Democrats to press star witness of Mueller report to repeat performance in Congress

[rice555]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You need to read the Mueller report, there is plenty of evidence of Collusion and Conspiracy.

 

Manafort handing GOP polling data to a known Russian intelligence office is one example.

 

Manafort, Kushner and Donny Jnr attending a meeting with a known Russian intelligence asset to obtain dirt from Russia on Clinton is another.

 

There are at least 9 other examples in the Mueller report.

 

 

 

Is that the woman that was known to be on a NO-Fly list to the US

as an Russian agent and was given a VISA by the Obama State Dept. who met with Glen Simpson(Fusion GPS) before the meeting and again the day after meeting, that no dirt was talked about??

[Chomper Higgot]

27 minutes ago, rice555 said:

Is that the woman that was known to be on a NO-Fly list to the US

as an Russian agent and was given a VISA by the Obama State Dept. who met with Glen Simpson(Fusion GPS) before the meeting and again the day after meeting, that no dirt was talked about??

Links!

[Thainesss]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Manafort handing GOP polling data to a known Russian intelligence office is one example.

 

Manafort handing polling data to a Russian. "Known Russian intelligence office" is your added hyperbole and lies. And this Russian citizen was working for Manaforts consulting firm from all the way back to 2005. And remember, Manafort only worked for Trump as his campaign manager for 3 months. 

 

But But But Conspiracy ????

 

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Manafort, Kushner and Donny Jnr attending a meeting with a known Russian intelligence asset to obtain dirt from Russia on Clinton is another.

 

Not illegal, and as has been stated about a billion times, and nothing materialized because they woman lied about the pretext of the meeting and wanted to discuss adoption. 

 

But But But Collusion ????

 

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

There are at least 9 other examples in the Mueller report.

 

And they are even more boring and stale than these 'bombshells'. 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, rice555 said:

there is no federal crime statute for "collusion", why do people

still use the term??

Because that is the term pushed by Trump and his lawyers.

 

Please do at least try to keep up with the man you are trying to defend.

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

Are you incapable of understanding the difference between insufficient evidence to prosecute for conspiracy or obstruction, and definitively stating there was no conspiracy or obstruction?

 

Or do you think, as thaibeachlovers explains above, that if you keep stating "no collusion, no obstruction" that simple minded people will believe it?

 

4 hours ago, Thainesss said:

 

Are you incapable of reading what I actually type? Poster I was replying to said "Collusion and Conspiracy" and it is an unequivocal fact that there was no evidence of either. These are the hard facts, and if you choose to ignore these facts and continue to bang on about something that didnt happen, thats up to you, but its hardly surprising coming from the SAME partisan hypocrites that continue push this trash. 

 

I see, you do have comprehension problems.  There is obviously a great deal of evidence of obstruction of justice.  Mueller decided not to recommend charges since it is the Justice Department policy to not indict a sitting President.  Rosenstein and Barr decided that the evidence was not sufficient to prosecute. 

 

However to state "it is an unequivocal fact that there was no evidence of either" is ridiculous.

[Thainesss]

14 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I see, you do have comprehension problems.

 

14 minutes ago, heybruce said:

There is obviously a great deal of evidence of obstruction of justice.

 

8 hours ago, Thainesss said:

According to literally everyone other than Democrats there was no collusion or conspiracy. This is simply a fact. 

 

You're interpretation and exaggeration of events does not change this. 

 

 

Ive been talking about collusion and conspiracy, because that was the point the poster I was originally replying to stated, and somehow out of left field, heres you stepping on rakes invoking obstruction of justice like somehow thats what Ive been talking about.

 

And to top if off, you insult my intelligence (several times now) even though clearly my actual words have gone straight over your head. 

Are you sure you arent taking social media classes from AOC or something? 

[heybruce]

13 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

 

Ive been talking about collusion and conspiracy, because that was the point the poster I was originally replying to stated, and somehow out of left field, heres you stepping on rakes invoking obstruction of justice like somehow thats what Ive been talking about.

 

And to top if off, you insult my intelligence (several times now) even though clearly my actual words have gone straight over your head. 

Are you sure you arent taking social media classes from AOC or something? 

Ok, there was ample evidence of conspiracy as well.  The Mueller report states that he decided not to recommend charges against Don Jr because he wasn't certain Don was smart enough to know the Russia meeting was illegal.  Manafort handed over detailed campaign polling data to a Ukrainian oligarch with known Russian ties.

