(08-25-2018 07:29 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  There was a point where it was legitimate. That point passed a long time ago.

It is now political theatre.

You can investigate until the cows come home but not a single thing from the stated intentions of the investigation has materialized.

I’m not even sure that’s true at this point. I would stipulate that there was a point that to the public it APPEARED it was legitimate. But the more we learn about the origin of the case—the less I believe there was never sufficient cause to investigate—much less sufficient cause to appoint a special counsel.

Who made it political theater? Show me one sound bite from Meuller, one interview he did, anything that points to his politicizing the investigations. Meanwhile, we have Trump's tweets and plenty of speculation from bloggers about what things might mean, so if anyone has politicized it, it was Trump, the media and the general public, not Meuller.

Here is an article written by the former assistant secretary of state under Reagan and Bush, who made his comments at the time of Meuller's appointment:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/05/1...asier.html

All of the commentary immediately after his appointment that I have seen characterized Meuller as a widely respected, highly regarded man of integrity who was non-political. The narrative that he is otherwise seems to me to be spin more than truth. I am willing to wait for the conclusion of the investigations before speculating what might be there.

(08-25-2018 07:29 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  There was a point where it was legitimate. That point passed a long time ago.

It is now political theatre.

You can investigate until the cows come home but not a single thing from the stated intentions of the investigation has materialized.

And thats on Mueller? The political theatre is coming from the pundits but not the special counsel.

(08-26-2018 07:53 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Who made it political theater? Show me one sound bite from Meuller, one interview he did, anything that points to his politicizing the investigations. Meanwhile, we have Trump's tweets and plenty of speculation from bloggers about what things might mean, so if anyone has politicized it, it was Trump, the media and the general public, not Meuller.

Here is an article written by the former assistant secretary of state under Reagan and Bush, who made his comments at the time of Meuller's appointment:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/05/1...asier.html

All of the commentary immediately after his appointment that I have seen characterized Meuller as a widely respected, highly regarded man of integrity who was non-political. The narrative that he is otherwise seems to me to be spin more than truth. I am willing to wait for the conclusion of the investigations before speculating what might be there.

The FBI has made it political by their actions to suppress documents requested by congress in their legitimate role of oversight.....and as those documents are slowly released, the evidence shows that there was political bias in the investigation. If you don't believe that, then explain to me how so many at the top of the FBI or in important investigative positiions have either been fired or demoted. There is no other explanation.

As I said, Bueller will eventually file a report that links Trump, in some tangential way, to a crime committed by someone tangentially related to him. I would suggest that if Bueller investigated any of us long enough, he could eventually come up with something to fertilize a report.

(08-26-2018 09:21 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 07:53 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Who made it political theater? Show me one sound bite from Meuller, one interview he did, anything that points to his politicizing the investigations. Meanwhile, we have Trump's tweets and plenty of speculation from bloggers about what things might mean, so if anyone has politicized it, it was Trump, the media and the general public, not Meuller.

Here is an article written by the former assistant secretary of state under Reagan and Bush, who made his comments at the time of Meuller's appointment:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/05/1...asier.html

All of the commentary immediately after his appointment that I have seen characterized Meuller as a widely respected, highly regarded man of integrity who was non-political. The narrative that he is otherwise seems to me to be spin more than truth. I am willing to wait for the conclusion of the investigations before speculating what might be there.

The FBI has made it political by their actions to suppress documents requested by congress in their legitimate role of oversight.....and as those documents are slowly released, the evidence shows that there was political bias in the investigation. If you don't believe that, then explain to me how so many at the top of the FBI or in important investigative positiions have either been fired or demoted. There is no other explanation.

As I said, Bueller will eventually file a report that links Trump, in some tangential way, to a crime committed by someone tangentially related to him. I would suggest that if Bueller investigated any of us long enough, he could eventually come up with something to fertilize a report.

I agree that the release of documents to Congress relating to their investigation has been way too slow, if not obstructed, and it has gone on for years. It was true for previous Intelligence Committee investigations. But as far as I know, that has nothing to do with Meuller's special counsel investigation.

