• Robert Mueller, Former F.B.I. Director, Named Special Counsel for Russia Investigation 0
    135 replies, posted
[QUOTE=mcharest;52249688]Agreed. Considering that most top administration officials are implicated in some way, the only outcome that could possibly restore people's confidence in the electoral process is a complete do-over with an interim administration (preferably somewhat bipartisan so we don't have riots in the streets) to serve out the remainder of this administration's term, as well as comprehensive electoral reform including a requirement that all presidential candidates release their taxes. Sanders-Kasich 2017 anyone?[/QUOTE] People would lose their god-damned minds if a progressive Independent/Democrat chose a conservative Republican for a VP. I'm in.
Is every single member of GOP this much of a scumbag? Send the whole damn party to Russia with Russian passports and revoke their US passports.
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;52249723]People would lose their god-damned minds if a progressive Independent/Democrat chose a conservative Republican for a VP. I'm in.[/QUOTE] Didn't a president do this long ago? Basically filled his cabinet with opposition. I remember it from high school, but I got only a 3 on that AP test for a reason...
[QUOTE=Revenge282;52250813]Didn't a president do this long ago? Basically filled his cabinet with opposition. I remember it from high school, but I got only a 3 on that AP test for a reason...[/QUOTE] Monroe is the only one I can think of off the top of my head. [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Era_of_Good_Feelings"]It didn't work out too well. [/URL]
I am pretty happy there will be a Special investigation with Robert Mueller. He is undoubtedly a good pick for such a role. Unlike most people on here, I don't think Trump is guilty of collusion. What they will probably find is a few subordinates that had precarious relationships with Russia, and I am totally fine with them getting charged if found guilty, but nothing with Trump himself actually acting on behalf of Russia. If anything, this investigation might help shoot the democrats in their own foot, considering that the special investigation unit can ask for evidence going back to Obama's Administration and even things related to Hillary. Especially if they are going to ask for Comey's previous memos to establish any kind of continuity.
[QUOTE=Tudd;52254004]I am pretty happy there will be a Special investigation with Robert Mueller. He is undoubtedly a good pick for such a role. Unlike most people on here, I don't think Trump is guilty of collusion. What they will probably find is a few subordinates that had precarious relationships with Russia, and I am totally fine with them getting charged if found guilty, but nothing with Trump himself actually acting on behalf of Russia. If anything, this investigation might help shoot the democrats in their own foot, considering that the special investigation unit can ask for evidence going back to Obama's Administration and even things related to Hillary. Especially if they are going to ask for Comey's previous memos to establish any kind of continuity.[/QUOTE] I mean I really shouldn't expect you to have any wherewithal to actually distance yourself from this situation but alright, I'm sure there's no chance Trump is guilty despite his actions, his twitter feed, his statements, his contradicting of the white house, continually calling that into question. [editline]20th May 2017[/editline] I'm sure Trump would try and neuter the investigation because he's innocent. That's how innocent people operate.
[QUOTE=Tudd;52254004]I am pretty happy there will be a Special investigation with Robert Mueller. He is undoubtedly a good pick for such a role. Unlike most people on here, I don't think Trump is guilty of collusion. What they will probably find is a few subordinates that had precarious relationships with Russia, and I am totally fine with them getting charged if found guilty, but nothing with Trump himself actually acting on behalf of Russia. If anything, this investigation might help shoot the democrats in their own foot, considering that the special investigation unit can ask for evidence going back to Obama's Administration and even things related to Hillary. Especially if they are going to ask for Comey's previous memos to establish any kind of continuity.[/QUOTE] Do you think that firing comey was not an obstruction of justice?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52254036]I mean I really shouldn't expect you to have any wherewithal to actually distance yourself from this situation but alright, I'm sure there's no chance Trump is guilty despite his actions, his twitter feed, his statements, his contradicting of the white house, continually calling that into question.[/quote] I mean is his behavior abnormal for this situation? If anything it is him just being him. I really don't think any of his behavior is indicative of collusion with Russia even with his conversation with Comey. That will be for the investigation to prove there was bad intentions which is key for obstruction. [quote] I'm sure Trump would try and neuter the investigation because he's innocent. That's how innocent people operate.[/QUOTE] How is drawing so much attention that a special investigation unit neutering? I think he truly wanted to fire Comey for his frankly weird performance that is a huge partisan tightrope and doesn't have anything to hide. I mean really, if you know you are innocent, wouldn't you still actively operate to close the investigation? And not shut it down in a obstructive way, because even with firing Comey Trump didn't shut down the investigation, it was still going to continue, and if anything he should have known this would highlight the investigation more. None of his behavior is weird in that sense, and I could always be wrong, but I think it is absolutely overreacting on this forum what I have seen for the past week in alot of regards. [editline]20th May 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Lambeth;52254049]Do you think that firing comey was not an obstruction of justice?[/QUOTE] No, because the investigation was still going to go on, and if anything his firing of Comey would obviously lead to more concentration on it to the point of a special investigation counsel being called.
