26
   

Special Counsel for Russia Election Interference: Robert Mueller.

 
 
farmerman
 
  5  
Reply Thu 15 Jun, 2017 02:06 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
To my knowledge the only person who has said such a thing is a powerless Democrat.

well your knowledge is, once again, wrong.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 15 Jun, 2017 05:56 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Just curious who is offended by Trump talking about grabbing pussy and not so much by Clinton sticking cigars in there.

Sexual aggression is illegal, consensual sex is legal.

When Leftists (or people who Leftists like) behave that way, it only counts as making a friendly pass at a woman.

Don't be surprised when Republicans get to live by the same standards that Leftists get to live by.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 15 Jun, 2017 05:57 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
oralloy wrote:
farmerman wrote:
The Sente Majority leader stated that, should Trump fire Mueller, the Senate qould rehire him an the entire investigation would iden significantly.
Sounds like the Senate is finding its balls, (besides that pitiful dog and pony show at yesterdays "Cabinet News Brief")

To my knowledge the only person who has said such a thing is a powerless Democrat.
Unlikely that a Republican controlled Congress would enable such a witch hunt.

well your knowledge is, once again, wrong.

Your use of the words "once again" is way out of place given that you've never once pointed out a fact that I've been wrong about.

And if you have evidence of such a statement being made by the Senate Majority Leader, how about a cite?
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  3  
Reply Thu 15 Jun, 2017 11:09 pm
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/15/us/politics/pence-hires-criminal-defense-lawyer.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=0
Quote:
WASHINGTON — Vice President Mike Pence has hired a personal criminal defense lawyer to guide him through the various investigations encircling the White House, an aide said on Thursday.

Mr. Pence has retained Richard Cullen, a former United States attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, becoming one of the most prominent figures in the Trump administration to have taken on personal white-collar criminal defense counsel.

Mr. Pence, who had little relationship with the president before joining the campaign ticket just before last July’s Republican convention, is most likely a peripheral figure in the government’s inquiry into Russia’s interference in the election and potential collusion with members of the Trump campaign. Paul Manafort — Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman who has been scrutinized for financial ties to a pro-Russian political party — was instrumental in recruiting Mr. Pence.

But as the special counsel investigation progresses — focusing increasingly on the president himself and his actions in office — the vice president’s account as a possible witness may become more relevant.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Thu 15 Jun, 2017 11:15 pm
@Real Music,
Curious...do you think this has any real significance...like he wouldn't need a white collar criminal defense counsel if he didn't have something to hide significance?
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 15 Jun, 2017 11:15 pm
@Real Music,
A pile of blanket pardons would make short work of this witch hunt and allow White House staff to get back to the business of the American people.
roger
 
  2  
Reply Thu 15 Jun, 2017 11:19 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I'm willing to give him a pass, at least for now. There are all kinds of reasons to retain a lawyer, even with 'nothing to hide'. I could also change my mind.
Real Music
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Jun, 2017 11:21 pm
http://www.businessinsider.com/jared-kushner-trump-russia-financial-investigation-2017-6
Quote:
Jared Kushner's finances and business dealings are now a focus of the Trump-Russia investigation

The business dealings of Jared Kushner have become a focus in special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, according to a Washington Post report Thursday night.

Kushner, the adviser and son-in-law of President Donald Trump, met separately with the Russian ambassador to the US and a Russian businessman in December — interactions that were already under scrutiny as part of the FBI probe.

Sources informed The Post of the financial focus of the investigation.

During the meeting at Trump Tower with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, Kushner reportedly floated the possibility of establishing a back-channel line of communication between the Trump transition team and Russia.

The White House has said that Kushner's subsequent meeting with Sergey Gorkov, CEO of Russia's state-owned Vnesheconombank, was unrelated to business matters. But the FBI is looking into whether Gorkov suggested to Kushner that Russian banks could finance the business ventures of Trump's associates if US sanctions were lifted or relaxed.