There may be something in the final report relating to someone close to the campaign, but I don't believe anything will implicate Trump, except by those seeking a guilt by association scenario. But that is why I want to actually know what Meuller reports, rather than speculate what will be found.

As usual, Kimberly Strassel of the WSJ has the clearest and most succinct take on the subject:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-justic...1535063261

Quote:If there is only “one set of rules,” where is Mr. Mueller’s referral of a case against Hillary for America? Federal law requires campaigns to disclose the recipient and purpose of any payments. The Clinton campaign paid Fusion GPS to compile a dossier against Mr. Trump, a document that became the basis of the Russia narrative Mr. Mueller now investigates. But the campaign funneled the money to law firm Perkins Coie, which in turn paid Fusion. The campaign falsely described the money as payment for “legal services.” The Democratic National Committee did the same. A Perkins Coie spokesperson has claimed that neither the Clinton campaign nor the DNC was aware that Fusion GPS had been hired to conduct the research, and maybe so. But a lot of lawyers here seemed to have been ignoring a clear statute, presumably with the intent of influencing an election.

***

Of the seven U.S. citizens Mr. Mueller has charged, five have been accused of (among other things) making false statements to federal officials. But there have been no charges against the partisans who made repeated abjectly false claims to the FBI and Justice Department about actions of their political opponents. There have been no charges against those who leaked classified information, including the unprecedented release of an unmasked conversation between former national security adviserMike Flynnand a Russian ambassador. Nothing.

***

Prosecutors can claim all they want that they are applying the law equally, but if they only apply it to half the suspects, justice is not served. Mr. Mueller seems blind to the national need for—the basic expectation of—a thorough look into all parties. That omission is fundamentally undermining any legitimacy in his findings. Lady Justice does not wear a blindfold over only one eye.

(08-26-2018 09:46 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  I agree that the release of documents to Congress relating to their investigation has been way too slow, if not obstructed, and it has gone on for years. It was true for previous Intelligence Committee investigations. But as far as I know, that has nothing to do with Meuller's special counsel investigation.

There may be something in the final report relating to someone close to the campaign, but I don't believe anything will implicate Trump, except by those seeking a guilt by association scenario. But that is why I want to actually know what Meuller reports, rather than speculate what will be found.

You do realize that both Peter Storzk and Lisa Page were on Bueller's team, don't you? They were only removed after evidence began leaking of their anti-Trump activites.

Do you also know that his top attorney, forget the guy's name, sent a tweet telling Sally Yates (then deputy AG) how proud he was of her for refusing to obey a Trump order on immigration? There are many more examples to be found if you need to see them.

These things don't happen in a vaccum. Bueller's team is absolutely loaded with Trump haters. How can that NOT affect his investigation?

(08-26-2018 07:53 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Who made it political theater? Show me one sound bite from Meuller, one interview he did, anything that points to his politicizing the investigations. Meanwhile, we have Trump's tweets and plenty of speculation from bloggers about what things might mean, so if anyone has politicized it, it was Trump, the media and the general public, not Meuller.

Here is an article written by the former assistant secretary of state under Reagan and Bush, who made his comments at the time of Meuller's appointment:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/05/1...asier.html

All of the commentary immediately after his appointment that I have seen characterized Meuller as a widely respected, highly regarded man of integrity who was non-political. The narrative that he is otherwise seems to me to be spin more than truth. I am willing to wait for the conclusion of the investigations before speculating what might be there.

Read the links. There are his past actions that raise serious doubts about having any integrity. He will do anything to win. I don't know if he is partisan, but his staff is partisan to the point of unprofessionalism. It has been exposed and he has covered it up (it was a long time before we found out why Strzok was gone). He will go to any lengths to win, he's not about justice.

Why did his staff raid Manafort's house at 5 am with guns drawn? That created a dangerous situation when Manafort was already cooperating. That was a gestapo/KGB like effort at intimidation. It shows a total lack of integrity. He's trying to freeze all of Manafort's assets so he can't pay his lawyers. There are serious questions that Flynn's interview documents were changed after the fact. And the interview was done by the compromised Strzok. None of this is professional in the least.

