:63]Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

it appears to me that Mueller is PURPOSELY not dropping the bombs until he can snare all the criminals that Trump won't pardon immediately. then, once there are a ton of people in his web he'll issue his final report that will, along with all the other stuff along the way, be hard for anyone to ignore.

in other words, he's setting them up.

 

[Nickyjo]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

???

All you have are "guesses"? And you think Dershowitz should come up with an answer to a question based on your guesses?

I think Dershowitz would tell you to quit wasting his time with your questions.

My guesses are based on what we know thus far. Don’t think Alan D needs to come up with any answer. But why do you think so many people lied or obstructed justice?

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

My guesses are based on what we know thus far.

Which is essentially nothing but speculation. Yes, your guesses are right in line with that stuff.

Don’t think Alan D needs to come up with any answer.

You don't think Dershowitz needs to come up with any answers, yet you are the one who thinks he should be asked the question. :doh

But why do you think so many people lied or obstructed justice?

I don't know...and I really don't care...but I speculate that some of it is due to Mueller's despicable "investigative" techniques.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Re: Alan Dershowitz reacts to Roger Stone’s indictment.

Yes Mueller keeps finding process crimes to charge committed after he was appointed special counsel like lying. Even though they are process crimes none the less they are criminal. I just wished if they are going after such crimes under Mueller, why aren't there a number in Obama's administration that lied before Congress and the American people have never been prosecuted and the friggen list is long.

There clearly is a double standard and the people see it.

Caveman mentality.

"Someone from my tribe got in trouble, therefore, someone from the other tribe must get in trouble as well, in retribution".