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

[outsidethebox]

15 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

Good questions.  I of course don't know but will speculate since you asked. 

 

The help given by the Russians to get him elected did not require a lot of day to day communication.  If the campaign agreed to accept the help one time, perhaps in person, that may have been all that was needed to start the conspiracy moving.  Perhaps the Don Jr Trump Tower meeting conveyed that agreement.  After that, the Russians would have been doing whatever they could to help.  They wouldn't need day to day guidance.

 

After the election was won, more back and forth MIGHT have been necessary to do the Russians bidding.  For instance, we don't want Mitt, how bout Rex from Exxon?  Speculation to be sure but you asked.

That is an awesome piece of fiction! When does the book come out?

[Bob in Mich]

Well, you guys are most welcome.  I had no idea you all appreciated my writing so much. I will continue....just for all of my new friends here.

 

I tried to answer the question of why some in the Trump administration wanted to establish secret communication lines with the Kremlin POST election.  Given that the proposed conspiracy PRIOR TO THE ELECTION involved tweaking the ongoing social media to more favor Trump along with strategically timing the release of hacked emails, not a lot needed to be communicated day to day. 

 

ONCE ELECTED, if a conspiracy was in place, much more back and forth was likely to happen and the administration would want to shield those conversations from US intelligence agencies.  You may not like that explanation but it is clearly possible and I would say plausible.

 

I readily admit that I don't know how things transpired and that I am speculating.  I would propose that most posting against me here do not know what transpired either.  They just say with conviction that they do....which is clearly just horseshit.

[Nanker]

Well, DR has laid out original source documents for most of his case(s). I for one tend to believe those documents more than I do some radio/TV/Intarwebs talking heads who are actually just pulling it out of their ass. I'm looking at YOU MSNBC, and CNN. 

[Deranged Rhino]

2 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

ONCE ELECTED, if a conspiracy was in place, much more back and forth was likely to happen and the administration would want to shield those conversations from US intelligence agencies.  You may not like that explanation but it is clearly possible and I would say plausible.

 

 

It's NOT plausible. It's fantasy.

 

Unless your contention is that the Russians who ran this op were ignorant of tradecraft, OPSEC, and the capabilities of the USIC. And if THAT was true, then we would have MOUNTAINS of evidence for this conspiracy - rather than the sum total of ZERO EVIDENCE we've seen proffered so far from numerous committees and investigations. You can't have it both ways. The Russians can't be so sophisticated to have left no trace while simultaneously ignoring even basic OPSEC as they did in the Seychelles. 

 

If the Russians wanted to shield their conversations from the USIC, they have COUNTLESS ways to do so. Risking a face-to-face meeting, in a public hotel with dozens of cameras, witnesses, and recording devices in the area, and arriving to that meet on a charter flight whose flight logs were so easy to find the Intercept had them in November - is the last thing they would do.

 

If there was a real operation in play, communications would have been established BEFORE the election, through any of the numerous encrypted means available to the FSB/GRU - and it would NEVER be direct contact between such famous faces like Prince. You're not speculating now, Bob. You're trying to make the facts fit the conclusion you've already made. And in so doing exposing how little you understand about how intelligence operations work and how little you paid attention to the investigation thus far. 

Edited March 14, 2018 by Deranged Rhino

[B-Man]

Long read.....................................for those who can.

 

 

Robert Mueller’s Beltway Cover-Up Tablet Magazine, by Lee Smith

Original Article

News that special counselor Robert Mueller has turned his attention to Erik Prince’s January 11, 2017 meeting in the Seychelles with a Russian banker, a Lebanese-American political fixer, and officials from the United Arab Emirates, helps clarify the nature of Mueller’s work. It’s not an investigation that the former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is leading—rather, it’s a cover-up. After all, Mueller took his job not at the behest of the man who by all accounts he is likely to professionally and personally disdain, Donald Trump, but of the blue-chip Beltway elite of which he is a charter member.

This is long and riveting. Lee Smith does not spare Mueller. He reminds us that Mueller oversaw the anthrax attacks case and wrongly accused Stephen Hatfill, never admitting he was wrong, let alone be held accountable for his terrible error even though Hatfill was cleared and won a $5.8 million settlement from the government. And a lot more.       .

[snafu]

2 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

Well, you guys are most welcome.  I had no idea you all appreciated my writing so much. I will continue....just for all of my new friends here.