Bueller lost his cred very early when he appointed 13 Dems to the bipartisan panel.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(08-26-2018 07:53 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Who made it political theater? Show me one sound bite from Meuller, one interview he did, anything that points to his politicizing the investigations. Meanwhile, we have Trump's tweets and plenty of speculation from bloggers about what things might mean, so if anyone has politicized it, it was Trump, the media and the general public, not Meuller.

Here is an article written by the former assistant secretary of state under Reagan and Bush, who made his comments at the time of Meuller's appointment:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/05/1...asier.html

All of the commentary immediately after his appointment that I have seen characterized Meuller as a widely respected, highly regarded man of integrity who was non-political. The narrative that he is otherwise seems to me to be spin more than truth. I am willing to wait for the conclusion of the investigations before speculating what might be there.

Answer this please, if the intention was to investigate Russian meddling then why have only Trump associated people been drug to the court house? Can you point out any article or leak where Glen Simpson, Hillary, Bruce Orh, or Comey (along with multiple other democrats) have been put under the scrutiny that those close to Trump have been? No you can’t. That is why there is no argument that he is overseeing a just investigation.

(08-26-2018 11:18 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 09:46 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  I agree that the release of documents to Congress relating to their investigation has been way too slow, if not obstructed, and it has gone on for years. It was true for previous Intelligence Committee investigations. But as far as I know, that has nothing to do with Meuller's special counsel investigation.

There may be something in the final report relating to someone close to the campaign, but I don't believe anything will implicate Trump, except by those seeking a guilt by association scenario. But that is why I want to actually know what Meuller reports, rather than speculate what will be found.

You do realize that both Peter Storzk and Lisa Page were on Bueller's team, don't you? They were only removed after evidence began leaking of their anti-Trump activites.

Do you also know that his top attorney, forget the guy's name, sent a tweet telling Sally Yates (then deputy AG) how proud he was of her for refusing to obey a Trump order on immigration? There are many more examples to be found if you need to see them.

These things don't happen in a vaccum. Bueller's team is absolutely loaded with Trump haters. How can that NOT affect his investigation?

Absolutely loaded on purpose.
Andrew Wiesman. He has a dirty as hell record. Overturned by the USSC multiple times, twice by 9-0. Caught withholding exculpatory evidence. A real gem. He is the one responsible for the nighttime raid on Manafort’s home when his wife was held at gun point while still in bed in her nightgown. He is Mueller’s number 1 lawyer. Was at Hillary Clinton’s ‘victory’ party on election night. Anyone who thinks Mueller is squeaky clean should ask themselves why he hired these people when other competent people were obviously available.

(08-26-2018 03:48 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Bueller lost his cred very early when he appointed 13 Dems to the bipartisan panel.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Including at least one, apparently the lead guy, that attended the Cank victory party. Yea, that's a politically neutral actor.


Yea, what He ^^^ said.

(08-26-2018 09:21 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(08-26-2018 07:53 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Who made it political theater? Show me one sound bite from Meuller, one interview he did, anything that points to his politicizing the investigations. Meanwhile, we have Trump's tweets and plenty of speculation from bloggers about what things might mean, so if anyone has politicized it, it was Trump, the media and the general public, not Meuller.

Here is an article written by the former assistant secretary of state under Reagan and Bush, who made his comments at the time of Meuller's appointment:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/05/1...asier.html

All of the commentary immediately after his appointment that I have seen characterized Meuller as a widely respected, highly regarded man of integrity who was non-political. The narrative that he is otherwise seems to me to be spin more than truth. I am willing to wait for the conclusion of the investigations before speculating what might be there.

The FBI has made it political by their actions to suppress documents requested by congress in their legitimate role of oversight.....and as those documents are slowly released, the evidence shows that there was political bias in the investigation. If you don't believe that, then explain to me how so many at the top of the FBI or in important investigative positiions have either been fired or demoted. There is no other explanation.

As I said, Bueller will eventually file a report that links Trump, in some tangential way, to a crime committed by someone tangentially related to him. I would suggest that if Bueller investigated any of us long enough, he could eventually come up with something to fertilize a report.

And all the leaks which almost certainly come from Mueller's staff.