Mueller Team Asking If Trump Tried to Hide Purpose of Trump Tower Meeting - Polidicks

[U][B]Mueller Team Asking If Trump Tried to Hide Purpose of Trump Tower Meeting[/B][/U] [url]https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mueller-team-asking-if-trump-tried-hide-purpose-trump-tower-n796746[/url] [QUOTE] Federal investigators working for Special Counsel Robert Mueller are keenly focused on President Donald Trump's role in crafting a response to a published article about a meeting between Russians and his son Donald Jr., three sources familiar with the matter told NBC News. The sources told NBC News that prosecutors want to know what Trump knew about the meeting and whether he sought to conceal its purpose. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE][B]A person familiar with Mueller's strategy said that whether or not Trump made a "knowingly false statement" is now of interest to prosecutors.[/B] [B]"Even if Trump is not charged with a crime as a result of the statement, it could be useful to Mueller's team to show Trump's conduct to a jury that may be considering other charges."[/B] The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.[/QUOTE] Article #3165 about Trump today

At least Americans didn't vote for 'crooked' Hillary, right? ... right?

Isn't this the first official admission that Trump himself is under investigation?

[QUOTE]"Even if Trump is not charged with a crime as a result of the statement, it could be useful to Mueller's team to show Trump's conduct to a jury that may be considering other charges."[/QUOTE] This is why it's good to look into his past financial dealings and such. He's really careless about who he works with and generally irresponsible.

[QUOTE=archangel125;52623836]Isn't this the first official admission that Trump himself is under investigation?[/QUOTE] Well, "sources say" is not the same as "official", but this is the first direct evidence that Trump is personally under Mueller's scanning tunnelling microscope.

Wow it's literally one thing after another today.

[QUOTE=archangel125;52623836]Isn't this the first official admission that Trump himself is under investigation?[/QUOTE] If I'm reading this article correctly, it sounds like the source may not actually be part of Mueller's counter-intel probe, but just someone who is familiar with the usual investigative process of a special prosecutor. It doesn't particularly matter who and what is under investigation anyway, since Mueller is more or less given the power to pursue any potentially criminal activity related to the probe as he sees fit.

[QUOTE=Chonch;52624269]If I'm reading this article correctly, it sounds like the source may not actually be part of Mueller's counter-intel probe, but just someone who is familiar with the usual investigative process of a special prosecutor. It doesn't particularly matter who and what is under investigation anyway, since Mueller is more or less given the power to pursue any potentially criminal activity related to the probe as he sees fit.[/QUOTE] Why do you keep calling it a counterintelligence probe when it isn't? Also, while the source is not from Mueller's team, the reports of investigations into trump's actions means the commission is specifically looking at Trump now. Just because the commission is looking at a person you prefer not them to look at does not mean they are not under their scrutiny now. After all, the implication is that Trump is himself is part of the attempt to cover up the actions of other member in his administration.

[QUOTE=Chonch;52624269]If I'm reading this article correctly, it sounds like the source may not actually be part of Mueller's [I][B]counter-intel probe[/B][/I], but just someone who is familiar with the usual investigative process of a special prosecutor. It doesn't particularly matter who and what is under investigation anyway, since Mueller is more or less given the power to pursue any potentially criminal activity related to the probe as he sees fit.[/QUOTE] You mean [B]criminal investigation[/B]. Furthermore, I feel it is necessary to point out that the article stated "Three sources familiar with [I]the[/I] matter", and not "Three law enforcement officials" or "[I]Three sources familiar with such matters.[/I]" I daresay I trust even NBC to properly vet their sources, given their reputation for reporting the facts with a high degree of reliability, even if they do put a slant on their speculation. Let's at least agree that it's poor form to call an orange an apple. Trump's cronies, and possibly the man himself, are the subject of a criminal investigation, and he was caught in yet another lie to the American public. See, Trump absolutely screwed himself. If he'd had even a modicum of self-control, he could have made all the deals he liked with Russia, and nobody could've touched him with American law, as since Russia is not classified as an enemy state, he cannot be found guilty of treason. Damn shame. However, he has repeatedly tried to shut down the investigation into Russia's election meddling, going so far as to fire James Comey and to try to find an excuse to fire Mueller. This opens him up to a charge of obstruction of justice, a high crime of office. Don't insult your own intelligence by calling it a 'counterintelligence probe', Chonch. The FBI's raid of Manafort's home and the impaneling of a grand jury made it abundantly clear that it's gone far beyond that now, and denial ill becomes anyone.

[QUOTE=Chonch;52624269]If I'm reading this article correctly, it sounds like the source may not actually be part of Mueller's counter-intel probe, but just someone who is familiar with the usual investigative process of a special prosecutor. It doesn't particularly matter who and what is under investigation anyway, since Mueller is more or less given the power to pursue any potentially criminal activity related to the probe as he sees fit.[/QUOTE] I know that you're in denial that this is a criminal investigation into Donald J. Trump and all, and you don't want to admit that your cult leader is being personally investigated for criminal behaviours, but can you [I]please[/I] stop referring to this as a "probe" for crying out loud? [B]It is a criminal investigation.[/B]

Chonch, once again intentionally spreading the very same false information that he has been repeatedly and thoroughly corrected on. Just how many threads has it been that you've perpetuated the lie that this is nothing more than a "counter-intelligence probe?" Why are you even posting here, if you refuse to engage honestly?

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52624690]Chonch, once again intentionally spreading the very same false information that he has been repeatedly and thoroughly corrected on. Just how many threads has it been that you've perpetuated the lie that this is nothing more than a "counter-intelligence probe?" Why are you even posting here, if you refuse to engage honestly?[/QUOTE] Surely actively spreading misinformation after being repeatedly corrected is considered shitposting?

[QUOTE=Alice3173;52624703]Surely actively spreading misinformation after being repeatedly corrected is considered shitposting?[/QUOTE] I don't know but if you ask me, baiting people into arguments and then fucking off LIKE CLOCKWORK should be.

[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;52626122]I don't know but if you ask me, baiting people into arguments and then fucking off LIKE CLOCKWORK should be.[/QUOTE] Stuff like that and whataboutism may actually be a good topic to bring up in the forum meta thread. It only ever serves to derail threads anymore which is clearly a problem.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52624690]Chonch, once again intentionally spreading the very same false information that he has been repeatedly and thoroughly corrected on. Just how many threads has it been that you've perpetuated the lie that this is nothing more than a "counter-intelligence probe?" Why are you even posting here, if you refuse to engage honestly?[/QUOTE] It's pretty obvious he doesn't want to "engage honestly". He comes into these threads, posts the same shit he always posts then either never responds again or only posts once or twice more.

[QUOTE=Anderan;52626175]It's pretty obvious he doesn't want to "engage honestly". He comes into these threads, posts the same shit he always posts then either never responds again or only posts once or twice more.[/QUOTE] Or he's really stupid.

[QUOTE=Chonch;52624269]If I'm reading this article correctly, it sounds like the source may not actually be part of Mueller's counter-intel probe, but just someone who is familiar with the usual investigative process of a special prosecutor. It doesn't particularly matter who and what is under investigation anyway, since Mueller is more or less given the power to pursue any potentially criminal activity related to the probe as he sees fit.[/QUOTE] You need a title stating "I Believe this is a [B]CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION[/B]" for how much you attempt to peddle a straight up lie.