Mueller reportedly told Trump's lawyers the president is not a criminal target at this point

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Bowers2

Stackin' Joe's Cups
A/V Subscriber
Jul 31, 2006
6,255
5,020
1,743
OKC
#41
I'm going to have to disagree with you. This investigation should have been done in a completely public manor. There are no laws on the books about collusion with a foreign government in an election. If he did yeah it's pretty damn shitty but not illegal. The FBI a special council or any other law enforcement should have zero involvement in investigating something that is completely legal. The whole special council is a joke at best until you realize they are spending millions of our dollars to investigate something that isn't even a crime.

If in a public investigation they found something that was a crime appoint a special council and get after it throw Trump in jail. But to appoint a guy to look for a crime the President elect may have committed from who knows when or for who knows what is a serious threat to our Constitutional Republic.

Appointing special councils to dig into duly elected officials for doing things that are not illegal is insane. This should not be a partisan thing. Everyone should be horrified this happened.
Can't argue with anything you said. But Trump's own appointee Rosenstein appointed the special council so here we are. Other than that, it's just not hard for me to believe members of Trump's campaign worked with Russian oligarchs and officials to gain an advantage in the election. But as you said I don't think that is a crime and don't think Trump should be impeached. Now, a national security threat? Yes. But we will be in Trump's 3rd year as POTUS when the investigation comes to a head. Democrats may win seats in the house to vote for impeachment, but no way will they have 2/3 of the Senate, so he'll be acquitted. He won't be elected for a second term and we'll move on from this. Just my prediction.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
64,306
47,169
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#42
Bold strategy by the HRC campaign to wait until after the election to try to derail the Trump campaign with this...
Oh please, are you really that obtuse? The Steele "dossier" began as opposition research. They tried and failed to derail his campaign, so then they switch to undermining the presidency.
 

NYC Poke

The Veil of Ignorance
A/V Subscriber
Sep 24, 2007
38,124
45,374
1,743
#44
Oh please, are you really that obtuse? The Steele "dossier" began as opposition research. They tried and failed to derail his campaign, so then they switch to undermining the presidency.
I’m not going back through this thread, but I don’t see why the Steele Dossier is even relevant at this point. All the Steele Dossier represents is raw human intelligence, i.e., gossip (though well-sourced gossip). None of it is admissible in court.

Mueller’s surely not relying on it by this point. It has led to admissible evidence. This is how criminal cases are built.

A Neighor A might be pissed off at Neighbor B because B’s dog poops in A’s yard. A suspects B is a drug dealer because of suspicious activity around the house, but doesn’t really care about that, A’s just mad about the dog poop and wants to get revenge on B, so reports it to the police.

The police can’t arrest B based on A’s phone call, but if they find A credible, they check it out themselves. They gather the evidence, admissible evidence, and build a case. When they have a case based on admissible evidence, they make arrests.

At this point, A’s motivation for reporting B is irrelevant, as is A’s phone call, other than that was what prompted their looking into B in the first place.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
64,306
47,169
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#47
I’m not going back through this thread, but I don’t see why the Steele Dossier is even relevant at this point. All the Steele Dossier represents is raw human intelligence, i.e., gossip (though well-sourced gossip). None of it is admissible in court.

Mueller’s surely not relying on it by this point. It has led to admissible evidence. This is how criminal cases are built.

A Neighor A might be pissed off at Neighbor B because B’s dog poops in A’s yard. A suspects B is a drug dealer because of suspicious activity around the house, but doesn’t really care about that, A’s just mad about the dog poop and wants to get revenge on B, so reports it to the police.

The police can’t arrest B based on A’s phone call, but if they find A credible, they check it out themselves. They gather the evidence, admissible evidence, and build a case. When they have a case based on admissible evidence, they make arrests.

At this point, A’s motivation for reporting B is irrelevant, as is A’s phone call, other than that was what prompted their looking into B in the first place.
And why does A suspect B in the first place? We're right back to the Steel dossier. Stop being obtuse.

I said before that Mueller is going to charge some people, but absolutely none of the charges will have to do with the campaign or "collusion" nor will any of it actually involve Trump. Answer me this: is that still true at this point or not?
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,636
17,917
1,743
#48
Oh please, are you really that obtuse? The Steele "dossier" began as opposition research. They tried and failed to derail his campaign, so then they switch to undermining the presidency.
Anything to cover for crooked Billary.
 

NYC Poke

The Veil of Ignorance
A/V Subscriber
Sep 24, 2007
38,124
45,374
1,743
#49
And why does A suspect B in the first place? We're right back to the Steel dossier. Stop being obtuse.

I said before that Mueller is going to charge some people, but absolutely none of the charges will have to do with the campaign or "collusion" nor will any of it actually involve Trump. Answer me this: is that still true at this point or not?
It does not appear that you are correct.
 

Lab Rat

Hold on while I make a chart
Jan 5, 2012
7,083
9,999
743
#51
According to all the news last week it appears Mueller is wrapping it up. He is typing up the report of the investigation for Rosenstein as we speak. The investigation is all but over.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/specia...s-hes-not-a-criminal-target-right-now-report/
You’re not just reading between the lines, you’ve constructed a whole new false narrative. There was no reference to Mueller “wrapping up the investigation” or that the investigation is “all but over.” The fact that Mueller is preparing a report for Rosenstein only indicates that the investigation is still active, but there is no indication of when it will reach conclusion.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,636
17,917
1,743
#54
I hear Muellar has turned his investigation to the porn industry. So much for collusion.....
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,636
17,917
1,743
#57
And why does A suspect B in the first place? We're right back to the Steel dossier. Stop being obtuse.

I said before that Mueller is going to charge some people, but absolutely none of the charges will have to do with the campaign or "collusion" nor will any of it actually involve Trump. Answer me this: is that still true at this point or not?
Sure, you investigate anyone here on OP and everyone they’ve had any dealings with, rather it be financial or relationship ( employee or employer) and you will find crimes to prosecute that will have nothing to do with the original claim.
 

Okieleaks

Le Soleil
Banned
A/V Subscriber
Mar 19, 2017
2,247
443
213
Here to there
#60
And why does A suspect B in the first place? We're right back to the Steel dossier. Stop being obtuse.

I said before that Mueller is going to charge some people, but absolutely none of the charges will have to do with the campaign or "collusion" nor will any of it actually involve Trump. Answer me this: is that still true at this point or not?
Saved for later