Jump to content

DOJ Appoints Robert Mueller as Special Counsel - Jerome Corsi Rejects Plea Deal


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

They did remove him for deep concerns, whether it was wise or just is another question.

 

I’m grateful Truman stepped in.

 

 

 

They removed him because he was an impediment to their preferred policy prescriptions towards the Soviets.  It was a political difference, nothing more.

 

It was framed as more by those in power who didn’t want to have a policy debate because it was easier, and more politically expedient, to destroy the man than to take on his arguments.

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

They removed him because he was an impediment to their preferred policy prescriptions towards the Soviets.  It was a political difference, nothing more.

 

It was framed as more by those in power who didn’t want to have a policy debate because it was easier, and more politically expedient, to destroy the man than to take on his arguments.

 

He was soft on the USSR and removed rightfully.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CONRAD BLACK: The Real Scandal Of Trump Term Starts To Unravel.

For more than two years, the United States and the world have had two competing narratives: that an elected president of the United States was a Russian agent whom the Kremlin helped elect; and its rival narrative that senior officials of the Justice Department, FBI, CIA, and other national intelligence organizations had repeatedly lied under oath, misinformed federal officials, and meddled in partisan political matters illegally and unconstitutionally and had effectively tried to influence the outcome of a presidential election, and then undo its result by falsely propagating the first narrative. It is now obvious and indisputable that the second narrative is the correct one.

 

The authors, accomplices, and dupes of this attempted overthrow of constitutional government are now well along in reciting their misconduct without embarrassment or remorse because — in fired FBI Director James Comey’s formulation — a “higher duty” than the oath they swore to uphold the Constitution compelled them. Or — in fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s words — “the threat” was too great. Never mind that the nature of “the threat” was that the people might elect someone he and Mr. Comey disapproved of as president, and that that person might actually serve his term, as elected.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DOJ Planned a Coup Against Trump - And the Press Doesn't Care
by Victoria Toensing

 

Original Article
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

They removed him because he was an impediment to their preferred policy prescriptions towards the Soviets.  It was a political difference, nothing more.

 

It was framed as more by those in power who didn’t want to have a policy debate because it was easier, and more politically expedient, to destroy the man than to take on his arguments.

 

And his dovish tone towards the Soviets ensured that tens of millions met an early grave.

 

But I'm sure his intentions were good

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GG said:

 

And his dovish tone towards the Soviets ensured that tens of millions met an early grave.

 

But I'm sure his intentions were good

 

Please outline exactly how Wallace‘s desire not to involve the United States in future European conflicts led to the deaths of tens of millions?

 

It seems to me that Wallace was ousted, his policy preferences went unutilized, and tens of millions died anyway.

 

You’re making the argument that a policy of non-aggression in the pursuit of peace should be criminalized.  What happened to Wallace is not entirely dissimilar to what has happened to the current administration in terms of attempting to criminalize foreign policy which doesn’t meet with the entrenched orthodoxy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

Please outline exactly how Wallace‘s desire not to involve the United States in future European conflicts led to the deaths of tens of millions?

 

It seems to me that Wallace was ousted, his policy preferences went unutilized, and tens of millions died anyway.

 

You’re making the argument that a policy of non-aggression in the pursuit of peace should be criminalized.  What happened to Wallace is not entirely dissimilar to what has happened to the current administration in terms of attempting to criminalize foreign policy which doesn’t meet with the entrenched orthodoxy.

 

I think you're understating his position.  It wasn't just that US should no longer be involved in Europe's matters, he also was a firm believer that US hawks overestimated the Soviet intentions, who he believed were very nice and kind people who wanted nothing better than peace and love for mankind.   To have a US VP take a warm approach towards Stalin and his intentions was a colossal mistake.  His policy preferences would have resigned a hell of a lot more people to the gulags than the unfortunate millions who ended up there, and there would have been another major war in Europe.

 

History has spoken, and he's on the same side of history as US isolationists who were against US involvement in European matters in the late 1930's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GG said:

 

I think you're understating his position.  It wasn't just that US should no longer be involved in Europe's matters, he also was a firm believer that US hawks overestimated the Soviet intentions, who he believed were very nice and kind people who wanted nothing better than peace and love for mankind.   To have a US VP take a warm approach towards Stalin and his intentions was a colossal mistake.  His policy preferences would have resigned a hell of a lot more people to the gulags than the unfortunate millions who ended up there, and there would have been another major war in Europe.

