And Mojo once again demonstrates that for him, life is a cartoon. I sometimes feel that way myself... But what the cartoon implies is that we now have most of the missing pieces of a puzzle and the conclusions obviously implicate Trump. What the cartoon misses, or ignores, is that the pieces of the puzzle are "crimes" that did not exist prior to the investigation and/or have nothing to do with the "Russian Probe" that the puzzle supposedly depicts. And so far, none of the crimes implicate Trump (or Russia for that matter) in anything. Well, we did find some Russians that were setting up fake Facebook profiles and posting mean stuff, but even then, there is no connection to Trump.
So, the puzzle represents a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
When Trump said: "Russia, if you're listening, please find those 30,000 missing Hillary emails", that right there was collusion right in front of your face.
Russia was listening because the very next day they hacked into Hillary's email.
I'm sure Mueller has much more proof than that & we will all hear about it when he releases his report.
If Mueller doesn't nail Trump, the SDNY will nail him on RICO charges.
One way or another Trump is going down.
"When Trump said: "Russia, if you're listening, please find those 30,000 missing Hillary emails", that right there was collusion right in front of your face."
You keep redefining words to help support your argument.
By your logic.. Suppose you were to say "I wish someone would kill Trump", then the next day, someone kills Trump. You are now guilty of murder, right?
'Suppose you were to say "I wish someone would kill Trump", then the next day, someone kills Trump. You are now guilty of murder, right?'
If I knew of, or was associated with the person/s that did the killing then you can bet that I'd be implicated & investigated for conspiracy to commit murder.
Next question.
there are more logic problems than that Tim. Number 1 if Trump were colluding he would of already had the info. Number 2 if the dnc had protected the podesat e-mails like the rnc did , or had they not blocked the investigation into the electronic detection we would fully know exactly when, where and why. Wonder why the dnc never protected and then blocked the investigation? Just more crap that would of been buried if the "correct " candidate had won.
just like the "cohen to parague story" this whole deal has amounted to squat
“this whole deal has amounted to squat”
Ahahaha, thirty-four individuals and two companies indicted.
Yeah, that’s not my definition of squat.
Political cartoons in question?...well..."Art imitates life" and sometimes it's necessary to spoon feed current events to the populace.
On Mueller... He's a professional hired to investigate and is staying on task. He's been very good at case building (finding the pieces of the puzzle) which takes time. Since he shuns publicity we still don't know exactly what he knows but he does skillfully and stealthfully work to "draw" out incriminating evidence on those his department is investigating. One thing we know for sure is MAGA...Mueller Ain't Going Away anytime soon.
"If I knew of, or was associated with the person/s that did the killing then you can bet that I'd be implicated & investigated for conspiracy to commit murder."
So, you have evidence that Trump knew or was associated with the people who did the hacking? Please share.
"When Trump said: "Russia, if you're listening, please find those 30,000 missing Hillary emails", that right there was collusion right in front of your face."
Quintessential example of how some are able to twist information to make it fit into their scheme to feed preconceived notions in the minds of others that want to believe.
This is why I enjoy mojo's climate change posts the most. They are all opportunities to show the difference between this sort of thing (that he copies here) and the reality of the planet having the best weather/climate in the last 1,000 years and heading towards another climate optimum............not a climate crisis.
"Ahahaha, thirty-four individuals and two companies indicted."
And if you look at the indictments, the vast majority are for lying to investigators. IOW, crimes that would not exist without the investigation. Then there are a few for crimes preceding and unrelated to the campaign and/or Trump.
That, as far as a probe into "Russian Collusion", amounts to squat.
"On Mueller... He's a professional hired to investigate and is staying on task. He's been very good at case building (finding the pieces of the puzzle) which takes time. Since he shuns publicity we still don't know exactly what he knows"
He doesn't always shun publicity cliff. Sometimes, when it suits him, he seeks it out or even manipulates it to his favor...............like when he invited CNN to accompany his FBI while they arrested Stone so that they would play the pro Mueller spin story(as they did for days) on their round the clock destroy Trump station.
Clearly this was collusion with the political activists at CNN...........and breaking the law.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/23544/
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/24839/
Since there is nobody investigating the investigator, the investigator can break laws and create crimes with his investigation.............with impunity!!!
