1. #16981
    Quote Originally Posted by Orbitus View Post
    Except it doesn't say that at all. We know they at least attempted to collude.
    We do?

    Look..I have things to do and I might see where this goes later.

    Bottom line

    Its over.

  2. #16982
    Quote Originally Posted by Aehl View Post
    We do?

    Look..I have things to do and I might see where this goes later.

    Bottom line

    Its over.
    Not when there is 16 other investigations. And yes, we do, if we didn't have our heads shoved into the sand like you have. Trump Tower meeting, all the evidence we need for collusion.

  3. #16983
    Legendary! Thepersona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Puerto Montt, Chile
    Posts
    6,672
    Quote Originally Posted by Aehl View Post
    We do?

    Look..I have things to do and I might see where this goes later.

    Bottom line

    Its over.
    It's not.
    Demand a Full release, and if he's truly vindicated, gloat as you like
    Forgive my english, as i'm not a native speaker



  4. #16984
    Quote Originally Posted by Aehl View Post
    Which ends the matter there and then.
    This is a really, really, weird thing to say. This is basically you saying that even if there's "clear and convincing" proof the president conspired with a foreign power to undermine our democracy, we shouldn't do anything about it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  5. #16985
    Quote Originally Posted by CrimsonKing View Post
    What does the bolded have to do with the Democrats in the House or the Senate? SDNY is handled by the state of New York, so I don't see how them pursuing charges is going to do anything to the Democrats at the federal level.
    What do you mean? What does SDNY have to do with the State of New York?

  6. #16986
    Quote Originally Posted by Hubcap View Post
    All those millions of $dollars wasted on this investigation.

    Might as well piled all that money up and put a match to it.
    Once again, since you appear to be one of the ones that requires it to be spelled out to you: The investigation MADE a surplus of money from assets seized. The investigation in effect did not cost a dime and in fact added to the treasury.

  7. #16987
    Quote Originally Posted by Orbitus View Post
    Yet, nothing came of it. But millions wasted in investigations and no indictments. Meanwhile we have several guilty pleas and several indictments that are still going through the courts.
    They would had indictments there too if they wouldn't give Clinton's underlings immunity.

  8. #16988
    Quote Originally Posted by Merkava View Post
    What do you mean? What does SDNY have to do with the State of New York?
    I think he means the NY AG. SDNY is still investigating trump though. So, just to be clear, even though mueller's office hasn't filed charges, trump is still being investigated even at the federal level.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  9. #16989
    Quote Originally Posted by Hubcap View Post
    All those millions of $dollars wasted on this investigation.

    Might as well piled all that money up and put a match to it.
    Oh how clever, using the same bullshit falsehood in two different threads.

  10. #16990
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    I think he means the NY AG. SDNY is still investigating trump though. So, just to be clear, even though mueller's office hasn't filed charges, trump is still being investigated even at the federal level.
    Yes clearly. He appeared to be implying that the State of New York had control over the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. I was just wondering why he thought that. Thanks.

  11. #16991
    Quote Originally Posted by Merkava View Post
    Yes clearly. He appeared to be implying that the State of New York had control over the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. I was just wondering why he thought that. Thanks.
    I probably screwed up my wording, sorry about that. I'm not that well versed in all the legal stuff, I'm actually quite casual when it comes to politics, but I'm trying to learn some.

  12. #16992
    Fluffy Kitten MoanaLisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Tralfamadore
    Posts
    29,790
    Quote Originally Posted by Merkava View Post
    Yes clearly. He appeared to be implying that the State of New York had control over the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. I was just wondering why he thought that. Thanks.
    It would be simpler, alas, if there were fewer investigations. But since possible crimes lurk everywhere there will be as many as there need to be. For myself I have said from way back in the beginning that if Trump were to be brought down it would be for money laundering and it would be a New York state indictment. I haven't changed my mind about that. SDNY will have things to say too. The speculation was that anything Mueller came across that was a serious non-political crime would be shuffled over to that office. Don Jr., Jared, Ivanka...they should all be concerned about both the state AG and SDNY. Trump can try to pardon himself out of anything federal but the NYAG's office is something he can't avoid.
    Last edited by MoanaLisa; 2019-03-25 at 01:03 AM.
    “We live in a moment where everything immediately seems to default to outrage. There’s a kind of M.O. of either it’s exactly how I see it, or you’re my enemy.”

