Postmortem on Mueller

It was kinda funny that Comey pointed out how the FBI actually ended up helping Trump in that op-ed
 
The Deep State has evaded detection
Ever since (at Obama's direction?!?!)
With their thumb on the scale,
Flagging Huma's e-mail,
They effected the Donald's election.
 
Gori the Grey said:
Hoist with their own petard, eh? Look, if your theory requires agents who are simultaneously super-subtle schemers and utter incompetents, it's probably time for a new theory.

Puppeteers into Power have crept,
Adroitly our laws overstepped.
Alas, for our land!
Will our country still stand?
Oh, no fears; they're completely inept.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, especially the last line. It's the Watergate break in written large.

All we ever needed was accountability. This has the feel of people who have cheated so long they don't even know the rules anymore.

J
 
onejayhawk said:
This has the feel of people who have cheated so long they don't even know the rules anymore.

J
Click to expand...

Its so weird you can say exactly the same thing about Trump and it be even more true! You are really good at this projection thing. I think you should call the white house and ask for a job.
 
Old Hippy said:
By clearing Hillary of serious charges... just days before people voted...now these hacks will have to explain the process behind that decision...they thought she would never lose...they thought no one would be around to follow it up... **** happens...
Click to expand...

https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/06/poli...ss-fbi-has-not-changed-conclusions/index.html

Comey wrote in his memoir that the FBI agents in the room told him that it "would take many weeks" to review the newly discovered emails, and that there was "no chance" that it would be done before the election.
Click to expand...

Comey was told the FBI couldn't read thru the glut of emails so he just announced 2 days before the election she was still cleared. And the Dems are mad at him? At least Barr waited for Mueller to finish, Comey didn't even bother. I figure he was taking so much crap from the Dems he was browbeat into clearing her before the election.

TheMeInTeam said:
"Guilt by association" is a trash concept. You need a lot more than some casual association to make any conclusions about tangible support or actual wrongdoing.
Click to expand...

If Este is accused of parroting MSNBC it wont even matter if he doesn't watch it, he's guilty by association using his own standard. Which makes it even funnier, he's accusing other people of hypocrisy based on a guilt by association he wouldn't apply to himself.
 
Estebonrober said:
Its so weird you can say exactly the same thing about Trump and it be even more true! You are really good at this projection thing. I think you should call the white house and ask for a job.
Click to expand...
Trump followed the rules. We just had a two year investigation that proves it.

I am reminded of the House scandals of 1990. The banking scandal was mild but widespread. The Post Office scandal was very serious, involving drugs and money laundering, and it brought down the #3 Democrat on Capital Hill, Dan Rostenkowski. Then, as with Clinton in 2016, the Democrats sought to cover cover some very serious wrongdoing. It eventually came to light because seven freshmen Congressmen, most notably John Boehner and Rick Santorum would not shut up. Rostenkowski was charged with a list of felonies, notably laundering bribe money, and pleaded guilty to the reduced charge of postal fraud. BiIl Clinton pardoned him during his last days in office in 2000.

The point is that all complaints went to Congressional leadership, then 100 % Democratic, and it died there. It took months, years, of loudly proclaiming some very basic facts before a real investigation was launched. Parallels to Hillary Clinton and Obama's FBI/Justice Department are non-trivial. So are Parallels to the 1994 election and the upcoming election in 2020.

J
 
onejayhawk said:
Trump followed the rules. We just had a two year investigation that proves it.


J
Click to expand...
WTH do you think you are talking about with this sentence? The Mueller investigation? It basically proved obstruction. That’s the opposite of following the rules. At some point being a total hack has to get old doesn’t it?

Berzerker said:
If Este is accused of parroting MSNBC it wont even matter if he doesn't watch it, he's guilty by association using his own standard. Which makes it even funnier, he's accusing other people of hypocrisy based on a guilt by association he wouldn't apply to himself.
Click to expand...

I don’t watch anything on TV unless it’s hockey pretty much. Anyways I’m sure I’m guilty by association of parroting many MSNBC talking points. That’s fine. See? Consistent. Unlike any conservative on any topic these days. Especially on small government and morals. You are case and point on that front which is why I point it out. Libertarians should not be supporting executive power at this level. You really should stop calling yourself libertarian if you do support this president.
 