 

History has spoken, and he's on the same side of history as US isolationists who were against US involvement in European matters in the late 1930's.

 

I have no problem with history metering out judgement of policy.  None.  It’s the proper place.

 

My issue is with the attempt to criminalize policy preferences which cut against the orthodoxy of the day; which is what the Trump Administration is dealing with today.

 

Process is far more important than individual outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What will @RepAdamSchiff do with a Mueller report that finds no collusion?

 

WaPo’s deep state stenographer David Ignatius telegraphs how Schiff will seamlessly transition from 2 years of Russia hysteria to something else...

 

 

Schiffting to Phase 2 of Collusion
Wall Street Journal, by Kimberley A. Strassel

 

Original Article
 

 

There’s been no more reliable regurgitator of fantastical Trump-Russia collusion theories than Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff. So when the House Intelligence Committee chairman sits down to describe a “new phase” of the Trump investigation, pay attention. These are the fever swamps into which we will descend after Robert Mueller’s probe. The collusionists need a “new phase” as signs grow that the special counsel won’t help realize their reveries of a Donald Trump takedown.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

D0BJNbMX4AEiDfk.jpg

 

Coming soon.

WJC offered RBG's Supreme Court Seat for LL's cooperation. 

 

That's big if true, but it'll need to be backed up.  Firmly backed up.

 

 

 

21 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

Meathead being Meathead.

 

Didn't know Rob Reiner was working with Adam Schiff. 

Edited by keepthefaith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, keepthefaith said:

 

That's big if true, but it'll need to be backed up.  Firmly backed up.

 

 

Remember, we wouldn't even know about it if it wasn't for local reporter, ABC15’s Christopher Sign.

 

He broke the story of the Lynch-Clinton meeting, a few hours after it occurred.  Sign reported at the time that sources told him that federal agents were on the tarmac, telling bystanders “no photos, no pictures, no cell phones.”

 

And, apparently, someone hoped, no evidence that the meeting ever occurred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


Rex has a thread going about this:

https://social.quodverum.com/@REX/101643339442747681  

 

I knew Rex would come around ;) He resisted "Manafort as a plant" for a good while. 

 

This filing really is interesting, but just not for the reasons CNN/MSNBC hoped. If I'm Tony and John Podesta, I'm leaving the country today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Court records reveal a Mueller report right in plain view

 

Mueller's grand jury heard testimony from several participants of the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting arranged by Trump Jr., but no charges have been filed.

 

The mercurial president himself has made no secret of his disdain for the Mueller investigation and his efforts to undermine it. Mueller has investigated whether any of Trump's actions constituted obstruction of justice, but the special counsel hasn't gone public with what he found.

 

And it's unclear if he ever will.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/court-records-reveal-mueller-report-134727224.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Capco said:

Court records reveal a Mueller report right in plain view

 

Mueller's grand jury heard testimony from several participants of the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting arranged by Trump Jr., but no charges have been filed.

 

The mercurial president himself has made no secret of his disdain for the Mueller investigation and his efforts to undermine it. Mueller has investigated whether any of Trump's actions constituted obstruction of justice, but the special counsel hasn't gone public with what he found.

 

And it's unclear if he ever will.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/court-records-reveal-mueller-report-134727224.html

 

Oof that article has the spins so badly it can't tell fact from fiction. 

 

Only worth reading if need a laugh.

(no offense intended towards you, Capco, just the article)

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Who needs Mueller to issue a report, when you can just cherry pick speculation, call them facts, ignore anything that doesn't fit the narrative, then pretend it's all true?

34 minutes ago, Capco said:

Court records reveal a Mueller report right in plain view

 

Mueller's grand jury heard testimony from several participants of the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting arranged by Trump Jr., but no charges have been filed.

 

The mercurial president himself has made no secret of his disdain for the Mueller investigation and his efforts to undermine it. Mueller has investigated whether any of Trump's actions constituted obstruction of justice, but the special counsel hasn't gone public with what he found.

