Mega-Thread: Mueller investigation

[Endus]

Boy, we sure have come a long way from "Trump colluded with Russia". Whatever works, I guess.

And I guess if it turns out he's guilty of some crime completely divorced from Trump-Russia, who am I to object?

But man, this Mueller probe sure was a great second-place prize for Democrats. Get to investigate Trump for all the things!

Money-laundering like these indictments indicate is evidence of such collusion. And the claim was always "Trump's campaign colluded with Russia". A lot of us never figured Trump was smart enough to plot this kind of stuff out in the first place.

It's still reason to see his Presidency as completely tainted.

Also, it bears mentioning that Mueller isn't done. This is just his next move. These kinds of cases make for long games.

[Dacien]

@Dacien do you deny that Trump was touting Putin saying he did not interfear in our elections, as the truth and a trust worthy comment. While at the same time insulting US intelligence, claiming the FBI is lying, firing Comey due to the cloud of the Russian investigation. If not collusion, what do you call Trump trusting Putin, more than US institutions?

These are complicated questions that require tons of necessary context and prefacing and explanation to properly unpack.

What I can tell you is that I'm open to a Trump-Russia election cooperation criminal charge. If that happens, I'll be wrong, and that's going to very unpleasant for me on this board (maybe enough people have written me off where it won't matter?), but I don't think, in spite of the smoke, there's actually fire. But I'm open to it. I accepted Comey's Hillary email announcement, even if I thought it was pretty nuts, I accepted the conclusion. I'll accept the conclusion of the Mueller investigation.

I've spent a lot of time detailing arguments about this subject, but I've come to a point where I feel like the only things that are really worth discussing anymore are interesting new announcements, a hypothetical major bombshell, or the conclusion of the investigation. But rehashing suspicion that Trump or Trump associates did or did not commit an election-related crime (or obstruction)? I just don't have much left in the tank for that.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, it bears mentioning that Mueller isn't done. This is just his next move. These kinds of cases make for long games.

I plan to be here till the end. It's too interesting.

- - - Updated - - -

Imagine how tedious it must be to play chess with you. Every time someone takes one of your pieces, you launch into a spiel about how it's just a pawn or a rook or the Queen, so there's no way this game could be leading towards the King.

I still get checkmated either way though, don't I?

[Breccia]

Also, it bears mentioning that Mueller isn't done. This is just his next move.

It does not bear mentioning.

Everyone with any context and understanding of the case, knows that Mueller isn't done. And that he's clearly capable of multitasking -- for example, indicting Russians for helping Trump's campaign, and more charges against Manafort, who works with Russia, in about a week of each other.

People who have no sense of context or understanding of the case, are meaningless noise and offer nothing to the conversation. Especially after they prove over dozens of posts they are incapable of context and understanding of the case. There is no reason to talk to these people, who have proven that logic and information are not values they're interested in, only semantics and denial.

It's like saying the sky is blue anymore.
Most people will say "Yes, it is."
A few will say "But you didn't say clouds were white, so they're not, they're green."
Neither side will look up.

[Endus]

It does not bear mentioning.

Everyone with any context and understanding of the case, knows that Mueller isn't done. And that he's clearly capable of multitasking -- for example, indicting Russians for helping Trump's campaign, and more charges against Manafort, who works with Russia, in about a week of each other.

People who have no sense of context or understanding of the case, are meaningless noise and offer nothing to the conversation. Especially after they prove over dozens of posts they are incapable of context and understanding of the case. There is no reason to talk to these people, who have proven that logic and information are not values they're interested in, only semantics and denial.

It's like saying the sky is blue anymore.
Most people will say "Yes, it is."
A few will say "But you didn't say clouds were white, so they're not, they're green."
Neither side will look up.

Yes, but as with so many other threads, I don't expect to change the minds of those who say the clouds are green.

I intend to point upwards and invite others to look for themselves, because anyone can see they're white.

When someone's prancing around and shouting that clouds are green, someone has to stand up and say "no, they're white, just look up you daft nugget". Otherwise, as you said, nobody might bother looking up. The moment there's two stories, and you make it easy to check which has the facts, people will check the facts. But if you let there only be one story, people won't bother because if it weren't true, someone would say something, right?