[QUOTE=Tudd;52254068]I mean is his behavior abnormal for this situation? If anything it is him just being him. I really don't think any of his behavior is indicative of collusion with Russia even with his conversation with Comey. That will be for the investigation to prove there was bad intentions which is key for obstruction. How is drawing so much attention that a special investigation unit neutering? I think he truly wanted to fire Comey for his frankly weird performance that is a huge partisan tightrope and doesn't have anything to hide. I mean really, if you know you are innocent, wouldn't you still actively operate to close the investigation? And not shut it down in a obstructive way, because even with firing Comey Trump didn't shut down the investigation, it was still going to continue, and if anything he should have known this would highlight the investigation more. None of his behavior is weird in that sense, and I could always be wrong, but I think it is absolutely overreacting on this forum what I have seen for the past week in alot of regards. [editline]20th May 2017[/editline] No, because the investigation was still going to go on, and if anything his firing of Comey would obviously lead to more concentration on it to the point of a special investigation counsel being called.[/QUOTE] Yes you are wrong that is not what a person who knows their innocence is assured in a fair investigation would do [editline]20th May 2017[/editline] So basically your defence is "he's fucking retarded of course he's going to say fucking retarded things out loud. #mypresident"
[QUOTE]How is drawing so much attention that a special investigation unit neutering? I think he truly wanted to fire Comey for his frankly weird performance that is a huge partisan tightrope and doesn't have anything to hide. I mean really, if you know you are innocent, wouldn't you still actively operate to close the investigation? And not shut it down in a obstructive way, because even with firing Comey Trump didn't shut down the investigation, it was still going to continue, and if anything he should have known this would highlight the investigation more. None of his behavior is weird in that sense, and I could always be wrong, but I think it is absolutely overreacting on this forum what I have seen for the past week in alot of regards.[/QUOTE] regardless of your attempts to justify how not weird trump is, it is on the public record that trump tried to fire comey in order to stop this russia investigation.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;52254093]regardless of your attempts to justify how not weird trump is, it is on the public record that trump tried to fire comey in order to stop this russia investigation.[/QUOTE] Actually no, that isn't how it is at all. That is you assuming intent at this time that he only did it for that reason, but he has also said that he wanted to fire Comey for months. Nor does firing the director indicate him trying to stop the Russia investigation, and again if anything Trump should know that dropping Comey would only help lead to special investigation to be created. Either way, that is for the investigations to prove and us to speculate alot on here, but I did want to drop what I thought of the situation since some people might be thinking I have dropped out of here thinking it was so damning.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52254085]Yes you are wrong that is not what a person who knows their innocence is assured in a fair investigation would do [editline]20th May 2017[/editline] So basically your defence is "he's fucking retarded of course he's going to say fucking retarded things out loud. #mypresident"[/QUOTE] My view on the situation is that none of this Comey firing really makes sense as an attempt to shut down the investigation considering how public and obvious the consequences would be. I think Trump is innocent, wanted to fire Comey for various other reasons, and that his behavior isn't indicative at all except through hyperbolic reaction as guilt. In a similar way you think I am only defending him for being "retarded". It seems on here that it is okay to accept Trump is retarded to explain the inconsistencies of why a person would draw such attention to himself if he truly wanted to obstruct the investigation.
[QUOTE=Tudd;52254153]My view on the situation is that none of this Comey firing really makes sense as an attempt to shut down the investigation considering how public and obvious the consequences would be.[/QUOTE] Congratulations on being smarter than Trump
[QUOTE=Fort83;52254150] Look at Trump's attitude, he loves to win at everything. If he was truly innocent he'd would just let the investigation run its course instead of trying to stop it.[/quote] Again he didn't try to stop the investigation. He fired Comey and you have to currently make the assumption that was him trying to end the investigation. [quote]And when it showed that he was in fact innocent, he could use that as ammunition against the Democrats saying "I told you so" and he'd consider it another win.[/quote] I don't think you realize that having an investigation possibly last for years can be quite damaging to your presidency and actions. So even an innocent person would be understandably be perturbed continuing this process. And again, he didn't even shut down the investigation by firing Comey. Not to mention that isn't even the reality of how cases and public opinion works. You think I instantly dropped my opinions on Clinton after her verdict given out by Comey?