 

And it's unclear if he ever will.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/court-records-reveal-mueller-report-134727224.html

 

Edited by Koko78
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Oof that article has the spins so badly it can't tell fact from fiction. 

 

Only worth reading if need a laugh.

(no offense intended towards you, Capco, just the article)

 

None taken DR. 

 

The reason I posted the last bit of the article is because it really does look like they are setting up for a "whoops there was no collusion" possibility.  

 

Also the article was written by the Associated Press, not Yahoo, fwiw.  Koko had the link to the AP in his post but edited it out for some reason.  

Edited by Capco
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Capco said:

 

None taken DR. 

 

The reason I posted the last bit of the article is because it really does look like they are setting up for a "whoops there was no collusion" possibility.  

 

Also the article was written by the Associated Press, not Yahoo, fwiw.  Koko had the link to the AP in his post but edited it out for some reason.  

 

Because you had already posted it. I linked the article before seeing you had already done so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Absolutely' prepared to sue Trump administration if Mueller report not released: House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff
 

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said that his committee would subpoena special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report and even call him to testify before the committee if the report was not made public, and that he was “absolutely” prepared to sue the Trump administration, if necessary.
 

“We will obviously subpoena the report. We will bring Bob Mueller in to testify before Congress. We will take it to court if necessary,” Schiff, D-Calif. said Sunday.
 

</snip>
 

Amid speculation that special counsel Robert Mueller would be delivering his report to Barr as early as this week, a Justice Department official with knowledge of the matter told ABC News Friday that the report is not imminent.
 

</snip>


 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Koko78 said:

Sue for what? The law Congress passed allows the AG to decide whether or not to disclose the report.

It will keep the issue before the public. In the news, ya know. The American people have a right to know if their president is a crook 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tiberius said:

It will keep the issue before the public. In the news, ya know. The American people have a right to know if their president is a crook 

 

Maybe Congress should have thought of that when they passed the law.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Maybe Congress should have thought of that when they passed the law.

We all do it, but arguing with Gleeful Gator is like arguing with a stone. Actually, more like a pebble in that he's not only very small, but very dense. "Pebbles" would be a good back up nickname for him/her/it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hilarious part is people who give Schiff a pass now. He needs new investigations? Why? He's said for two years he's already seen the evidence needed to prove conspiracy collusion, if that's true he shouldn't need new investigations. 

 

He also seems to think he knows what Mueller will have or not have, which is funny since Mueller's report is classified. Has Schiff been leaked to? (Irony)

 

Those tactics give schiff away: he has nothing. He always had nothing because he's a liar and a partisan hack. He's also guilty of felony leaking and attempting a coup. 

 

The perp walk would be prime time viewing - if only to watch the cognitive dissonance wracking the heads of the anchors covering the scene after years of propping ol doll eyes up on a pedestal. 

Edited by Deranged Rhino
  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Maybe Congress should have thought of that when they passed the law.

No one needs to tell politicians in congress about the power of public opinion. That's just built into the law

24 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

The hilarious part is people who give Schiff a pass now. He needs new investigations? Why? He's said for two years he's already seen the evidence needed to prove conspiracy collusion, if that's true he shouldn't need new investigations. 

 

He also seems to think he knows what Mueller will have or not have, which is funny since Mueller's report is classified. Has Schiff been leaked to? (Irony)

 

Those tactics give schiff away: he has nothing. He always had nothing because he's a liar and a partisan hack. He's also guilty of felony leaking and attempting a coup. 

 

The perp walk would be prime time viewing - if only to watch the cognitive dissonance wracking the heads of the anchors covering the scene after years of propping ol doll eyes up on a pedestal. 

This almost might make sense but the corrupt nature of this president makes further investigations not only necessary but inevitable 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

The perp walk would be prime time viewing - if only to watch the cognitive dissonance wracking the heads of the anchors covering the scene after years of propping ol doll eyes up on a pedestal. 

 

You know as well as I do that the media isn't going to be staking out Schiff's house to televise the FBI raid arresting him. They'll bury it, because it doesn't fit the 'narrative'.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

You know as well as I do that the media isn't going to be staking out Schiff's house to televise the FBI raid arresting him. They'll bury it, because it doesn't fit the 'narrative'.

You are expecting Schiff to get arrested? 

 

Image result for the shit is deep

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...