  13. #16993
    Quote Originally Posted by CrimsonKing View Post
    I probably screwed up my wording, sorry about that. I'm not that well versed in all the legal stuff, I'm actually quite casual when it comes to politics, but I'm trying to learn some.
    No need to apologize, and certainly nothign wrong with a casual attitude to politics. I thought that maybe you were implying that perhaps the New York Attorney General had recommended charges to the SDNY or perhaps vice versa.

    Thanks for offering the clarification.

  14. #16994
    Oh god, the right wing spin is going off the rails here. I mean, it would have regardless of what Mueller said, but it's always fun to see it in action. They seem to skip over the fact that Mueller didn't find that collusion didn't occur at all, only that attempts to collude were unsuccessful; it also did not find that obstruction did not occur, just that it wasn't provable beyond a reasonable doubt because, as all obstruction cases tend to go, it's near impossible to prove intent.

    I wasn't expecting much else from the report, as I've said from the start. Trump's not an evil asshole. He's a stupid asshole. He's not an evil mastermind who spun wizardry and intrigue. He's a dumb shit who did illegal things because he was too stupid to know to do otherwise. He'll probably face action from the various states on those counts, but for the scope of Mueller's probe, this isn't too surprising. Even this thread mostly worked around the idea of "Mueller will turn up something not directly related to the case that shows Trump for the shitlord he is." And to be fair, that happened, but Mueller decided it wasn't his job to deal with it.

  15. #16995
    Quote Originally Posted by MoanaLisa View Post
    It would be simpler, alas, if there were fewer investigations. But since possible crimes lurk everywhere there will be as many as there need to be. For myself I have said from way back in the beginning that if Trump were to be brought down it would be for money laundering and it would be a New York state indictment. I haven't changed my mind about that.
    Eh, I don't think money laundering would garner an impeachment. Yeah, he's probably done it, but it's not really a high crime or misdemeanor unless there's an obstruction charge related to it or unless he was actively being blackmailed over it (and then, again, whatever he's being blackmailed to do would probably be the high crime or misdemeanor). It's despicable. It should prevent him from being re-elected. But I put that in the same category as clinton's perjury: a crime, but not worth removing a president over.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  16. #16996
    Quote Originally Posted by CrimsonKing View Post
    I probably screwed up my wording, sorry about that. I'm not that well versed in all the legal stuff, I'm actually quite casual when it comes to politics, but I'm trying to learn some.
    You should be glad you don't know much about politics. Its core laid bare is just tribalism. Picture cavemen fighting but with words this time and it's because they think differently to each other.

    You shouldn't get into it because all it does to you is draws you into a well of hate and negativity. Before long you'll find your own particular tribe to fight for and you'll become fanatical like the posters in this thread. Just observe and watch how human nature gets the best of them, use that as inspiration not to become like them.

  17. #16997
    Warchief Mekkle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    My desk, Lurkin'.
    Posts
    2,194
    I think we just all need to reel ourselves in a bit, a little too soon to be biting each throats. Their is likely more details coming soon for better or worse.

  18. #16998
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post

    And then this fuck gets nothing for trolling like this lol.
    As I understand it, trolling is defined as posting something you don't really mean in order to stir up trouble.

    Trust me, I meant what I said.
    "Independence forever!" --- President John Adams
    "America is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own." --- President John Quincy Adams
    "Our Federal Union! It must be preserved!" --- President Andrew Jackson

  19. #16999
    Fluffy Kitten MoanaLisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Tralfamadore
    Posts
    29,790
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    Eh, I don't think money laundering would garner an impeachment.
    I didn't say it would but you are not wrong to call out what I wrote as imprecise.

    I think it will possibly land his ass in criminal court the day after he walks out of the White House. If indictments do come down they are likely to be sealed and then unsealed on January 21, 2020 if he loses. 2024 if he doesn't. The family itself will have no protection.
    “We live in a moment where everything immediately seems to default to outrage. There’s a kind of M.O. of either it’s exactly how I see it, or you’re my enemy.”

  20. #17000
    Pandaren Monk Sinyc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,960
    Quote Originally Posted by Mekkle View Post
    I think we just all need to reel ourselves in a bit, a little too soon to be biting each throats. Their is likely more details coming soon for better or worse.
    Welcome to American politics. It's been like this for a long time before Trump came around. Trump was just so polarizing that it seems like it only started with him. It didn't. The American political climate has been toxic for years, and the media does a good job of keeping people mad at each other and not at the real people making the US a corrupt shit show.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •