Mueller enpannels grand jury

littlelady

God bless the USA
Wow. The delusion, desperation and blame shifting is very strong with this one.

How many lobotomies have you had? There is no discussing anything with you. If someone doesn't agree with you, you write them off, as insane, delusional, illiterate, lacking in comprehension, etc.. Do yourself a favor, and just listen/read. You might have an awakening. I have said many times on this forum...be careful what you wish for. You're welcome.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
AND I'll tell you something else:

If you consume any news other than progbot brainwasher crap, you know that the dominoes are falling on Hillary Clinton and she doesn't get immunity just because she's a loser. All sorts of corruption and collusion is coming out and pretty much anyone she's every "done business with" is sweating hard.

There is no reason for anyone involved with Hillary to sweat hard. She IS immune.
 

littlelady

God bless the USA
There is no reason for anyone involved with Hillary to sweat hard. She IS immune.

That is the truth. Hill will never be nabbed. But, I think all the people that will be called to testify in the "Trump investigation' should be able to take the 5th, too. All's well that ends well, or something like that.
 

philibusters

Active Member
Seems it's widening every day instead Of winding down as some people thought. I would think this means they are discovering more to investigate.

In fairness to Trump, I don't think it means there are necessarily finding more evidence of collusion as much as it means the investigation is broadening its scope. This is what Bill Clinton complained bitterly of during his term and lead to his impeachment. An independent investigator was appointed to look into his land dealings in Arkansas. In the end after a 5 year investigation, the investigation did not really come up with anything on the land transactions. There was some gray areas, but no smoking gun. However, the investigation resulted in his impeachment when Linda Tripp went to the investigator Kenneth Starr told and told him about an affair Clinton had with an intern--which while very shady is not illegal. The investigator then told worked with Paula Jones attorneys to set up Clinton. Since he was being sued by Paula Jones he had to answer some questions under oath for that case and they threw in a question about Monica Lewinsky to set him up. Depositions are public records so if he admits the allegations they have a scandal and if denies they have him for perjury. So they basically set him up for action that while shady was legal.

I dislike Trump, but I do think he has a point about the widening scope of the investigation. I didn't think it was fair exactly how the Whitewater investigation expanded on Clinton and I don't think its necessarily fair to Trump if the Russia Collusion investigation broadens.
 

philibusters

Active Member
I guess to clarify, I am not talking about the subpoenas issued in regards to the meeting with the attorney with Russian links as much as the investigation of Trump's business dealings when I talk about the investigation widening its scope beyond its original objectives.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
In fairness to Trump, I don't think it means there are necessarily finding more evidence of collusion as much as it means the investigation is broadening its scope. This is what Bill Clinton complained bitterly of during his term and lead to his impeachment. An independent investigator was appointed to look into his land dealings in Arkansas. In the end after a 5 year investigation, the investigation did not really come up with anything on the land transactions. There was some gray areas, but no smoking gun. However, the investigation resulted in his impeachment when Linda Tripp went to the investigator Kenneth Starr told and told him about an affair Clinton had with an intern--which while very shady is not illegal. The investigator then told worked with Paula Jones attorneys to set up Clinton. Since he was being sued by Paula Jones he had to answer some questions under oath for that case and they threw in a question about Monica Lewinsky to set him up. Depositions are public records so if he admits the allegations they have a scandal and if denies they have him for perjury. So they basically set him up for action that while shady was legal.

I dislike Trump, but I do think he has a point about the widening scope of the investigation. I didn't think it was fair exactly how the Whitewater investigation expanded on Clinton and I don't think its necessarily fair to Trump if the Russia Collusion investigation broadens.

Pretty sure Fairness never entered Muellers mind.
 

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
I guess to clarify, I am not talking about the subpoenas issued in regards to the meeting with the attorney with Russian links as much as the investigation of Trump's business dealings when I talk about the investigation widening its scope beyond its original objectives.

exactly, any subpoenas issued regarding DJs meeting with the Russians is with in the scope of Muellers appointment.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
It means he has found evidence of at least one crime and is going to present it to determine if charges should be brought.