[QUOTE=Tudd;52254153]My view on the situation is that none of this Comey firing really makes sense as an attempt to shut down the investigation considering how public and obvious the consequences would be. I think Trump is innocent, wanted to fire Comey for various other reasons, and that his behavior isn't indicative at all except through hyperbolic reaction as guilt. In a similar way you think I am only defending him for being "retarded". It seems on here that it is okay to accept Trump is retarded to explain the inconsistencies of why a person would draw such attention to himself if he truly wanted to obstruct the investigation.[/QUOTE] What do you think of Trump telling Russians that the firing of Comey "relieved great pressure" after he called Comey a "nut job"? [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1564612[/url] Also, why does Trump now care about how Comey handled Clinton's investigation after previously praising him for it? Why do you suppose his opinion publicly changed only after Comey said he was investigating Trump?
[QUOTE=Tudd;52254068] No, because the investigation was still going to go on, and if anything his firing of Comey would obviously lead to more concentration on it to the point of a special investigation counsel being called.[/QUOTE] Trump could then appoint whoever he wants (and don't act like the Republican-majority Congress wouldn't approve them considering the other appointees they've already approved, despite lacking in qualifications) who could then smother the investigation by redirecting funds/man-power. Holy shit, not even osmium is this dense. [QUOTE=Tudd;52254137]Actually no, that isn't how it is at all. That is you assuming intent at this time that he only did it for that reason, but he has also said that he wanted to fire Comey for months. Nor does firing the director indicate him trying to stop the Russia investigation, and again if anything Trump should know that dropping Comey would only help lead to special investigation to be created. Either way, that is for the investigations to prove and us to speculate alot on here, but I did want to drop what I thought of the situation since some people might be thinking I have dropped out of here thinking it was so damning.[/QUOTE] The same guy who said he would release his tax returns if he won the election? (spoiler alert: he didn't, and now says he never will) Trump says a lot of things.
I dunno why you guys genuinely try to argue with Tudd. If cognitive dissonance was a mental illness, he'd be the perfect example of its later stages.
[QUOTE=Dom Pyroshark;52254183]I dunno why you guys genuinely try to argue with Tudd. If cognitive dissonance was a mental illness, he'd be the perfect example of its later stages.[/QUOTE] I personally don't consider Tudd's posts arguments so much as I consider them a fairly half-assed attempt at smoke and mirrors.
[QUOTE=Dom Pyroshark;52254183]I dunno why you guys genuinely try to argue with Tudd. If cognitive dissonance was a mental illness, he'd be the perfect example of its later stages.[/QUOTE] eh, it passes the time as we all lurch towards the inevitability of death
[QUOTE=Tudd;52254167]Again he didn't try to stop the investigation. He fired Comey and you have to currently make the assumption that was him trying to end the investigation.[/QUOTE] Trump has said on camera that he made the decision based on the Russia investigation. And the idea is to remove the hostile FBI director and insert someone else who is more malleable: nobody expected the investigation to immediately cease to exist when Comey was fired, not even Trump is dumb enough to think that. [QUOTE=Tudd;52254167]I don't think you realize that having an investigation possibly last for years can be quite damaging to your presidency and actions. So even an innocent person would be understandably be perturbed continuing this process. And again, he didn't even shut down the investigation by firing Comey.[/QUOTE] Are you arguing both that he had good reason to try to shut down the investigation, and that he didn't try to shut down the investigation, in the same paragraph? In any case, what he did [I]looks[/I] like the actions of a guilty man trying to obstruct justice - surely that's damaging to his presidency and actions, too. I feel like it's common sense not to try to shut down / destroy / "conclude" / alter the investigation process when you're being investigated. [QUOTE=Tudd;52254068]I mean really, if you know you are innocent, wouldn't you still actively operate to close the investigation? And not shut it down in a obstructive way,[/QUOTE] What does that even mean? When has someone ever [I]non-obstructively shut down[/I] an ongoing investigation into themselves? [QUOTE=Tudd;52254153]In a similar way you think I am only defending him for being "retarded". It seems on here that it is okay to accept Trump is retarded to explain the inconsistencies of why a person would draw such attention to himself if he truly wanted to obstruct the investigation.[/QUOTE] I don't see how you can attempt to explain Trump's actions as though they have to conform to logical reasoning. People are talking about [I]impeachment[/I] as a result of many of his decisions, this firing of a man he supported not that long ago included. What reasons could he possibly have for doing this, that were good enough to outweigh the massive reaction he got?
[QUOTE=Tudd;52254167]Again he didn't try to stop the investigation. He fired Comey and you have to currently make the assumption that was him trying to end the investigation.[/QUOTE] I genuinely missed you making these insane statements. The tension has been building for a week and it hasn't been a disappointment yet.