 

So there is evidence of conspiracy, but Mueller decided it was not enough to make a court case "beyond a reasonable doubt".  Not prosecuted is not the same as not guilty.

[Thainesss]

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

The Mueller report states that he decided not to recommend charges against Don Jr because he wasn't certain Don was smart enough to know the Russia meeting was illegal.

 

Thats not what the Mueller report states at all. If you have to invoke hyperbole and BS, you know you're position is weak.

 

And ill accept your apology for insulting my intelligence at any time. 

 

[heybruce]

28 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

 

Thats not what the Mueller report states at all. If you have to invoke hyperbole and BS, you know you're position is weak.

 

And ill accept your apology for insulting my intelligence at any time. 

 

" Special Counsel Robert Mueller said he considered charging President Donald Trump’s eldest son and other participants in a June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with campaign-finance violations but chose not to because of a high bar to prove they intended to break the law."  https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-18/donald-trump-jr-mueller-report

[Thainesss]

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

" Special Counsel Robert Mueller said he considered charging President Donald Trump’s eldest son and other participants in a June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with campaign-finance violations but chose not to because of a high bar to prove they intended to break the law."  https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-18/donald-trump-jr-mueller-report

 

So you bang on for weeks about obstruction and collusion and conspiracy and say Jr wasn't smart enough to know he was breaking the law commiting conspiracy and collusion - then post a link citing campaign finance violations as his most likely possible crime, and which says nothing about Jrs intelligence, and this brings you vindication? 

 

Have another rake to step on. 

[rice555]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Links!

Veselnitskaya, however, wasn’t admitted into the U.S. in June 2016 because of her role in the Prevezon case. In fact, then U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara of Manhattan specifically refused Veselnitskaya’s request that the Justice Department authorize her trip via a mechanism known as immigration parole, which allows the attorney general to temporarily suspend immigration requirements on a case-by-case basis.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-otc-veselnitskaya/how-did-russian-lawyer-veselnitskaya-get-into-u-s-for-trump-tower-meeting-idUSKBN1D62Q2

 

[rice555]

Lawyers for Prevezon hired a research firm, Fusion GPS, to collect information about Browder. Separately, Fusion GPS was also hired by a Republican donor and then a lawyer for the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 presidential campaign to explore any ties between Donald Trump and Russia. That work produced a dossier of unverified allegations against the president that played a key role in the early days of the FBI’s investigation of Trump.

Joshua A. Levy, a lawyer for Fusion GPS, said the allegations in the indictment were not known to the firm. “No one at Fusion GPS has any knowledge that Natalya Veselnitskaya played any role in the drafting of the Russian . . . response discussed in the indictment,” Levy said.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-lawyer-at-trump-tower-meeting-charged-in-separate-case/2019/01/08/0f0303a0-1356-11e9-b6ad-9cfd62dbb0a8_story.html?utm_term=.080f24b07628

 

 

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, Thainesss said:

 

So you bang on for weeks about obstruction and collusion and conspiracy and say Jr wasn't smart enough to know he was breaking the law commiting conspiracy and collusion - then post a link citing campaign finance violations as his most likely possible crime, and which says nothing about Jrs intelligence, and this brings you vindication? 

 

Have another rake to step on. 

A campaign finance violation involving accepting free assistance from a hostile foreign power.  Illegal assistance from a hostile foreign power, along with Russian interference in the election, was what the investigation was all about. 

 

What did you think the conspiracy investigation was about?

[heybruce]

8 hours ago, rice555 said:

Is that the woman that was known to be on a NO-Fly list to the US

as an Russian agent and was given a VISA by the Obama State Dept. who met with Glen Simpson(Fusion GPS) before the meeting and again the day after meeting, that no dirt was talked about??

 

4 hours ago, rice555 said:

Veselnitskaya, however, wasn’t admitted into the U.S. in June 2016 because of her role in the Prevezon case. In fact, then U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara of Manhattan specifically refused Veselnitskaya’s request that the Justice Department authorize her trip via a mechanism known as immigration parole, which allows the attorney general to temporarily suspend immigration requirements on a case-by-case basis.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-otc-veselnitskaya/how-did-russian-lawyer-veselnitskaya-get-into-u-s-for-trump-tower-meeting-idUSKBN1D62Q2

 

Your link does not substantiate anything in your earlier post, other than the fact that Fusion GPS was hired for an investigation totally unrelated to the Trump investigation.