 

I tried to answer the question of why some in the Trump administration wanted to establish secret communication lines with the Kremlin POST election.  Given that the proposed conspiracy PRIOR TO THE ELECTION involved tweaking the ongoing social media to more favor Trump along with strategically timing the release of hacked emails, not a lot needed to be communicated day to day. 

 

ONCE ELECTED, if a conspiracy was in place, much more back and forth was likely to happen and the administration would want to shield those conversations from US intelligence agencies.  You may not like that explanation but it is clearly possible and I would say plausible.

 

I readily admit that I don't know how things transpired and that I am speculating.  I would propose that most posting against me here do not know what transpired either.  They just say with conviction that they do....which is clearly just horseshit.

 

 

This is ass backwards.

--They just needed a nod and a wink to set up the biggest "collusion" to throw an election in history.

--Then afterward, they needed to take the giant risk of communicating more, in order to cover their tracks.

 

 

[Taro T]

4 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

Well, you guys are most welcome.  I had no idea you all appreciated my writing so much. I will continue....just for all of my new friends here.

 

I tried to answer the question of why some in the Trump administration wanted to establish secret communication lines with the Kremlin POST election.  Given that the proposed conspiracy PRIOR TO THE ELECTION involved tweaking the ongoing social media to more favor Trump along with strategically timing the release of hacked emails, not a lot needed to be communicated day to day. 

 

ONCE ELECTED, if a conspiracy was in place, much more back and forth was likely to happen and the administration would want to shield those conversations from US intelligence agencies.  You may not like that explanation but it is clearly possible and I would say plausible.

 

I readily admit that I don't know how things transpired and that I am speculating.  I would propose that most posting against me here do not know what transpired either.  They just say with conviction that they do....which is clearly just horseshit.

 

Bob, thank you for the reply.

 

You are earnest.  But your speculation without ANY 1st hand corraboration doesn't come across as plausible.  Again, that's due to the 2 narratives brought forth by those actively opposing 45 are directly contradicting themselves.

[Deranged Rhino]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/14/us/politics/andrew-mccabe-fbi-firing-recommendation-justice-department.html?mtrref=t.co&gwh=2BF400EF5195D6601BA0479AEB90CF95&gwt=pay

 

 

McCabe spotted on the right... trying to cross that retirement finish line for that sweet, sweet, pension.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

[Nanker]

Bet Sessions doesn't do it. He should. But I bet he won't. 

If he doesn't Trump might tell Jeff... "You're fired!" 

 

JMO

[row_33]

8 minutes ago, Nanker said:

Bet Sessions doesn't do it. He should. But I bet he won't. 

If he doesn't Trump might tell Jeff... "You're fired!" 

 

JMO

 

on Twitter?

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

5 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

Well, you guys are most welcome.  I had no idea you all appreciated my writing so much. I will continue....just for all of my new friends here.

 

I tried to answer the question of why some in the Trump administration wanted to establish secret communication lines with the Kremlin POST election.  Given that the proposed conspiracy PRIOR TO THE ELECTION involved tweaking the ongoing social media to more favor Trump along with strategically timing the release of hacked emails, not a lot needed to be communicated day to day. 

 

ONCE ELECTED, if a conspiracy was in place, much more back and forth was likely to happen and the administration would want to shield those conversations from US intelligence agencies.  You may not like that explanation but it is clearly possible and I would say plausible.

 

I readily admit that I don't know how things transpired and that I am speculating.  I would propose that most posting against me here do not know what transpired either.  They just say with conviction that they do....which is clearly just horseshit.

Wait...

 

You're under the impression that "US intelligence agencies", which as a stand-alone concept is nebulous enough on it's own merits to lead me to question question your understanding of their individual charters and purposes, have direct oversight of of the President and Executive prerogative on foreign policy?

 

But, even setting that aside, you think it is the duty of our government to appoint Special Councils to investigate politically motivated conspiracy theories against a duly elected President, and the duty of those Special Councils to persist in those investigation even after lengthy and thorough completion has turned up absolutely no evidence of the charges made in the politically motivated conspiracy theories in order to satisfy the political agenda of those forwarding those same theories without evidence???  Do you see where this leads?

[Nanker]

39 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

Wait...

 

You're under the impression that "US intelligence agencies", which as a stand-alone concept is nebulous enough on it's own merits to lead me to question question your understanding of their individual charters and purposes, have direct oversight of of the President and Executive prerogative on foreign policy?