Estebonrober said:
WTH do you think you are talking about with this sentence? The Mueller investigation? It basically proved obstruction. That’s the opposite of following the rules. At some point being a total hack has to get old doesn’t it?
Click to expand...
The Mueller report did not basically prove obstruction. If that is what you are basing your stance upon, I understand your confusion.

Just to be clear, Trump cooperated with the Mueller investigation. This is shown by thousands of hours of testimony, including 30 hours by then Counsel McGahn, and over 1.5 million pages of documents. Trump was falsely accused and is genuinely innocent of the charges. Mueller's report itself backs up this statement, finding no connection between the Trump campaign and Russian activity.

The question of the moment is when did Mueller find out that Trump was innocent?

J
 
Lexicus said:
Doesn't responding as if the hack's not a total hack get old quicker?
Click to expand...
Yea it does, I'll probably take another break from here soon.
 
today Flynn fired his Legal team... very interesting...Hirers new council .. just incase people have forgotten he has not faced sentencing yet...in light of the Mueller post mortem...
 
Estebonrober said:
I don’t watch anything on TV unless it’s hockey pretty much. Anyways I’m sure I’m guilty by association of parroting many MSNBC talking points. That’s fine. See? Consistent. Unlike any conservative on any topic these days. Especially on small government and morals. You are case and point on that front which is why I point it out. Libertarians should not be supporting executive power at this level. You really should stop calling yourself libertarian if you do support this president.
Click to expand...

When have you referred to yourself and your allies as parroting talking points? You're a little late with that consistency. The problem is we dont agree on what it means to parrot talking points. I will admit to repeating what I hear on MSNBC because I watch it and post information they've provided. I dont watch Fox so I cant 'parrot' their talking points. Its an insult, a derogatory term meant to shoot the messenger.
You're the 2nd person who has argued libertarians should be supporting the FBI's abuse of the surveillance state on behalf of the Democrats.
 
Last edited:
onejayhawk said:
Trump followed the rules. We just had a two year investigation that proves it.
Click to expand...

Ghina (Mexico, EU, Japan, South Korea, India and Canada) if your listening, please hack find emails from the GOP server and send money
Thanks

Its perfectly legal now /wink
 
Last edited:
FriendlyFire said:
Ghina (Mexico, EU, Japan, South Korea, India and Canada) if your listening, please hack find emails from the GOP server and send money
Thanks
Click to expand...
so having established that You and Trump have the same values... please tell us why your so bad... :mischief:
 
Berzerker said:
You're the 2nd person who has argued libertarians should be supporting the FBI's abuse of the surveillance state on behalf of the Democrats.
Click to expand...

In this case doing the opposite basically makes the President beyond law enforcement and believing the FBI supports democrats is crazy and part of this divide amongst conservatives I made the other thread about. It's insane you guys are all over the place and honestly directly opposed to each other on topics.
 
Estebonrober said:
In this case doing the opposite basically makes the President beyond law enforcement and believing the FBI supports democrats is crazy and part of this divide amongst conservatives I made the other thread about. It's insane you guys are all over the place and honestly directly opposed to each other on topics.
Click to expand...

The FBI cleared Clinton before the election and spied on Trump people based on a fictitious conspiracy provided by the Democrats. That was Obama's FBI, he had 8 years to reshuffle the deck and the FBI undoubtedly thought Hillary would win. The law requires probable cause, using trumped up excuses to spy on people is not libertarian.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GoodEnoughForMe
Should the US be a Dictatorship?
8 9 10
Replies
195
Views
9K
EnglishEdward
EnglishEdward
Birdjaguar
What can the Democrats do?
12 13 14
Replies
266
Views
9K
danjuno
danjuno
Birdjaguar
Trump Indicted!
199 200 201
Replies
4K
Views
180K
aelf
aelf
Broken_Erika
US Debt Ceiling
7 8 9
Replies
178
Views
12K
Farm Boy
Farm Boy
Birdjaguar
Jan. 6th commission
88 89 90
Replies
2K
Views
115K
Gori the Grey
Gori the Grey
Back
Top Bottom