Mega-Thread: Mueller investigation

[Breccia]

Trump's doom will probably his finances and not obstruction

And Mueller is working with state law enforcement. These are less restricted on who they can/can't indict, but more importantly in context, could shut down his businesses and sue for crippling amounts if proof of lawbreaking is found.

While it's well-known that Mueller is working with the New York AG's office, what I'd be more interested in seeing is Mueller working with Delaware. DE is a well-known corporate tax haven, and even Trump has at least one "company" there that is loaning millions of dollars to Trump's other companies at prime plus five percent. We saw this earlier when looking at his fiscal release forms that he says are as good as tax forms no really why are you laughing they are. We've seen this company doing other things as well. If Trump and his companies are involved with money laundering -- especially overseas money involved with his campaign -- it could Jenga a substantial part of his company propped up by loans to himself.

[Deleted]

And Mueller is working with state law enforcement. These are less restricted on who they can/can't indict, but more importantly in context, could shut down his businesses and sue for crippling amounts if proof of lawbreaking is found.

Good enough to avenge my soul and the time it wastes on the internet for this asswipe.

If Trump and his companies are involved with money laundering -- especially overseas money involved with his campaign -- it could Jenga a substantial part of his company propped up by loans to himself.

Yup, I'll allow it. Do your thing Bobby Three Sticks.

[Shalcker]

I'm saying I don't assume he's a partisan asshole because he hasn't acted like one, unlike nunes, who said he was going to recuse himself because he acted like a partisan asshat and then didn't fulfill that obligation.

So you only assume and you got no actual knowledge of his character?

That's okay. Question was about his, not Nunes or his staff trustworthiness, and if you cannot answer that you should have just said it from the start, not deflect to Nunes.

Did I say he's never drawn my ire? Did I say he always toes the party line? Did I say I only trusted him because he's a democrat? Seems like you need to work on reading comprehension.

Just answering "I got no idea of his trustworthiness" to question about it would be enough.

[Ripster42]

So you only assume and you got no actual knowledge of his character?

That's okay. Question was about his, not Nunes or his staff trustworthiness, and if you cannot answer that you should have just said it from the start, not deflect to Nunes.

Just answering "I got no idea of his trustworthiness" to question about it would be enough.

When comparing two people's trustworthiness, let's say nunes and warner, who am I likely to believe is more trustworthy, the guy who's shown himself to be untrustworthy, or the guy who hasn't shown himself to be untrustworthy? As chairmain and vicechairman of their respective committees which committee is widely seen as being bi-partisan, and which is widely seen as political theater? Warner-acting as vice-chairman of a committee that's working in a bipartisan manner. Nunes-acting as chairman of a committee that's been political theater from the start including, again, the incident that caused him to recuse but not recuse himself because he has zero ethics.

[Shalcker]

When comparing two people's trustworthiness, let's say nunes and warner, who am I likely to believe is more trustworthy, the guy who's shown himself to be untrustworthy, or the guy who hasn't shown himself to be untrustworthy?

Well, i asked for basis of that belief, and apparently it is "because he isn't Nunes"... that's pretty low bar.

It's like voting for anyone in Russia "because he isn't Putin".

As chairmain and vicechairman of their respective committees which committee is widely seen as being bi-partisan, and which is widely seen as political theater? Warner-acting as vice-chairman of a committee that's working in a bipartisan manner. Nunes-acting as chairman of a committee that's been political theater from the start including, again, the incident that caused him to recuse but not recuse himself because he has zero ethics.

Err, chairman of House committee is untrustworthy and yet vice-chairman of Senate version is 100% trustworthy?

American politics are so weird.

[warvings]

Well, i asked for basis of that belief, and apparently it is "because he isn't Nunes"... that's pretty low bar.

No it isn't if the person has actions that define him. It is easier to say "because he isn't Nunes" than list all actions that define the statement.

It's like voting for anyone in Russia "because he isn't Putin".

That would be a great idea. Again just look what actions define Putin and you will get the answer.

Err, chairman of House committee is untrustworthy and yet vice-chairman of Senate version is 100% trustworthy?

Are they the same person? Position doesn't represent trustworthy it is the person.

American politics are so weird.

Sure is weird. Can't unite even under foreign threat.

[Ripster42]

Well, i asked for basis of that belief, and apparently it is "because he isn't Nunes"... that's pretty low bar.

It's like voting for anyone in Russia "because he isn't Putin".

