Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: Big Island of Hawaii & HOT BuOYS Sailing Vessel
5,277 posts, read 2,801,130 times
Reputation: 1932
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by phma
Democrats Russian collusion is bad and transparency is bad too.
Republicans defending themselves is bad. It should never be allowed.
I am fine with GOP defending themselves. I am not fine with a President stepping into an active DOJ case to try and court public support to shut down an investigation into the President himself.
This is completely valid. You have to have something crime that you suspect the person of having and investigate that. You can't just decide to investigate a person and look for a crime.
Have you read Mueller's mandate. He's empowered to do that exact thing.
The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confinned by then-FBIDirector James 8. Corney in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee onIntelligence on March 20, 2017, includingi) any links and/or coordination bet ween the Russian government and individualsassociated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).
Trump is correct. The actual federal law/regulation regarding the appointment of special counsel requires probable cause that a crime was committed which is the threshold or standard for all law enforcement investigations - anything less does not meet the de minimis test for government action.
Here is the actual text:
§ 600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.
The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -
(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and
(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.
Actually, they did have evidence. This has been posted over and over and is easily found with a Google or Bing search.
Papadopoulos, numerous foreign intelligence services, a foreign agent running Trump's campaign, Don Jr. meeting with Russian operatives, Trump openly asking Russia to hack emails and that day they start to do it, Trump's reading an article at a campaign rally that had only been up briefly on a Kremlin website, ...
The indictments and convictions are piling up and the the quaint notion that they only found illegal behavior because they were looking for it is a thin argument at best.
Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page admitted earlier this summer that more than nine months into the federal Russia probe, investigators had found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.
"I think this represents that even as far as May 2017, we still couldn't answer the question," Page told lawmakers during a closed-door deposition in July, according to Fox News.
The transcript shows Page stopped mid-answer, asking to consult with her counsel.
...
In a statement to Fox News, Ratcliffe said he "cannot provide the specifics of a confidential interview," before adding: "But I can say that Lisa Page left me with the impression, based on her own words, that the lead investigator of the Russian collusion case, Peter Strzok, had found no evidence of collusion after nearly a year."
He didn't have access to much of the information that has come to light since Mueller took this investigation on...
The fact that Mueller had enough information/evidence to indict the Russian hackers means there is proof of illegal activity to interfere in the 2016 election
Look at what came out about Cambridge Analytical???
Trump is a dog chasing his tail...
Put faith in his Twitter feed and his "insight" and you will just be going round in circle too
If there is nothing pointing to any wrongdoing within the declassified material, then there will be no chaos.
If there is even more evidence of wrongdoing, well then we'll have more chaos.
Not true. Simply by introducing it - Trump has introduced chaos. Possibly to take the focus off of his lousy supreme court pick; possibly to take the focus off of Manafort's cooperation agreement.
Whatever the reason, the american people are sick and tired of the chaos of this White House.
Meanwhile, Mueller just keeps his head down and does his job. Why can't the f'ing POTUS do the same?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmaise
Which Trump in turn will use as an argument that since he was only a suspect that no Special Counsel should have been appointed. These two articles and their timing are very much related.
Release of the information so everyone to see the FBI only suspected Trump, and Lisa Page's confirmation that the FBI had no definitive proof yet.
Trump is correct. The actual federal law/regulation regarding the appointment of special counsel requires probable cause that a crime was committed which is the threshold or standard for all law enforcement investigations - anything less does not meet the de minimis test for government action.
Here is the actual text:
§ 600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.
The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -
(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and
(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.
Say Pilot, question for you: if law/regulation says “need probable cause” and Trump says “doesn’t exist” why didn’t F’ing moron sue Mueller!?! LOL
Actually, they did have evidence. This has been posted over and over and is easily found with a Google or Bing search.
Papadopoulos, numerous foreign intelligence services, a foreign agent running Trump's campaign, Don Jr. meeting with Russian operatives, Trump openly asking Russia to hack emails and that day they start to do it, Trump's reading an article at a campaign rally that had only been up briefly on a Kremlin website, ...
The indictments and convictions are piling up and the the quaint notion that they only found illegal behavior because they were looking for it is a thin argument at best.
No - the indictments and convictions are not piling up. It's been over two years since this has been an issues. There are no indictments or convictions related to Trump.
The latest Trump strategy is to release all the text messages so everyone can see the FBI only suspected Trump and they had no prove of collusion before Mueller was appointed. https://www.google.com.ph/amp/s/theh...-mueller%3famp
Therefore, expect Trump to claim Mueller investigation should be ended and Sessions fired.
Here is related article in declassification of text messages:
The old College Try. I'm glad Mueller doesn't pay any attention to Donnie's blather.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i) any links and/or coordination bet ween the Russian government and individualsassociated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).