 

But, even setting that aside, you think it is the duty of our government to appoint Special Councils to investigate politically motivated conspiracy theories against a duly elected President, and the duty of those Special Councils to persist in those investigation even after lengthy and thorough completion has turned up absolutely no evidence of the charges made in the politically motivated conspiracy theories in order to satisfy the political agenda of those forwarding those same theories without evidence???  Do you see where this leads?

Yes. Yes, of course. Because he hates Trump. Can't stand the guy. POTUS is a fool who isn't capable of understanding the complexities of dealing with large complex issues. 

[Deranged Rhino]

Nothing to see here... it's all made up. No one at the FBI or DOJ was doing anything improper. This is just more FAKE NEWS to distract from the real Russian Collusion, right? 

 

Must be. 

 

 

Over 15 DOJ/FBI employees (high ranking) have been fired, reassigned, demoted, or resigned. 

 

Coincidence, right? 

 

Those who get their news from High Times and the Young Turks are CERTAIN that it's bull ****, so it must be. Facts, evidence, and new events be damned. They're sticking to the narrative which came to them from trusted "professionals" who would never work with the plotters inside the DOJ or FBI to misinform the public. 

 

Ever. 

 

Right? 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

Those clinging to this narrative should read this Greenwald thread... (click for more)

 

 

[Tiberius]

More than a few eyebrows were raised when Trump fired Tillerson mere hours after the Sec State had denounced Russia for its chemical attack on UK soil. If this gets investigated also, Mueller might never get done. 

[Deranged Rhino]

4 minutes ago, E. Side Bulldog said:

The evidence is in plain sight.  Putin speaks publicly.  Trump capitulates publicly.

 

It's been that way since before the election, which is why the Russian Federation interfered in our elections.  Trump invited them publicly.  

 

Out of curiosity:

 

How does a peace deal with the DPRK help Putin or Russia's interests?

How does obliterating 200+ "Russian" troops in Syria help Putin or Russia's interests?

How does openly supporting the overthrow of the Mullahs in Iran help Putin or Russia's interests?

How does arming the Ukrainians help Putin or Russia's interests?

[3rdnlng]

[Deranged Rhino]

10 minutes ago, E. Side Bulldog said:

1. What imaginary peace deal are you imagining?  There is a legitimate difference between show teasers and what plays out.  Hold your show ponies.

 

Fair, we can wait to see what happens. But would you at least concede that Russia profits from having Kim in power and nuclearized - and removing him would be against Putin's geopolitical strategy?

 

11 minutes ago, E. Side Bulldog said:

2. There's also a difference between "Russian" and "Rossiskaya" in the Russian language.  Cossacks are "Rossiskaya."   Cossacks fighters are not Russian, according to Putin (ethnically), nor are Ukrainians, Jews, or Tartars.  Putin, for the most part will have non-ethnic Rossiskayas do the suicide missions chalk it up to experience when they are slaughtered.

 

 

They weren't on a suicide mission. They weren't attacking a US base. The force was wiped out for simply amassing. That's a massive shift in the ROE in theater. It wasn't just a simple artillery or bombing run... it was three hours of sustained fire from B-52 and drones. B-52s versus infantry. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/13/russian-mercenaries-killed-us-airstrikes-syria

 

That's a message to Putin, speaking in the only language he understands: force. The message wasn't designed to simply kill 200+ mercenaries - it was to tell Putin to stay out of what's to come in Iran. 

 

Leaving the nationality of the fighters aside, the forces wiped out were Putin proxies. Proxies who for the past several years had been allowed to amass where they wanted, when they wanted because the ROE prevented the US from engaging. Proxies whom Putin is depending on to maintain control in the proxy war in Syria. Wouldn't you agree losing those forces, and changing the ROE in Syria works directly against Putin and Russia's geopolitical strategy? 

 

If not, how? 

 

17 minutes ago, E. Side Bulldog said:

3. It would be in Russia's interests for Trump to create a power vacuum in Iran that the Russian Federation can exploit.  I bet the Cossack special forces enter the vacuum Trump would stir up for Russia first.  

  

 

Respectfully, this is inaccurate. Russia would not benefit from a power vacuum in Iran. Any vacuum in Iran would immediately be filled by western interests who thrive in the educated, and wealthy, middle class of Iran. If the Mullahs were thrown out tomorrow, Iran would still have a functioning government - one who aligns almost immediately with western interests and ideals. 