[Felya]

These are complicated questions that require tons of necessary context and prefacing and explanation to properly unpack.

No, they are not. Trump did claim he talked to Putin and trusts him, while claiming FBI illegally wired tapped him. A simple foolish would suffice to answer, without saying collusion. That’s what I think Trump did... be a fool... a patsy... a person that folds for compliments... not collusion... it looks like collusion, but it’s two parallel lines, without an intersecting point. They were going in the same direction because Putin is cunning and Trump is incompetent.

What I can tell you is that I'm open to a Trump-Russia election cooperation criminal charge. If that happens, I'll be wrong, and that's going to very unpleasant for me on this board (maybe enough people have written me off where it won't matter?), but I don't think, in spite of the smoke, there's actually fire. But I'm open to it. I accepted Comey's Hillary email announcement, even if I thought it was pretty nuts, I accepted the conclusion. I'll accept the conclusion of the Mueller investigation.

But, I am giving you a way out. A way to maintain that Trump didn’t collude, while admitting that something few would disagree with, that Trump is incompetent and prone to misjudgment of character. You get to save face, by simply not denying collusion, but asserting an agreeable compromise. No one will call you a Trump drone for it, while you maintain the same exact position.

This is very similar to what I did in the shooting thread, by mentioning metal detectors. You treat my replies as antagonistic, which to some degree they are... but, I usually try to find an agreeable compromise.

I've spent a lot of time detailing arguments about this subject, but I've come to a point where I feel like the only things that are really worth discussing anymore are interesting new announcements, a hypothetical major bombshell, or the conclusion of the investigation. But rehashing suspicion that Trump or Trump associates did or did not commit an election-related crime (or obstruction)? I just don't have much left in the tank for that.

You cannot say stuff like this in a long winded post. One of the reasons ‘I aignt got time fo that’ is funny, is the contractions, while saying you have not time. Long winded posts explaining why you don’t have anything left in the tank are just weird...

[Dontrike]

Boy, we sure have come a long way from "Trump colluded with Russia". Whatever works, I guess.

I'll never understand why you seem to hate how Mueller is catching criminals in our government. I don't get why you'd love them to not get caught.

And I guess if it turns out he's guilty of some crime completely divorced from Trump-Russia, who am I to object?

Considering you've been complaining a lot about it since the start, I'd have to say that you'd have to be.....well you.

But man, this Mueller probe sure was a great second-place prize for Democrats. Get to investigate Trump for all the things!

Better than investigating him for none of it, much like how you would prefer it.

[Machismo]

Boy, we sure have come a long way from "Trump colluded with Russia". Whatever works, I guess.

And I guess if it turns out he's guilty of some crime completely divorced from Trump-Russia, who am I to object?

But man, this Mueller probe sure was a great second-place prize for Democrats. Get to investigate Trump for all the things!

Well, that's a classic deflection. Whatever you need to do to rationalize your decision to support such a terrible human being, I guess this is your coping mechanism.

[Breccia]

What is even the point of security clearance if people can just continue working for the administration without it?

It's true, the Executive Branch is pretty much choosing not to police itself. Granted, there are House and Senate Oversight Committees, but the House's leader is stepping down and nobody wants the head of that one. Basically, the point is just to demonstrate how blatantly corrupt they are, leading to stories like this one, which not only say that Kelly might resign in frustration but might take McMaster with him. As @Skroe would surely say if he was here, Kelly and McMaster were two required people in Trump's administration to give it any amount of credibility at all. Their loss, especially their loss if they say Trump is fucking up to the point they can't stand it, will be costly.

Technically, the President can just hand over classified information whenever he wants, to whomever he wants. We've seen that before. He just has to admit that he's going to give classified information to his son-in-law, for no reason, other than it's his son-in-law.

[kaelleria]

Annnnd... Gates is pleading guilty.

[Dontrike]

Annnnd... Gates is pleading guilty.

@Ransath will be pleased to know this.

