Mega-Thread: Mueller investigation

[Dacien]

You might want to read the post I was responding to, and then question yourself as to why I made that statement.

Hint: It has to do with your lot's lingo about 'urban areas'.

To be fair, I'd make the same remark about Huntington Beach, CA, a predominately white area, but I used that specific language to get my point across.

Tell any poor person accused of a crime who can't afford an attorney, "If you've done nothing wrong, navigating the legal waters and proving your innocence with a low-tier public defender should be easy!" And watch them laugh.

I have some experience with the Justice System, and while I myself was guilty of certain things that I was charged with, they added a ton of stuff I had nothing to do with, and fighting against those false claims required lengthy and costly representation that I didn't have and couldn't afford. Again, prosecutors are going to try to throw everything at a defendant, build as strong a case as possible, whether or not it can be proven in front of a jury.

So Gates is completely reasonable in being desirous of strong legal representation, even if he is completely innocent.

[Belize]

Of course! Ask any person unable to afford a lawyer who is accused of a crime, "If you've done nothing wrong, this should be easy, right?"

Bonus points if you go to a poor urban area.

Cases of false convictions are rarer nowadays, with DNA tests et al.

Not that DNA tests exist for money laundering but generally those have rock solid evidence because of how difficult they can be to prove in normal circumstances.

[cubby]

Yes - has not happened yet so your entire assertion is complete bullshit. When it happens, then you can continue with your rhetoric, but until it does you should stop.

Awwwwww - you are just frothing at the mouth at this point. You realize all your ridiculous bluster just makes you more adorable, right? I also love that you don't understand even basic reporting (regardless of source) when people post "rumors" versus "close to finalizing" - but hey, no one's ever accused you of actually reading something before commenting on it, right?

I have not made a single mistake - WTF are you even babbling about?

That's all you do, is make mistakes and deflect from the issue. But most of us still tolerate you just because of the entertainment value.

Just in case you haven't clued in, your current mistake was not understanding what the word "finalizing" and the phrase "complete bullshit" mean.

[Belize]

LOL - you used "journalistic sources" and "WaPo and NYT" in the same sentence. LOLOLOL!!!


Drink!

Congratulations on cutting out the part of my post that pointed out how sad and flailing you are, something examplified here.

[cubby]

To be fair, I'd make the same remark about Huntington Beach, CA, a predominately white area, but I used that specific language to get my point across.

Tell any poor person accused of a crime who can't afford an attorney, "If you've done nothing wrong, navigating the legal waters and proving your innocence with a low-tier public defender should be easy!" And watch them laugh.

I have some experience with the Justice System, and while I myself was guilty of certain things that I was charged with, they added a ton of stuff I had nothing to do with, and fighting against those false claims required lengthy and costly representation that I didn't have and couldn't afford. Again, prosecutors are going to try to throw everything at a defendant, build as strong a case as possible, whether or not it can be proven in front of a jury.

So Gates is completely reasonable in being desirous of strong legal representation, even if he is completely innocent.

I agree that the majority of prosecutors run on a conviction rate methodology, and are likely than not to throw as many charges as possible at a defendant and sort it out later. But as you pointed out, Mueller is anything but normal, and I would imagine that he wouldn't bring up any charge that he wasn't entirely ready to prove, with mountains of evidence.

Mueller can't afford to have any mistakes, or even place a wrong foot - so every charge brought down is more than likely rock solid. I know, I know - that stinks of "guilty before being proven innocent" and all that. But the realities of this investigation are much different than normal.

[Elegiac]

To be fair, I'd make the same remark about Huntington Beach, CA, a predominately white area, but I used that specific language to get my point across.

Tell any poor person accused of a crime who can't afford an attorney, "If you've done nothing wrong, navigating the legal waters and proving your innocence with a low-tier public defender should be easy!" And watch them laugh.

I have some experience with the Justice System, and while I myself was guilty of certain things that I was charged with, they added a ton of stuff I had nothing to do with, and fighting against those false claims required lengthy and costly representation that I didn't have and couldn't afford. Again, prosecutors are going to try to throw everything at a defendant, build as strong a case as possible, whether or not it can be proven in front of a jury.

So Gates is completely reasonable in being desirous of strong legal representation, even if he is completely innocent.

The reason we are mocking Gates is twofold.