 

The Mullahs and Putin are allies. They have major influence in Iran as things stand. Any changes to the status quo in Iran would be devastating to Russia's geopolitical interests. This isn't opinion, this is fact. 

 

The last administration went out of it's away to avoid angering or disrupting the Mullah's grip on Iran. That's why the media went nuts when Trump tweeted this - a simple statement which most Americans would agree with. Most Americans agree we should support brave people working to overthrow dictators... 

 

22 minutes ago, E. Side Bulldog said:

4. Arming the Ukrainians gives the Russian Federation an excuse to fire back and be offensive.  What weapons we are giving the Ukrainians is just appeasing the military industrial complex and adding fuel to Russia's fire.  (similar to arming teachers here is the US.  NRA, and Russia are like, cha-ching - arms race)  

 

We are in more agreement than you probably think about the MiC - but that's a secondary issue to this question. Your first statement, that arming the Ukrainians gives Russia the excuse to go on the offensive, is - imo - inaccurate. 

 

If Putin wanted to take the rest of the Ukraine in '14 he could have. There was nothing to stop him, 44 went out of his way to make that clear. The only way NATO could have stopped Putin from taking the entire country was to go nuclear - and there's no way that would happen to save the Ukraine. Putin knew this. He could have taken the country. But he stopped. 

 

Arming the Ukrainians isn't going to give Putin an excuse to push forward, it's giving the Ukrainians the means to push back. It's a decisively bad deal for Putin. Which is why many in the press clamored for Trump to do this, going as far as to say him not doing it was proof he was in Putin's pocket. It wasn't until after he sent arms that the narrative changed to it's polar opposite. 

 

 

To sum up - each one of these issues is a much bigger blow to Putin's plans for empire than you're giving them credit for. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[Deranged Rhino]

18 minutes ago, E. Side Bulldog said:

That's well argued.  I'm only shortening it for the folks with small phones, not out of disrespect. 

 

 Appreciate the conversation. 

 

19 minutes ago, E. Side Bulldog said:

I think you're underestimating Russia's influence in Iran, vs. our own capabilities.  The incentive for making our Iran nuclear deal was to leverage them away from Russia and towards the West.  If Trump blows up the deal, that leaves Iran butt-hurt toward us.  You'd be counting on a pro-Western revolution in Iran in order to swing influence in America's favor, whereas Russia's already their buddy. 

 

The Iran deal is a much longer conversation (for me), but my thoughts on it aside, you're correct that was how the deal was sold to the public and the logic given at the time. Trump tearing up the agreement would piss off the Mullahs. No question.

 

But per the bolded: What I'm suggesting though is that the Mullahs are on the verge of being thrown out of power by the Iranian people. The people who, as we know now, did not get any of the promised economic benefit from the over $150 billion in cash the US gave to the Mullahs as part of the deal. That's part of the reason why they have been protesting for months - the Mullahs kept most of it for themselves/Hezbollah and gave the rest to their puppet masters in Moscow and Beijing, now the people are mad and there's been a run on the banks. 

 

If the Mullahs fall - without requiring the traditional US intervention (boots on the ground, bombing campaigns and long term occupation), the government which stands will not be friendly to Moscow (imo). It would almost immediately look to the GCC and the west for support and economic aid.  Russia couldn't afford to put the kind of money into the economy that the west could. 

 

27 minutes ago, E. Side Bulldog said:

We'll have to see where the line is drawn in the Ukraine.  I think your point is valid, but it will require some major follow through and teeth to not serve as a convenient excuse for Putin to extend his empire.  Western "aggression" is his justification at home, in the Russian media, for these advances.  I don't see the actual deterrent in what Trump has done at all.

 

 

You're right, without question Putin will always use the Ukraine as propaganda at home. It's what he does. Another thing to consider, by arming the Ukrainians - even if it's not going to get the Russians out of Crimea (which it won't) - it forces Putin to maintain/increase the resources he has to dump into Crimea to keep it secure. By not arming them, we would be helping Putin keep costs low. 

 

30 minutes ago, E. Side Bulldog said:

Big McMaster fan, though.

 

I'm more skeptical of McMaster personally, though a fan of Mattis and Kelly. 

 

[boyst]

2 hours ago, E. Side Bulldog said:

1. What imaginary peace deal are you imagining?  There is a legitimate difference between show teasers and what plays out.  Hold your show ponies.