[gamb00ler]

On 4/24/2019 at 7:47 PM, Paul Henry said:

This report was NOT written by the Democrates Mueller has been a Republican all his adult life.

If no collusion and no obstruction of justice and following through on the Mueller report will work against the Democrates why is POTUS obessed with with blocking any further investigation. He should welcome it to highlight the DEMOCRATES CONSPIRACY and his total innocence.

There you go again.... using logic and facts.  You're going to unnecessarily confuse our stressed out Republican brethren.  Let them carry on to the doom they deserve.

 

There probably won't be another GOP president or House for several election cycles.

[thaibeachlovers]

23 hours ago, Thainesss said:

 

Are you incapable of reading what I actually type? Poster I was replying to said "Collusion and Conspiracy" and it is an unequivocal fact that there was no evidence of either. These are the hard facts, and if you choose to ignore these facts and continue to bang on about something that didnt happen, thats up to you, but its hardly surprising coming from the SAME partisan hypocrites that continue push this trash. 

 

Some people are so convinced that there must be something to prove Trump committed a crime that they refuse to believe that the report does not contain any proof of a crime. Perhaps they forget that in the US a person is INNOCENT till PROVEN guilty. 

No evidence, no indictment, no conviction, no jailtime.

Even Pelosi apparently doesn't think there is any there in the report or she'd be moving to impeach. If there were any proof at all, Trump could be impeached and after indicted.

Trump will, IMO, win BECAUSE of the report.

[Chomper Higgot]

11 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Some people are so convinced that there must be something to prove Trump committed a crime that they refuse to believe that the report does not contain any proof of a crime. Perhaps they forget that in the US a person is INNOCENT till PROVEN guilty. 

No evidence, no indictment, no conviction, no jailtime.

Even Pelosi apparently doesn't think there is any there in the report or she'd be moving to impeach. If there were any proof at all, Trump could be impeached and after indicted.

Trump will, IMO, win BECAUSE of the report.

I've read the report, it is replete with evidence of crimes. 

 

Part 2 of the report makes very specific mention of numerous crimes for which there is ample evidence to put forward for impeachment, and then there is the matter of the 14 on going indictments in the report. 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I've read the report, it is replete with evidence of crimes. 

 

Part 2 of the report makes very specific mention of numerous crimes for which there is ample evidence to put forward for impeachment, and then there is the matter of the 14 on going indictments in the report. 

 

 

Sooooo, why won't Pelosi impeach? It's down to her to proceed or not. Perhaps she doesn't agree with you.

[Thainesss]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, why won't Pelosi impeach? It's down to her to proceed or not. Perhaps she doesn't agree with you.

 

They are strategically debating internally about wether or not its politically beneficial, and if they can handle the political backlash thats gonna happen. 

 

Absolutely nothing to do with crimes and law. All politics. 

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, why won't Pelosi impeach? It's down to her to proceed or not. Perhaps she doesn't agree with you.

 

The Congressional Committees that are in the processes of issuing Subpoenas to those around Trump will expose to the public the crimes warranting impeachment.  

 

First up is McGahn, then Barr, then Mueller is scheduled and Rosenstein has just ensured he's going to have a spell in front of Congress explaining what 'plane' it was that he was promising he could 'land' for Trump. 

 

When Trump's crimes and the crimes of those around Trump are laid out on prime TV, public opinion in favour of impeachment will grow. 

 

That's when Nadler, not Pelosi, will recommend impeachment. 

 

Be patient, it's coming. 

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

 

They are strategically debating internally about wether or not its politically beneficial, and if they can handle the political backlash thats gonna happen. 

 

Absolutely nothing to do with crimes and law. All politics. 

Which I guess is why Trump is ordering members of the WH staff and administration not to obey Congressional Subpoenas. 

 

He's obviously trying to protect the Democrats from self harm.

 

 

Doh! 

[Thainesss]

29 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The Congressional Committees that are in the processes of issuing Subpoenas to those around Trump will expose to the public the crimes warranting impeachment.  

 

29 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

When Trump's crimes and the crimes of those around Trump are laid out on prime TV, public opinion in favour of impeachment will grow.