The first is irony; typically people in Gates' position in either the public or private sector are able to get off with minimal impact, if not outright by virtue of the fact they paid enough for a high powered legal team that enables them to skirt the letter of the law and fuck everyone else over. That he has to put up with a public defender like the rest of us drones is rather delicious.

The second is that unlike people from 'poor urban areas', Gates was a government official. By virtue of their position they need to be held to a higher standard than the rest of us - so really, no excuses.

[Dacien]

The reason we are mocking Gates is twofold.

The first is irony; typically people in Gates' position in either the public or private sector are able to get off with minimal impact, if not outright by virtue of the fact they paid enough for a high powered legal team that enables them to skirt the letter of the law and fuck everyone else over. That he has to put up with a public defender like the rest of us drones is rather delicious.

I'll tell you this, Didactic: I'm sure there are some good public defenders out there, but by and large, from what I've seen personally, they're basically legal automatons. They'll file the proper paperwork, file the proper motions, get you to sign where you need to sign, keep the machine moving along, but they do not have any particular interest in helping you.

Instead of pointing out the irony that Gates should have to play on the same level as the rest of us with public defenders, we should be talking about why it is exactly that "the rest of us" have to deal with poor representation by public defenders in the first place. Why it is exactly that merely being accused of a crime demands paid representation for any hope of defending oneself properly.

We, as the general public, deserve better. And so does Gates.

Although, as high-profile as this case is, Gates is almost certain to receive competent representation one way or the other. I just bristled at cubby's link to the public defenders office.

[Elegiac]

I'll tell you this, Didactic: I'm sure there are some good public defenders out there, but by and large, from what I've seen personally, they're basically legal automatons. They'll file the proper paperwork, file the proper motions, get you to sign where you need to sign, keep the machine moving along, but they do not have any particular interest in helping you.

Instead of pointing out the irony that Gates should have to play on the same level as the rest of us with public defenders, we should be talking about why it is exactly that "the rest of us" have to deal with poor representation by public defenders in the first place. Why it is exactly that merely being accused of a crime demands paid representation for any hope of defending oneself properly.

We, as the general public, deserve better. And so does Gates.

Ah yes. The 'fiscally responsible' Republican complaining about lax public defenders despite forwarding a program of civil poverty that ensures public defenders will never be paid enough to attract talented and driven individuals into the field. C'est ironique, n'est-ce pas?

[cubby]

I'll tell you this, Didactic: I'm sure there are some good public defenders out there, but by and large, from what I've seen personally, they're basically legal automatons. They'll file the proper paperwork, file the proper motions, get you to sign where you need to sign, keep the machine moving along, but they do not have any particular interest in helping you.

Instead of pointing out the irony that Gates should have to play on the same level as the rest of us with public defenders, we should be talking about why it is exactly that "the rest of us" have to deal with poor representation by public defenders in the first place. Why it is exactly that merely being accused of a crime demands paid representation for any hope of defending oneself properly.

We, as the general public, deserve better. And so does Gates.

You realize the irony of someone who voted for Cheeto now being upset at fiscally disproportional legal representation, right? I mean, Trump made a career out of not paying people and then daring them to sue him.

I get that you had a bad run of it with the legal system, and all political banter aside, that sucks. Really.

But when the issue comes back to bite Trump in the ass like this - well, it's delicious. In almost every conceivable way.

[Thekri]

You realize the irony of someone who voted for Cheeto now being upset at fiscally disproportional legal representation, right? I mean, Trump made a career out of not paying people and then daring them to sue him.

I get that you had a bad run of it with the legal system, and all political banter aside, that sucks. Really.

But when the issue comes back to bite Trump in the ass like this - well, it's delicious. In almost every conceivable way.

I agree with both Dacien and this post. Dacien is correct that in order to get adequate legal resources for Gates to defend himself, it would cost far more then Gates has. Among other things, Mueller's team has submitted literally millions of documents of evidence, just paying someone on the defense to audit them all would cost a lot, and public defenders won't do that.

On the other hand Republicans have never been a friend to the public defenders offices, so while it is certainly a problem that needs attention, I don't feel one bit sorry for Gates. I don't believe he was an innocent bystander caught up in this.

[Stormspark]

I agree with both Dacien and this post. Dacien is correct that in order to get adequate legal resources for Gates to defend himself, it would cost far more then Gates has. Among other things, Mueller's team has submitted literally millions of documents of evidence, just paying someone on the defense to audit them all would cost a lot, and public defenders won't do that.