 

2. There's also a difference between "Russian" and "Rossiskaya" in the Russian language.  Cossacks are "Rossiskaya."   Cossacks fighters are not Russian, according to Putin (ethnically), nor are Ukrainians, Jews, or Tartars.  Putin, for the most part will have non-ethnic Rossiskayas do the suicide missions chalk it up to experience when they are slaughtered.

 

3. It would be in Russia's interests for Trump to create a power vacuum in Iran that the Russian Federation can exploit.  I bet the Cossack special forces enter the vacuum Trump would stir up for Russia first.  

 

4. Arming the Ukrainians gives the Russian Federation an excuse to fire back and be offensive.  What weapons we are giving the Ukrainians is just appeasing the military industrial complex and adding fuel to Russia's fire.  (similar to arming teachers here is the US.  NRA, and Russia are like, cha-ching - arms race)  

So you coming here like this and now you need to show proof that you're not just a !@#$ing retard with emotional #feels

[row_33]

27 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

So you coming here like this and now you need to show proof that you're not just a !@#$ing retard with emotional #feels

 

It was a good set of answers, you are free to disagree with them.

 

[boyst]

7 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

It was a good set of answers, you are free to disagree with them.

 

It wasn't good sets of answers, it was literally every single major byline of media reporting period the same reports which get manipulated every month when little facts change. I don't often agree with trans Greg but he has been sourcing is information and there is very little doubt that what he says is inaccurate.

 

He presented no true rebuttal other than his feelings and a pasted version of what is already out there

[Deranged Rhino]

42 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

It wasn't good sets of answers, it was literally every single major byline of media reporting period the same reports which get manipulated every month when little facts change. I don't often agree with trans Greg but he has been sourcing is information and there is very little doubt that what he says is inaccurate.

 

He presented no true rebuttal other than his feelings and a pasted version of what is already out there

 

I didn't take offense to it at all. I took all as honest opinions and a willingness to engage. That's when this place is at it's best imo. 

[Warren Zevon]

On 3/13/2018 at 3:26 PM, Bob in Mich said:

Boyst, why are you such an ass?  Do you have to work at it or does it come easy to you?

 

Its easiest to ignore the perv

[boyst]

22 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

Well, you guys are most welcome.  I had no idea you all appreciated my writing so much. I will continue....just for all of my new friends here.

 

I tried to answer the question of why some in the Trump administration wanted to establish secret communication lines with the Kremlin POST election.  Given that the proposed conspiracy PRIOR TO THE ELECTION involved tweaking the ongoing social media to more favor Trump along with strategically timing the release of hacked emails, not a lot needed to be communicated day to day. 

 

ONCE ELECTED, if a conspiracy was in place, much more back and forth was likely to happen and the administration would want to shield those conversations from US intelligence agencies.  You may not like that explanation but it is clearly possible and I would say plausible.

 

I readily admit that I don't know how things transpired and that I am speculating.  I would propose that most posting against me here do not know what transpired either.  They just say with conviction that they do....which is clearly just horseshit.

Somewhere you asked why I'm such an ass. It's because 99% of the world reacts to everything hysterically. Reacts with emotion and without logic. Reacts to the victim and not the assailant. Reacts to the symtom not the cause.  To simply look at anything that is going on with Trump, to simply look at anything with the DOJ and cast judgement already beyond all doubt is a bias that most never admit, including yourself. 

 

I couldn't stand the idea of trump. Now I'm warming up to him. That isn't even faxtoring in Russia.  The things he has done with best Korea, the wall, business, tax and just flushing the system are good in my eyes.  I choose those good things over the #mean words that hurt people's #feelings.  

 

And I'm sick and God damn tired of people being sensetive little pussies.  Billy Graham died and everyone acted all hurt. Stephen Hawking died and some douchebag sky fairy lover criticized him. Yet, so many attack Christianity unchecked.

 

The hypocrisy of this world creates bigots.  

 

There are many things I am not and many things I am. But I am not a hypocrite nor a bigot.  And I am never shy to voice my opinions in person anywhere I choose. I'm a guy who was going to wear a trump 2020 shirt to the vagina monlogues until my friend refused to go for wearing the shirt.  I own the shirt because it's as stupid as obamas hope shirt, it's just funny.  I get away wtih being this type of !@#$ because I know enough about the subjects and am actually intelligent enough to carry on conversations and win arguments in person. Beyond that I'm of fairly large stature and have been told I'm intimidating so people generally don't !@#$ with me.

