Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 I really don't like picking on people's weight -- but Jerry does himself no favor with how he wears his pants. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: He testified over 80 times previously and never looked this bad. He looks bad today because he's either too old (doubtful) or he's under tremendous pressure and knows he's caught red handed pushing a partisan investigation, not one rooted in a desire to find justice. I dont think he is caught red handed at anything, i think the main problem as i see it, and just my quick observation...sounds like he is a CEO that did not understand the day to day, and had little to do with the actual writing of the report..the dude who cant testify is the guy who did the work, and he is the one who prolly should be testifying. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 1 minute ago, plenzmd1 said: I dont think he is caught red handed at anything, i think the main problem as i see it, and just my quick observation...sounds like he is a CEO that did not understand the day to day, and had little to do with the actual writing of the report..the dude who cant testify is the guy who did the work, and he is the one who prolly should be testifying. Meaning it was entirely staff driven (Weissman) rather than Mueller doing the legwork. They are caught red handed with Mifsud. There's no other way to slice that apple. They had him dead to rights for lying, yet didn't charge him because doing so would destroy the initial seed which the CI investigation was based on. That means they weren't trying to get to the truth, but to a specific political outcome. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: Meaning it was entirely staff driven (Weissman) rather than Mueller doing the legwork. They are caught red handed with Mifsud. There's no other way to slice that apple. They had him dead to rights for lying, yet didn't charge him because doing so would destroy the initial seed which the CI investigation was based on. That means they weren't trying to get to the truth, but to a specific political outcome. Entirely is not did "not oversee the day to day" He did not testify why they did not charge him, that is called "speculation" on your part in all the Law and Orders I have watched! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, plenzmd1 said: Entirely is not did "not oversee the day to day" He did not testify why they did not charge him, that is called "speculation" on your part in all the Law and Orders I have watched! There's no other reason NOT to charge Mifsud. None. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: There's no other reason NOT to charge Mifsud. None. objection: Speculation!!!! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Highlights so far: COLLINS: in colloquial terms, collusion and conspiracy synonymous?MUELLER: no.COLLINS: in you report [citation, you say they are]MUELLER: what i’m asking is whereCOLLINS: I just read itMUELLER: I stand by the report. ? It's a rehash. Like those TV show episodes where they cobble together pieces of previous shows. The pattern is pretty clear: Reading practiced answers to the dem questions, stumbling, can't remember, running out the clock to the GOP RADCLIFFE: [citation]“Which DOJ policy says . . . that an investigative person is not exonerated if innocence is not conclusively determined?”MUELLER: “uh, uh, I can’t say.”RADCLIFFE: Because . . . it doesn’t exist. RADCLIFFE: “Special Counsel applied this . . . the very first line of your report . . . here’s the problem, you don’t do that. The SC made neither a prosecution decision or a declination decision . . . you didn’t follow the special regulations. You wrote 180 pages about decisions not reached. Volume 2 was not authorized . . written in violation DOD principle.” “outside my purview”“outside my purview”“outside my purview” “I can’t get into that...” Jim Jordan (R) caught him in trying to avoid the question when the answer is in the report. give thanks for Jim Jordan. Chris Wallace: “This has been a disaster for the democrats and a disaster for the reputation of Robert Mueller.” ... and this coming from an anti-Trumper. Hmm. Mueller looks and acts terrible. This is backfiring big time on the Democrats. It’s obvious that Mueller had little to do with the report. He was just a figurehead. Although, Dems are getting their sound bites and circus to wee wee up their base. The media will simply not report the valid points the GOP brings up . 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted July 24, 2019 Author Share Posted July 24, 2019 Boy, what a smoke screen! 