Given we have no details, have you considered it could be they found something on Hillary or Obama, et al...........?
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
Normally there is evidence of a crime, which triggers an investigation. In this case, there is an investigation to see if they can find a crime.

Is it just me who thinks this is bull####?

Nope. That's exactly what I thought. I even texted my wife that exact same thing earlier this morning when I heard about this.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
BTW, a lot if investigations start with suspicion.

And it shouldn't be that way. If there is 'suspicion' there should be an inquiry. If they have no evidence, there should be no special prosecutor or grand jury. Grand Juries are stood up on the basis of evidence of a crime.

I've used this example before... I heard no shots or saw no bodies; but I heard my neighbor yelling at his kids. So, I suspect he killed them. I call the cops. They will come in and do their investigation. If they find no evidence... it's over. If they find evidence (blood, dead bodies, etc...) they will hand it over to the prosecutor's office for an investigation. An investigation based on evidence; not suspicion. This whole thing is cart-before-the-horse. But, I guess it's typical of our government to do things their own way and not 'law way'.
 
Last edited:

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
exactly, any subpoenas issued regarding DJs meeting with the Russians is with in the scope of Muellers appointment.

He didn't meet with "the Russians" - he met with *a* Russian.

You people and your "the Russians". "The Russians", to normal people, means the Russian government. This particular Russian was not a government official, nor connected with the Russian government in any way. The progpress is trying to say she's a Russian official, but there is not only no evidence of that, there is fact based evidence that she's not. As in, they totally made that up.

Whenever I hear some progbot make a reference to "the Russians" I immediately tune them out because they're idiots.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
The progpress is trying to say she's a Russian official, but there is not only no evidence of that, there is fact based evidence that she's not.



an unregistered lobbyist left in the country by the previous administration
 

littlelady

God bless the USA
At this point, might as well have Putin come over and be our president. This whole thing is beyond ridiculous. I want my 20% of Uranium back. Does anyone have Hillary's number? TIA.
 

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
Given we have no details, have you considered it could be they found something on Hillary or Obama, et al...........?
its possible, not likely, but possible
He didn't meet with "the Russians" - he met with *a* Russian.

You people and your "the Russians". "The Russians", to normal people, means the Russian government. This particular Russian was not a government official, nor connected with the Russian government in any way. The progpress is trying to say she's a Russian official, but there is not only no evidence of that, there is fact based evidence that she's not. As in, they totally made that up.

Whenever I hear some progbot make a reference to "the Russians" I immediately tune them out because they're idiots.

You might want to check with your 'sources'. there were more than one Russian in the room and the lawyer had deep ties to the government having been a prosecutor, and the other was a former intelligence officer. From what I have read there were up to 8 people in the room. This wasn't DJ meeting with one lady.

Born in Russia, Akhmetshin served in the Soviet military and emigrated to the U.S., where he holds dual citizenship. He did not respond to NBC News requests for comment Friday, but he told the AP the meeting was not substantive. “I never thought this would be such a big deal, to be honest,” he told the AP.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...unter-intelligence-officer-trump-team-n782851


like I said before, you do a lot of :lalala:
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
its possible, not likely, but possible


You might want to check with your 'sources'. there were more than one Russian in the room and the lawyer had deep ties to the government having been a prosecutor, and the other was a former intelligence officer. From what I have read there were up to 8 people in the room. This wasn't DJ meeting with one lady.


http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...unter-intelligence-officer-trump-team-n782851


like I said before, you do a lot of :lalala:

Born in Russia, Akhmetshin served in the Soviet military and emigrated to the U.S., where he holds dual citizenship. He did not respond to NBC News requests for comment Friday, but he told the AP the meeting was not substantive. “I never thought this would be such a big deal, to be honest,” he told the AP.

If he holds dual citizenship he is an American.
 
Top