On the other hand Republicans have never been a friend to the public defenders offices, so while it is certainly a problem that needs attention, I don't feel one bit sorry for Gates. I don't believe he was an innocent bystander caught up in this.

When someone gets bitten in the ass by policies they create and/or support, I call that poetic justice. I hope he gets screwed.

[Breccia]

Man, it's a sad, sad state of affairs when even FOX News is pointing out the thin ice under the obese Trump.

Fox News host Shepard Smith chastised President Donald Trump Monday afternoon for his weekend tweet storm and for failing to address or promise ways to hinder Russia from meddling in future United States elections. The berating followed revelations made by the Special Counsel investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Smith, who has often challenged Trump despite the president’s frequent praise of Fox News, tore down the president’s tweets about the Russia investigation and how Trump littered attacks on many officials, including those within his administration, but not Russia.

“The president spent the weekend defending himself, misrepresenting the truth and attacking others from his phone in Florida,” Smith said, according to Mediaite. “The president attacked the Justice Department, the FBI and his national security adviser H.R. McMaster. He attacked Congressman Adam Schiff, Democrats and the DNC. He attacked Hillary Clinton, President Obama, the previous Congress and the news media before going after Oprah Winfrey.”

Smith continued: “He did not attack Vladimir Putin or Russia, nor did he express concern that the Russians attacked the United States, nor did he pledge in any way to put measures in place to stop future attacks.”

After summing Trump’s numerous attack tweets, Smith stated: “The president’s spokespersons have been on television denouncing the meddling, the president has not. Not once, not on camera, not on Twitter, not anywhere.”

I just want to remind everyone Trump wrote a letter when he signed the sanctions bill, the sanctions imposed because Russia attacked the election. Even in that letter, when he explains why he's signing (well, he gave his spin on "there was a veto-proof majority"), he does not denounce Russia. In fact, he says the bill is a mistake, and to date, he has not enforced it yet. No, copy-pasting from Forbes doesn't count.

[Lenonis]

Well, first off he has NOT yet pleaded guilty - and why are simple things, like the only reason he is pleading guilty is because he is financially ruined and does not have the pockets to fight an investigation that is completely funded by the Fed Govt and has any resource they want at their fingertips - so hard for you to understand?

Why are simple things - like the Fed Govt basically bankrupting someone and forcing them to plead guilty to something just so they can save whatever bit of money they have left - so far hard for you?

A lot of people would call that coercion - either plead guilty to a crime or we (Mueller) will destroy you financially and emotionally. And, in the end, if you are found NOT GUILTY - oops, our bad. (But don't worry for Mueller, he and his cronies will have made MILLIONS off of the destruction of your life.)

Wow. You so decided he's innocent and then constructed an elaborate conspiracy theory (violation of forum rules btw) to justify your conclusion.

I put forward that, alternatively, he's guilty. Which is the most likely reality in this scenario as it doesn't require an elaborate an implausible (how exactly would Mueller profit off this again?) conspiracy.

[Breccia]

Hey, remember when Trump said he'd set up a legal fund for people working with him, but he only pledged money never gave it, the OGE immediately got involved and dragged things out, meanwhile Trump paid his own legal fees with RNC funds and Gates somehow got nothing from anyone?

I remember it like it was November of 2017.

EDIT: Remember, Gates did start a GoFundMe but immediately had it wrecked by a judge because he blew an NDA when he appeared in a video.

Man, it's the saddest thing when people who can't follow the rules get hung out to dry by their co-conspirators.

[Bodakane]

LOL - you used "journalistic sources" and "WaPo and NYT" in the same sentence. LOLOLOL!!!


Drink!

Yeah, you keep making the enemy the press instead of the guy that sold our election to the Russians.

So, I'm clear.....the press, Hillary, Obama, all the liberals, all the press and every single member of every single intelligence agency have teamed up to take down Trump, that about right?

[Zeek Daniels]

Yeah, you keep making the enemy the press instead of the guy that sold our election to the Russians.

So, I'm clear.....the press, Hillary, Obama, all the liberals, all the press and every single member of every single intelligence agency have teamed up to take down Trump, that about right?