 

You should know, Mr Lawyer, that doing what you lay out in your posts here is literally illegal, and not the duty of Congress nor within the scope of its powers. 

 

I will note however, that this is the most open you've been with your wishes to date. You usually mask them behind some fake veil of political professionalism and you've come a LONG way now from Russian collusion, all the way to using Congressional power to look for juice to give to the public because your precious Mueller report falls on its face. 

 

32 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Doh!

 

Uh huh. 

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

 

 

You should know, Mr Lawyer, that doing what you lay out in your posts here is literally illegal, and not the duty of Congress nor within the scope of its powers. 

 

I will note however, that this is the most open you've been with your wishes to date. You usually mask them behind some fake veil of political professionalism and you've come a LONG way now from Russian collusion, all the way to using Congressional power to look for juice to give to the public because your precious Mueller report falls on its face. 

 

 

Uh huh. 

The crimes committed by Trump are detailed in the Mueller report. 

 

Congress has the legal authority to examine witnesses and evidence relating to those crimes in order to determine if Impeachment is appropriate. 

 

I look forward to you explaining what it is you believe to be literally illegal. 

 

 

[Thainesss]

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The crimes committed by Trump are detailed in the Mueller report. 

 

Congress has the legal authority to examine witnesses and evidence relating to those crimes in order to determine if Impeachment is appropriate. 

  

I look forward to you explaining what it is you believe to be literally illegal. 

 

Using congressional power to investigate made-up accusations in a partisan manner for political gain, and done in a highly partisan way, and the leaking and televising evidence, is illegal, and an abuse of congressional power. This is what you support. 

 

Trump did not actively and willingly collude with the Russian state to win the US Presidential Election. This is the entire basis of the Mueller investigation, and it didn't happen. 

 

Do you not even see the different stages of get-trump goal-post shifting you've done? 

[Chomper Higgot]

26 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

 

Using congressional power to investigate made-up accusations in a partisan manner for political gain, and done in a highly partisan way, and the leaking and televising evidence, is illegal, and an abuse of congressional power. This is what you support. 

 

Trump did not actively and willingly collude with the Russian state to win the US Presidential Election. This is the entire basis of the Mueller investigation, and it didn't happen. 

 

Do you not even see the different stages of get-trump goal-post shifting you've done? 

You are so wrong on everything here, the only fix is for you to observe the reality you are trying to deny.

 

See you at the Congressional hearings. 

 

 

 

[heybruce]

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Some people are so convinced that there must be something to prove Trump committed a crime that they refuse to believe that the report does not contain any proof of a crime. Perhaps they forget that in the US a person is INNOCENT till PROVEN guilty. 

No evidence, no indictment, no conviction, no jailtime.

Even Pelosi apparently doesn't think there is any there in the report or she'd be moving to impeach. If there were any proof at all, Trump could be impeached and after indicted.

Trump will, IMO, win BECAUSE of the report.

"Perhaps they forget that in the US a person is INNOCENT till PROVEN guilty."

 

Tell that to the "lock her up" crowd at the Trump rallies.  Weren't you of a similar opinion?

 

Plenty of evidence but no indictment of Trump yet.  But there are many investigations ongoing.

[Scott]

Off-topic post and reply removed.

 

[gamb00ler]

15 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, why won't Pelosi impeach? It's down to her to proceed or not. Perhaps she doesn't agree with you.

My unfiltered response would be: Because she's smarter than you

and... gives much more thought to what is better for the nation.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

My unfiltered response would be: Because she's smarter than you

and... gives much more thought to what is better for the nation.

LOL

Sooooo, if Pelosi isn't going to impeach because she thinks it's better for the nation, everything on every thread saying Trump is guilty of some crime is irrelevant.

Without being impeached Trump will not be indicted as we all know, and if he's not indicted there will be a lot of very sad posters on TVF that are eagerly awaiting the sight of Trump being arrested.

[bristolboy]

Robert Mueller reportedly said AG William Barr’s summary of Trump investigation didn’t ’capture the context, nature, and substance’ of findings

“The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this office’s work and conclusions,” Mueller wrote in a letter to Barr, obtained by the Washington Post...

“There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.”

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-mueller-barr-trump-russia-20190501-az6dl6ftlnffjfrykn3xhltp3i-story.html