Kushner attorney Jamie Gorelick pushed back on the report in a statement Thursday evening.

"We do not know what this report refers to," Gorelick said. "It would be standard practice for the Special Counsel to examine financial records to look for anything related to Russia. Mr. Kushner previously volunteered to share with Congress what he knows about Russia-related matters. He will do the same if he is contacted in connection with any other inquiry."

The development marks another expansion of the FBI probe, whose scope had previously been limited to uncovering whether Trump's campaign colluded with the Kremlin during the 2016 election. The Post reported on Wednesday that Mueller was investigating Trump to prove whether the president attempted to obstruct justice.

In an early-morning tweetstorm, Trump blasted the investigation as a "witch hunt" and a "phony story."

"You are witnessing the single greatest WITCH HUNT in American political history - led by some very bad and conflicted people!" Trump said in a tweet.

According to Thursday's Post report, investigators have also been looking into the financial dealings of other Trump associates, including former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, and former foreign-policy adviser Carter Page.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Jun, 2017 11:31 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Roger posted the following and he made a good point:
"I'm willing to give him a pass, at least for now. There are all kinds of reasons to retain a lawyer, even with 'nothing to hide"
Real Music
 
  3  
Reply Thu 15 Jun, 2017 11:40 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
A pile of blanket pardons would make short work of this
Yes, it is true that the president has the authority to hand out a pile of blanket pardons. Don't these people have to first be convicted of a crime before they can be pardoned? Are you conceding that these people are going to be convicted of a crime?
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 16 Jun, 2017 12:02 am
@Real Music,
Real Music wrote:
Don't these people have to first be convicted of a crime before they can be pardoned?

Nixon was pardoned before he was even charged with anything.


Real Music wrote:
Are you conceding that these people are going to be convicted of a crime?

I have grave fears that the Democrats will once again get innocent people convicted of imaginary crimes, like they did with Scooter Libby.

Also it seems likely that Flynn and Manafort committed a minor offense that isn't worth prosecuting, but will likely be prosecuted anyway.
revelette1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Jun, 2017 06:50 am
Quote:
President Trump's legal team and political allies have launched a preemptive strike against special counsel Robert Mueller.

Trump's backers are furious about a story that appeared Wednesday in the Washington Post, in which five anonymous sources alleged that the president is the target of an obstruction of justice investigation for allegedly trying to bury an FBI probe into his former national security adviser, Michael Flynn.

The timing of that story, which was published on Trump's birthday and a week after the White House believed the president had moved beyond allegations of election collusion with Russia, was viewed by Trump's allies as evidence that the story was planted by law enforcement officials to ensure a shadow of suspicion would remain.

It is unclear whether the Post story was leaked by the special counsel, the FBI, former FBI director James Comey and his allies, or witnesses that have been contacted by those law enforcement agencies as part of the investigation.

Many legal experts suspect the leaks didn't come from the special counsel or from current or former FBI officials, but rather from those who have been reached for questioning as part of the probe - or their staffers.

"The Special Counsel's Office has undertaken stringent controls to prohibit unauthorized disclosures that deal severely with any member who engages in this conduct," Mueller spokesman Peter Carr told The Hill.

That hasn't been enough to stop a barrage of attacks against the special counsel and Mueller, the lead investigator, who otherwise enjoys the confidence of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.

Trump has chimed in on Twitter, saying Wednesday that "conflicted people" are running the "single greatest witch hunt in American political history." Aside from Trump's tweets, though, the White House is taking a backseat in the offensive, referring all questions about the special counsel to the president's outside lawyers.

Instead, Trump's legal team, the Republican National Committee, conservative heavyweights and the right-wing mediasphere are picking up the slack, launching a tandem effort to cast the special counsel as hopelessly corrupt.


[ur=https://a.msn.com/r/2/BBCKV9F?m=en-usl]The Hill[/url]
revelette1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Jun, 2017 08:18 am
@revelette1,
I have to fix my previous post url.