[QUOTE=Tudd;52254153]My view on the situation is that none of this Comey firing really makes sense as an attempt to shut down the investigation considering how public and obvious the consequences would be. I think Trump is innocent, wanted to fire Comey for various other reasons, and that his behavior isn't indicative at all except through hyperbolic reaction as guilt. In a similar way you think I am only defending him for being "retarded". It seems on here that it is okay to accept Trump is retarded to explain the inconsistencies of why a person would draw such attention to himself if he truly wanted to obstruct the investigation.[/QUOTE] Except it's only public because Trump made it public He deliberately fired him in the most humiliating way imaginable. He made a shitshow out of what could've been a quiet resignation, then stoked fears of collusion [I]even further[/I] by denying American (but not Russian) media access to his meeting with Russian officials [I]the day after firing Comey[/I] AND shared classified information with the Russians (in the [I]exact fucking scenario[/I] that had been predicted by US officials, in a warning to Israeli intelligence, [I]before the inauguration[/I]). You're a fool if you legitimately can't see how this scandal is 100% Trump's doing.
[QUOTE=Tudd;52254153]My view on the situation is that none of this Comey firing really makes sense as an attempt to shut down the investigation considering how public and obvious the consequences would be. I think Trump is innocent, wanted to fire Comey for various other reasons, and that his behavior isn't indicative at all except through hyperbolic reaction as guilt. In a similar way you think I am only defending him for being "retarded". It seems on here that it is okay to accept Trump is retarded to explain the inconsistencies of why a person would draw such attention to himself if he truly wanted to obstruct the investigation.[/QUOTE] Why would a person act in a way that is [B]OBJECTIVELY[/B] the wrong way to act in regards to the perceptions(Which is all that matters here) of his actions? Why are you defending doing the wrong thing as a 230958729-8374098qw356985 dimensional chess game? You are not being a reasonable person right now.
I've stopped trying to reason with hardcore Trump supporters. They will come up with the most non logical things just to try and defend their decision.
There's a grain of truth to what Tudd is saying though. Are Trump's actions in regards to the investigation suspicious as hell? Absolutely. Could they be used as part of a case against him? Maybe. Are they proof positive alone that he's guilty? Not really. And innocent until proven guilty and all that.
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;52254500]There's a grain of truth to what Tudd is saying though. Are Trump's actions in regards to the investigation suspicious as hell? Absolutely. Could they be used as part of a case against him? Maybe. Are they proof positive alone that he's guilty? Not really. And innocent until proven guilty and all that.[/QUOTE] Innocent until proven guilty only applies in a legal court. In the court of public opinion... he's guilty as shit.
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;52254500]There's a grain of truth to what Tudd is saying though. Are Trump's actions in regards to the investigation suspicious as hell? Absolutely. Could they be used as part of a case against him? Maybe. Are they proof positive alone that he's guilty? Not really. And innocent until proven guilty and all that.[/QUOTE] No it's not evidence and anyone who says it should shut up for a minute. What it [B]IS[/B] is so highly suspicious, and so highly unprofessional that it is absolutely mind boggling how anyone can sit back and think of it as anything other than suspicious, and unprofessional. No legal counsel would suggest these actions beacuse they would throw your actions into such heavy suspect even if oyu weren't guilty no one will trust you again. I don't know why it's different for the most powerful man on earth and I don't know why people are so ready to let him have his way. I genuinely believe Trump could kill someones mother, and they would at the very least, try and find a reason to not hate him over that.
He has acted so suspiciously that it has only helped to cement his guiltiness into mind of many people. But frankly? There is a chance he is innocent, but that will just cement him as a bigger idiot - why'd he try fend off investigation, creating more suspicions and scandals in his wake? Of course, it could be that the investigation just offends him by existing, or he is trying to cover someone. But still, obstruction of justice is an offense either way, so play dumb games, win dumb prices.
[QUOTE=Dom Pyroshark;52254183]I dunno why you guys genuinely try to argue with Tudd. If cognitive dissonance was a mental illness, he'd be the perfect example of its later stages.[/QUOTE] Even if it's physically impossible to convince Tudd he's wrong while beating him over the head with indisputable evidence of that fact you can still dismantle his arguments for any readers who might have thought his shit spewing held any water. [QUOTE=Ricenchicken;52254486]I've stopped trying to reason with hardcore Trump supporters. They will come up most non logical things just to try and defend their decision.[/QUOTE] It's too bad mental gymnastics isn't an Olympic event. People like Tudd would take home the gold medal.
I mean I can imagine a world in which an innocent Trump fires Comey basically for harming his ratings but I don't think we're in that world.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.