Im sorry who sold our election to the Russians? Your talking about the Obama administration which was told about russian involvment and did virtually nothing till it was too late because they were too busy helping Hillary with her spying on trumps campaign through a phony dossier that was unverified, that was funded by her camp and the sources of the information in the dossier were Russians.

So again. Who "sold" our election to the Russians?

You know after Mueller comes out and indicts 13 or so Russians and even then says these people did not work with the Trump camp. And any american who worked with these people did so thinking they were americans and not Russians. So 1 year. Zero collusion. Just a false narrative by a left wing main stream media.

Im sure you people will go on about this for years. I have been saying since this whole thing started. WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE. And the only evidence that has been consistantly brought forth is evidence that Hillary, Obama, the DoJ and the FBI were working in tandam at the highest levels of our government to screw trump over. And the only people who have had the ability to collude with the russians was Hillary and her state department under the obama admin.

So keep chasing your own tail with this cuz your going no where. The rest of us have moved on from this silly investigation. If something actually comes to light about the Trump camp we can talk about it. But that day still hasnt come.

[Garnier Fructis]

The rest of us have moved on from this silly investigation.

Then why are you still in this thread?

[NYC17]

Im sorry who sold our election to the Russians? Your talking about the Obama administration which was told about russian involvment and did virtually nothing till it was too late because they were too busy helping Hillary with her spying on trumps campaign through a phony dossier that was unverified, that was funded by her camp and the sources of the information in the dossier were Russians.

So again. Who "sold" our election to the Russians?

You know after Mueller comes out and indicts 13 or so Russians and even then says these people did not work with the Trump camp. And any american who worked with these people did so thinking they were americans and not Russians. So 1 year. Zero collusion. Just a false narrative by a left wing main stream media.

Im sure you people will go on about this for years. I have been saying since this whole thing started. WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE. And the only evidence that has been consistantly brought forth is evidence that Hillary, Obama, the DoJ and the FBI were working in tandam at the highest levels of our government to screw trump over. And the only people who have had the ability to collude with the russians was Hillary and her state department under the obama admin.

So keep chasing your own tail with this cuz your going no where. The rest of us have moved on from this silly investigation. If something actually comes to light about the Trump camp we can talk about it. But that day still hasnt come.

Incorrect. This whole post is just virtual shit on a stick.

Obama took the information he has to Congress, and those "leaders", namely McConnell, decided they wanted no part of it. Your nonsense about the dossier being used to spy on Trump is borderline incoherent babbling not based in anything factual. It's your narrative devoid of actual information.

There is no commentary about collusion in the indictments, except for those specific indictments themselves. Concluding anything about where the investigation stands regarding collusion is foolish.

There is plenty of evidence. What you are looking for is proof, because you don't know the difference between the two. If there is proof, and one can only use if when referring to conclusions about the investigation at this time, then that will be provided...at the conclusion of the investigation.

You haven't moved on from anything. You took the time to whine about an investigation, draw inaccurate conclusions, and express and support them, poorly, on a message board.

Perhaps you should move on to selling lemonade, because you sure as shit can't sell your narrative.

[Breccia]

Perhaps you should move on to selling lemonade, because you sure as shit can't sell your narrative.

Damn. Gonna need a senzu bean for that one.

Speaking of spinning ineffectively, Vox -- hardly impartial themselves of course -- points out how FOX News basically failed at every possible spin of the Mueller investigation, making call after call wrong and also backing the 3 1/4 page Nunes memo like it was the last scrap of debris from the Titanic. It's a fun read.

[Machismo]

To be fair, I'd make the same remark about Huntington Beach, CA, a predominately white area, but I used that specific language to get my point across.

Tell any poor person accused of a crime who can't afford an attorney, "If you've done nothing wrong, navigating the legal waters and proving your innocence with a low-tier public defender should be easy!" And watch them laugh.

I have some experience with the Justice System, and while I myself was guilty of certain things that I was charged with, they added a ton of stuff I had nothing to do with, and fighting against those false claims required lengthy and costly representation that I didn't have and couldn't afford. Again, prosecutors are going to try to throw everything at a defendant, build as strong a case as possible, whether or not it can be proven in front of a jury.

So Gates is completely reasonable in being desirous of strong legal representation, even if he is completely innocent.

But he's not completely innocent, which is why he's about to plead guilty...

As for you being a criminal, I guess that makes sense why you supported Trump.