The Hill

That is going to bug me until the page is turned.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Fri 16 Jun, 2017 08:19 am
@roger,
roger wrote:

I'm willing to give him a pass, at least for now. There are all kinds of reasons to retain a lawyer, even with 'nothing to hide'. I could also change my mind.


You would likely change your mind if you saw evidence of his wrongdoing, not because you simply thought about it some more.

Of course there are plenty of valid reasons to retain legal counsel and it is not an admission of wrongdoing.

I'm afraid that I don't believe the MSM is reporting Pence's retention of counsel simply as a news nugget mundanely associated with the larger story. If they were, I wouldn't be receiving the story as a News Alert! in my e-mail inbox or on my phone.

Similarly I don't think Real Music was simply updating the forum on the latest tidbit of news.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Fri 16 Jun, 2017 08:20 am
@Real Music,


Real Music wrote:

Roger posted the following and he made a good point:
"I'm willing to give him a pass, at least for now. There are all kinds of reasons to retain a lawyer, even with 'nothing to hide"


He made a very good point and the precise one I was going to make to you.

So what was your point in posting the news nugget?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Fri 16 Jun, 2017 08:39 am
@Real Music,
Oralloy has already responded that a preemptive pardon can be issued.

While it certainly doesn't look good for the person pardoned, it doesn't mean that they are guilty of anything. Such pardons can be extended to spare someone the president knows or believes is innocent of wrongdoing and who he feels should be spared the ordeal and expense of a criminal proceeding. He might also do so (as in the case of Ford) to spare the country from a very ugly, and divisive spectacle; particularly when the pardoned person has already been justly and harshly punished. Nixon's resignation broke him and I'm sure plagued him every day for the rest of his life.

There was, at one point, talk about Obama issuing a pardon of Hillary Clinton in anticipation of the possibility that Trump would make good on his campaign rhetoric about having her prosecuted if he were elected. I don't know if Obama every really gave it serious thought, but there was also speculation about Clinton refusing any offer of a pardon as it would be the final coffin nail for her moribund political career.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 16 Jun, 2017 11:50 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
He might also do so (as in the case of Ford) to spare the country from a very ugly, and divisive spectacle; particularly when the pardoned person has already been justly and harshly punished. Nixon's resignation broke him and I'm sure plagued him every day for the rest of his life.

I question whether there was any justice in the way Nixon was treated.

Nixon's having a private team bug the Democrats pales in comparison to the Democrats' previous corrupting of entire federal agencies to have their political opponents bugged.

And the notion that it was obstruction of justice for Nixon to try to shut down the investigation is just as ludicrous as the notion that it would be obstruction of justice for Trump.

If America ever carries through with my proposal to outlaw the Democratic Party, the shameful lynching of Nixon should be "Exhibit A" in the case against the Democrats.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Fri 16 Jun, 2017 12:00 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
I'm afraid that I don't believe the MSM is reporting Pence's retention of counsel simply as a news nugget mundanely associated with the larger story.

That's speculative. True or fake, news get reported. Whether they get red by a wide audience and/or ends up as an alert depends on many factors, including some human subjectivity together nowadays with loads of machine code.

In this particular case, it's evidently meaningful: Pence is faced with complex legal questions and nobody could falt him for seeking counsel but -- Edit: and I know squat about US law but -- he could have relied on a white house counseler. Instead he took a private one -- why? Likely, he wants to make sure his counsel has total loyalty to him, personally rather than institutionally.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Jun, 2017 02:57 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

roger wrote:

I'm willing to give him a pass, at least for now. There are all kinds of reasons to retain a lawyer, even with 'nothing to hide'. I could also change my mind.


You would likely change your mind if you saw evidence of his wrongdoing, not because you simply thought about it some more.


Absolutely.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Jun, 2017 02:59 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

While it certainly doesn't look good for the person pardoned, it doesn't mean that they are guilty of anything.


True, but I would always question their ability to act as public servants in the future.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/28/2020 at 07:13:40