[Breccia]

Annnnd... Gates is pleading guilty.

Source please.

Oh...wait.

[Orbitus]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/23/u...stigation.html

Just for the source for @kaelleria.

Guess he knows that the last round of charges against him and Manafort would bring him down for the rest of his life.

Dammit @Breccia.

[Felya]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/23/u...stigation.html

Just for the source for @kaelleria.

Guess he knows that the last round of charges against him and Manafort would bring him down for the rest of his life.

Dammit @Breccia.

... or he knows it might be better to plea now, before even more charges are added. This was Muller saying ‘if you don’t think we know enough for you to plea now, here is a little more of what we know’.

[Hobb]

Annnnd... Gates is pleading guilty.

And per usual, Fox fabricated News is not covering this.

[Felya]

And per usual, Fox fabricated News is not covering this.

It’s breaking now. NY times has the scoop as of 5 min ago. This forum rocks... my feed has not picked this up yet.

[Breccia]

I mean, we already knew this. Gates hired a lawyer who excels at plea deals, and that lawyer worked with Mueller extensively. To assume he wasn't trying for a plea deal was just laughable. Granted, the negotiations might have fallen through, but other than that one mistaken TheDailyBeast article there was no evidence of that.

So we know Gates worked with Manafort, both worked with the Russians, both took money illegally from the Russians, both also have other illegal loans we don't know about because they failed to disclose them to us or the IRS, and failed to disclose as foreign agents. And apparently, they'd been doing this for years before Trump intentionally hired them. They then ran Trump's campaign for a while, during which Trump took significant pro-Russian steps including
-- openly praising Putin, even to Bill O'Reilly's shocked face
-- asking WikiLeaks to hack his opponent
-- that one Russian bank pinging Trump Tower (we've seen that pop back up in the news)
-- the Trump Tower meeting. Which Manafort attended.
Throw in Gates' guilty plea with Flynn's and it's now objectively impossible to say there's no evidence of collusion. At best, you can argue "Mueller hasn't proven collusion yet".

[some guy]

Boy, this nothing burger comes with all the fixins.

[Rukh]

I mean, we already knew this. Gates hired a lawyer who excels at plea deals, and that lawyer worked with Mueller extensively. To assume he wasn't trying for a plea deal was just laughable. Granted, the negotiations might have fallen through, but other than that one mistaken TheDailyBeast article there was no evidence of that.

So we know Gates worked with Manafort, both worked with the Russians, both took money illegally from the Russians, both also have other illegal loans we don't know about because they failed to disclose them to us or the IRS, and failed to disclose as foreign agents. And apparently, they'd been doing this for years before Trump intentionally hired them. They then ran Trump's campaign for a while, during which Trump took significant pro-Russian steps including
-- openly praising Putin, even to Bill O'Reilly's shocked face
-- asking WikiLeaks to hack his opponent
-- that one Russian bank pinging Trump Tower (we've seen that pop back up in the news)
-- the Trump Tower meeting. Which Manafort attended.
Throw in Gates' guilty plea with Flynn's and it's now objectively impossible to say there's no evidence of collusion. At best, you can argue "Mueller hasn't proven collusion yet".

Furthremore, Gates stayed on after Manafort left the Trump campaign. He's been right in the middle of it.

[mvaliz]

Source please.

Oh...wait.

Dayum - that was fast! What was that - like, less than 24 hours between hiring the new laywer and getting the guilty plea?

Man, he (the lawyer) probably just doubled his pricepoint today! :P

- - - Updated - - -

Boy, this nothing burger comes with all the fixins.

At this point it's no longer about being a "giant everything buger", I'd say it's now more of an all-you-can-eat Nothingburger Buffet! :P

[Drutt]

I would think Gates is going to have to offer to do a lot more than just finger Manafort in order to get a plea deal here. Meuller already seems to have enough to nail Manafort for the floor, and considering he's 70 years old he doesn't need to go away for long for his sentence to essentially be the rest of his life. Letting Gates plea bargain just to add more years to Manafort's potential rest-of-life sentence doesn't seem like a very efficient route to me.