Err, chairman of House committee is untrustworthy and yet vice-chairman of Senate version is 100% trustworthy?

American politics are so weird.

Ya, it's almost like we judge people on their actions and not what state propaganda tells us. Nunes said he was going to recuse himself because of his shady dealings. The senate intelligence committee has been widely praised as bipartisan(see burr/warner), as opposed to both the senate judiciary committee (see grassely) and the house intelligence committee (see nunes).

[Shalcker]

No it isn't if the person has actions that define him. It is easier to say "because he isn't Nunes" than list all actions that define the statement.

I asked for single example, not "all actions".

If someone has no examples at all, it most likely means he is going off stereotypes - which in this case would be most likely partisan stereotypes.

That would be a great idea. Again just look what actions define Putin and you will get the answer.

Plenty of people would be just as authoritarian or even more authoritarian then Putin.

Are they the same person? Position doesn't represent trustworthy it is the person.

People get elected in House/Senate because certain people want them there.

Sure is weird. Can't unite even under foreign threat.

Well, if anything works in Russia it's this...

- - - Updated - - -

Ya, it's almost like we judge people on their actions and not what state propaganda tells us.

And yet you cannot name single previous action of Warren you actually approved...

[jdbond592]

Mueller's days are numbered. He better drop some big names or he is going to get fired soon.

[Orbitus]

And yet you cannot name single previous action of Warren you actually approved...

How about not being a lapdog to a fucking president and making shit up like Nunes has done?

[Shalcker]

How about not being a lapdog to a fucking president and making shit up like Nunes has done?

What exactly is so "making shit up" with asking examples of why Warren is trustworthy?

Vilifying "the other" is easy.

[Orbitus]

What exactly is so "making shit up" with asking examples of why Warren is trustworthy?

Vilifying "the other" is easy.

Do you not understand why Nunes should be recused from the investigation? He was at the Whitehouse, got information from them, then ran back to them to announce that they were under surveillance but they weren't. That is LITERALLY making shit up. We know that Trump Tower wasn't under surveillance, it was the people they were talking to. Your people.

Warren hasn't done anything to fuck it up like that.

[Shalcker]

Warren hasn't done anything to fuck it up like that.

"Warren hasn't done anything" seems to be the most people can say about Warren.

[Orbitus]

"Warren hasn't done anything" seems to be the most people can say about Warren.

Good job taking things out of context. Not surprised the Russian propagandist is taking things out of context.

[Dontrike]

Mueller's days are numbered. He better drop some big names or he is going to get fired soon.

And you know this how?

[Shalcker]

Good job taking things out of context. Not surprised the Russian propagandist is taking things out of context.

I asked to provide context for Warren; noone did. You didn't either.

[Orbitus]

I asked to provide context for Warren; noone did. You didn't either.

Yeah, come back when they do something that is even 1/4 of what Nunes has done to tarnish his reputation. It's just unfortunate that he isn't up for election this year. It would be an easy win against him.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Yes, that's how conspiracy theories often work - string unrelated things together to make them look connected and part of some united sinister plan.

Trump's constant efforts to squash the investigation into his dealings with Russia couldn't be called unrelated. Along with every Russian ambassador, lawyer, and other Putinista who has met with Trump in the last 3 years that Trump and his cronies seemingly desperately want to hide their contacts with.

[Shalcker]

Trump's constant efforts to squash the investigation into his dealings with Russia couldn't be called unrelated.

People hate witch-hunts that undermine their position and character - shocker!

Along with every Russian ambassador, lawyer, and other Putinista who has met with Trump in the last 3 years that Trump and his cronies seemingly desperately want to hide their contacts with.

Where "every" is "exactly one" ambassador and lawyer... so convincing! So many Russian agents met!

Another bogus qualifier to promote your still unproven conspiracy theory.

And we even know what they talked about. There is nothing damning in those talks, nor did anything material ever appeared from them.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, come back when they do something that is even 1/4 of what Nunes has done to tarnish his reputation. It's just unfortunate that he isn't up for election this year. It would be an easy win against him.

You can point out flaws in other team all day long but you cannot give even single example of what someone on your team did right. Pathetic.

[Orbitus]

You can point out flaws in other team all day long but you cannot give even single example of what someone on your team did right. Pathetic.

Sorry, I don't have to defend myself to a known Russian propagandist. The only question is, are you under Putin's employment, or are you really this ignorant? My guess is, you are Putin's employment. Simply because of your adamant defense of your dictator.