This is not a defense of Stone or Trump or anybody being investigated (since I don't have evidence of guilt or innocence) but is based entirely on the observations of Mueller during the investigation.
“And if you look at the indictments, the vast majority are for lying to investigators.”
Oh now be serious, what possible reason would anyone have to lie to an investigator ?
"Oh now be serious, what possible reason would anyone have to lie to an investigator ?"
I honestly don't know. It could be the result of what is often called a perjury trap, where the "target" is badgered until they commit an inconsistency. Not uncommon in "witch hunts".
It could be that the Mueller probe has completely thrown the 4th amendment out the window, which we know to be the case, and is probing into unrelated areas. It's quite possible some of these people have engaged in questionable or even illegal activity and Mueller is probing into them to get some "cooperation through intimidation". In the process, these people get caught in lies unrelated to anything related to Russia. It is illegal as hell. (Read the 4th amendment again just for the heckuvit), but we know illegal doesn't always matter these days.
But whatever the reasons, you are making presumptions that these arrests/indictments are proof positive of some sort of Russian collusion. But they are most certainly not.
" ... these people get caught in lies unrelated to anything related to Russia."
Tim, not unusual in investigations. Re: the six year impeachment of Bill Clinton related to White Water, and it occurred the other day with Cohen's testimony related to Trump.
Bob Mueller...a man of impeccable integrity and service to his country who's been employed by and admired by members of both political parties.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mueller
And, unlike 45's platoon of dancing monkeys, we rarely if ever see Mueller speak directly in front of the press. Bob's a very respected, skilled and tactful investigator.
"like when he (Mueller) invited CNN to accompany his FBI while they arrested Stone"
Mike, I can't believe that you said that again, after I pointed out several (unanswered) times that you had not an iota of proof he was personal involved.
"like when he (Mueller) invited CNN to accompany his FBI while they arrested Stone"
OK, let me adjust that.
"like when Mueller's team invited CNN to accompany his FBI while they arrested Stone"
I remember our discussion on this. You are remembering that part of it correctly carl. I thought about it even more........trying to conceive of how Mueller could not have authorized this and realized that I found it impossible to imagine a scenario, leading up to CNN's coverage, that on this key arrest involving the Mueller investigation (where they at least quadrupled the manpower needed to do the job and obviously spent a tremendous amount of time preparing), that there would be a massive oversight of a tv station being there that shouldn't be..............and it just happened to be the anti Trump station.
So the question is, whether Mueller himself was responsible or knew about it or was it a subordinate, risking their job?
Then, I realized that there were 2 dozen+ other FBI agents there and every single one of them knew that CNN was there and CNN was there for a long time, so it couldn't have been a lone wolf or single tipster that went against the others or CNN would have been booted.
Because there were so many FBI agents there that allowed CNN to do what they did is exactly why we know that it had to be authorized and not an oversight from somebody that went against the others or Mueller.
I can call it the Mueller team to make it an absolute 100% fact vs that its still something extraordinarily close to that when stating that it was Mueller(since its possible that all those FBI agents did something that Mueller would not have authorized.....1`% chance? )
“But whatever the reasons, you are making presumptions that these arrests/indictments are proof positive of some sort of Russian collusion. But they are most certainly not.”
That is an absolute falsehood. I would ask you to indicate where I made any mention of collusion.
Face it, if this many indictments occurred during Obama’s term you folks would be having a fecal hemorrhage. Hypocrisy is one thing I can not stand. It is very unbecoming.
"Tim, not unusual in investigations. Re: the six year impeachment of Bill Clinton related to White Water, and it occurred the other day with Cohen's testimony related to Trump."
Carl, I can't believe you've forgotten the several conversations where at least a few of us have denounced Starr's investigation as a violation of the 4th amendment as well as this Mueller investigation. I know for a fact that MetMike and I pointed that out repeatedly. And I made the rather acerbic observation that the difference between us is that we (the right) see both as wrong..
And a SIX YEAR impeachment? Honestly <G>
I SAID:
'And if you look at the indictments, the vast majority are for lying to investigators. IOW, crimes that would not exist without the investigation. Then there are a few for crimes preceding and unrelated to the campaign and/or Trump.