 

But, I'm an ass because some people need to be me because of pussies like so many here.  I'd rather be an ass than a kitty.

[DC Tom]

23 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

I tried to answer the question of why some in the Trump administration wanted to establish secret communication lines with the Kremlin POST election.  Given that the proposed conspiracy PRIOR TO THE ELECTION involved tweaking the ongoing social media to more favor Trump along with strategically timing the release of hacked emails, not a lot needed to be communicated day to day. 

 

ONCE ELECTED, if a conspiracy was in place, much more back and forth was likely to happen and the administration would want to shield those conversations from US intelligence agencies.  You may not like that explanation but it is clearly possible and I would say plausible.

 

So prior to the election there was a conspiracy to troll Facebook, then after the election a conspiracy to hide that they trolled Facebook.  Neither of which requires a conspiracy, since trolling Facebook is not illegal.

 

Do you realize how thoroughly retarded that is?

[boyst]

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

So prior to the election there was a conspiracy to troll Facebook, then after the election a conspiracy to hide that they trolled Facebook.  Neither of which requires a conspiracy, since trolling Facebook is not illegal.

 

Do you realize how thoroughly retarded that is?

No, he doesn't. But it's okay because apparently I'm an !@#$ because I believe he's too stupid to realize he is compromised in his bias

Edited March 15, 2018 by Boyst62

[row_33]

1 hour ago, Boyst62 said:

No, he doesn't. But it's okay because apparently I'm an !@#$ because I believe he's too stupid to realize he is compromised in his bias

 

you and DC both have very correct views on the situation

 

i just ignore the fool

 

it's heaven to see it tell me his trash is being ignored

 

 

[thebug]

9 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I didn't take offense to it at all. I took all as honest opinions and a willingness to engage. That's when this place is at it's best imo. 

Why are you replying to yourself? 

[boyst]

12 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

you and DC both have very correct views on the situation

 

i just ignore the fool

 

it's heaven to see it tell me his trash is being ignored

 

 

There are few cases that bans should be put in place. He's one of 3 or 4 

 

[thebug]

2 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

There are few cases that bans should be put in place. He's one of 3 or 4 

 

What # on that list are you? 

[Bob in Mich]

18 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

There are few cases that bans should be put in place. He's one of 3 or 4 

 

 

This is pretty funny.  I should be banned, eh?  For what exactly?  Disagreeing?

 

Wasn't it just a few posts ago you talked about how tough you are?  Not tough enough to read my mind searing posts though, huh?

[Tiberius]

10 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

This is pretty funny.  I should be banned, eh?  For what exactly?  Disagreeing?

 

Wasn't it just a few posts ago you talked about how tough you are?  Not tough enough to read my mind searing posts though, huh?

Having an illegal opinion! 

[boyst]

40 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

This is pretty funny.  I should be banned, eh?  For what exactly?  Disagreeing?

 

Wasn't it just a few posts ago you talked about how tough you are?  Not tough enough to read my mind searing posts though, huh?

I thought he was quoting bug.  That pest is all over the place and keep track of, infesting all things.

[row_33]

1 hour ago, Boyst62 said:

There are few cases that bans should be put in place. He's one of 3 or 4 

 

 

bans should be for really rancid stuff, they are just silly and insutling

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Again, Nader is a CLOSE FRIEND of WJC and the CF.

 

Which makes this par for the course. 

 

What people think is happening with Mueller is not. 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

If this is true it raises some questions about whether your theory about whether Mueller has moved his investigation from Russian-Trump Campaign  collusion over to K-Street misdeeds will remain plausible/valid.?

 

Another question is how exactly does the NYT know what subpoenas the SC office is issuing?  Thought those weren't PACER/FOIA accessible during the investigation.  (Could be wrong on that count though.)

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Taro T said:

 

If this is true it raises some questions about whether your theory about whether Mueller has moved his investigation from Russian-Trump Campaign  collusion over to K-Street misdeeds will remain plausible/valid.?

 

Another question is how exactly does the NYT know what subpoenas the SC office is issuing?  Thought those weren't PACER/FOIA accessible during the investigation.  (Could be wrong on that count though.)

 

If true it would cut against that theory on the surface - which is why I wanted to post it. Color me skeptical for the time being, but I'm willing to change my mind when presented with new evidence.

 

So far, this isn't really evidence of anything - but it's a development worth noting.