That, as far as a probe into "Russian Collusion", amounts to squat."
YOU REPLIED:
"Oh now be serious, what possible reason would anyone have to lie to an investigator ?"
I replied:
"I honestly don't know. It could be the result of what is often called a perjury trap, where the "target" is badgered until they commit an inconsistency. Not uncommon in "witch hunts".
It could be that the Mueller probe has completely thrown the 4th amendment out the window, which we know to be the case, and is probing into unrelated areas. It's quite possible some of these people have engaged in questionable or even illegal activity and Mueller is probing into them to get some "cooperation through intimidation". In the process, these people get caught in lies unrelated to anything related to Russia. It is illegal as hell. (Read the 4th amendment again just for the heckuvit), but we know illegal doesn't always matter these days.
But whatever the reasons, you are making presumptions that these arrests/indictments are proof positive of some sort of Russian collusion. But they are most certainly not."
To which you stated:
"That is an absolute falsehood. I would ask you to indicate where I made any mention of collusion."
Now, read this exchange and explain to me why I'm incorrect in thinking you are being dishonest. I really don't want to think you are being dishonest, so it'll be an easy sell. I'll accept you may not have mentioned "Collusion", but I came away from this exchange feeling that you felt there must have been Russian Collusion. No other reason for lies, right?
"Bob Mueller...a man of impeccable integrity and service to his country who's been employed by and admired by members of both political parties."
There is no question that Mueller has the credentials and Trump doesn't. Based on the information provided, I would take Mueller's word over Trumps every day of the week.........where there were no other facts other than a Wikepedia search that showed me Muellers credentials and I knew how crummy Trump's credibility is on many issues.
Fortunately, we do have meaningful facts/observations regarding Mueller's actions during this investigation to base statements/opinions on.
This is all that I'm doing.
This is independent of any guilt or innocence of Trump on any issue, including Russia.
I'm just assessing Muellers known actions during these investigations, including how he obtained crimes and how his team broke the law by inviting CNN to record their arrest of Stone(who is certainly a snake but that doesn't matter to me).
If the pope, with an impeccable career and credentials robbed a bank, his credentials don't matter any more........he should be held accountable for his actions.
Unfortunately, there is no accountability for Mueller(nobody is investigating him)...........which is why he can do what he's doing with impunity.
On this, we will never agree. You have decided to believe everything that comes from Mueller. I also believe most of it, including the shady way that he created crimes with his investigation(legally).
However, I believe the facts with the CNN/Stone arrest coverage..........which means I think that he's lying.
And a SIX YEAR impeachment? Honestly <G>
My bad, Tim. I should have said a six year investigation.
Someone once said that "Justice and Politics are two ingredients seldom found together in something cooked up by Washington."
Oh, wait … that was me.
“No other reason for lies, right?”
I have no idea why they lied, I never said I had any idea why they lied, I just said they have been indicted. You said it was for lying.
This material is past its sell by date.
Oh, what about the hypocrisy ? You must have missed that.
You are welcome to the last word.
Yawn.
"I have no idea why they lied, I never said I had any idea why they lied, I just said they have been indicted. You said it was for lying.
This material is past its sell by date."
This material is current events. The vast majority of indictments are for lying to investigators. That's a matter of public record.
You specifically asked "What possible reason could they have for lying"
I assumed, by that question, you were making a presumption of guilt as the motive. If not, what was the point of your question?
It appears to me you have a problem taking ownership of your words. But perhaps I am reading more into what you are saying than what you mean.
tim, just keep in mind the key word nowadays is "investigation" the left throw that word around with no underlying facts and th msms pick it from there and we are off the races...suddenly the sheepies start throwing around "investigations" like duct is known....do not forget what they put kavannugh through with nothing more than a wacked out professor, no facts but they dammed near ruined him
Mueller's not the only one with questions... at least 70 more businesses and individuals will now have to release info on 45.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/top-democrat-jerry-nadler-demands-documents-investigation-into-trump/
I guess you missed the quote of all quotes...nadler say the Mueller mission into collusion with Russia was way too narrow,,,,they need wider scope so they can look into more areas......Mueller has wondered about as far of the collusion story as one could