2 minutes ago, B-Man said: Highlights so far: COLLINS: in colloquial terms, collusion and conspiracy synonymous?MUELLER: no.COLLINS: in you report [citation, you say they are]MUELLER: what i’m asking is whereCOLLINS: I just read itMUELLER: I stand by the report. ? It's a rehash. Like those TV show episodes where they cobble together pieces of previous shows. The pattern is pretty clear: Reading practiced answers to the dem questions, stumbling, can't remember, running out the clock to the GOP RADCLIFFE: [citation]“Which DOJ policy says . . . that an investigative person is not exonerated if innocence is not conclusively determined?”MUELLER: “uh, uh, I can’t say.”RADCLIFFE: Because . . . it doesn’t exist. RADCLIFFE: “Special Counsel applied this . . . the very first line of your report . . . here’s the problem, you don’t do that. The SC made neither a prosecution decision or a declination decision . . . you didn’t follow the special regulations. You wrote 180 pages about decisions not reached. Volume 2 was not authorized . . written in violation DOD principle.” “outside my purview”“outside my purview”“outside my purview” “I can’t get into that...” Jim Jordan (R) caught him in trying to avoid the question when the answer is in the report. give thanks for Jim Jordan. Chris Wallace: “This has been a disaster for the democrats and a disaster for the reputation of Robert Mueller.” ... and this coming from an anti-Trumper. Hmm. Mueller looks and acts terrible. This is backfiring big time on the Democrats. It’s obvious that Mueller had little to do with the report. He was just a figurehead. Although, Dems are getting their sound bites and circus to wee wee up their base. The media will simply not report the valid points the GOP brings up . Well, Trump did order someone to lie, and tried to get him make a fake record. Obstruction 14 minutes ago, Doc said: That's a separate issue. And Barry should have done something about it. It's an issue, a stolen election is an issue. Only traitors would think otherwise 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 It's HILARIOUS how no one on the left is even bothering to talk about Vol I, they're not even trying to spin or defend Mueller's non answers or answers on Vol I. That shows how scared they actually are. They're ***** terrified. 4 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said: objection: Speculation!!!! Give me a better answer. They charged everyone else who lied to them (and even some who didn't lie). But they didn't charge Mifsud -- because doing so would expose him to discovery and cross, which would expose him as a western intelligence asset, not a Russian asset as Mueller's report claims. As McCabe claimed. As Comey claimed. This is just like Nader. They had his laptop. Knew there was CP on it, yet they didn't charge him because they wanted his testimony for the report... 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: It's HILARIOUS how no one on the left is even bothering to talk about Vol I, they're not even trying to spin or defend Mueller's non answers or answers on Vol I. That shows how scared they actually are. They're ***** terrified. why would they? Am I missing something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 1 minute ago, plenzmd1 said: why would they? Am I missing something? ... Because for 3 years people like Nadler and Swalell and Jeffries have told the American public that Trump was a traitor and they had evidence. Mueller would prove it. yet now, crickets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 23 minutes ago, jrober38 said: No one arguing here is going to agree on obstruction, but does anyone actually care that the Russians interfered in the election? I'm far more concerned with Google's interference in our 2020 election. 8 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Buck: "You unfairly shifted the burden of proof to the president." 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: I'm far more concerned with Google's interference in our 2020 election. 10 million votes influenced in 2016 at least. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 (edited) Savage destruction of Mueller from Rep. Gohmert Gohmert: Did you know that your entire team was full of animus towards Donald Trump ? Mueller: Know what? Gohmert: Your investigator Peter Strzok hated Trump. Mueller: Ok. Gohmert: You didn’t know that? Mueller: *mumbles* Gaetz: Can you state that the Steele dossier wasn't Russian disinformation? Mueller: Dossier is before my time. Gaetz: So were Manafort's crimes. You charged him. Mueller: Not my purview. Gaetz: IT IS IN YOUR REPORT! Edited July 24, 2019 by B-Man 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: Buck: "You unfairly shifted the burden of proof to the president." 10 million votes influenced in 2016 at least. But really...the Russians were found to spend $3M on influencing the election...which somehow the Clinton campaign and their billion-dollar war chest couldn't overcome? Russian Facebook memes somehow counted for more than the 25 years that people had to form their opinions on Hillary Clinton? The "Russian influence" story is prima facie ludicrous. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 She's not wrong..................... Rep. @Jim_Jordan just rips the bark off Mueller: "You can charge 13 Russians, no one has ever heard of, you can charge all kinds of people around the president with false statements, but the guy who puts this whole story in motion, you can’t charge him?" . 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Cicilline is one of the worst ones, he made more promises than anyone not named Schiff about Trump's treason and the evidence to support it... yet all his questions are on: wait for it... obstruction. Liars gonna keep lying. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 (edited) this dude killing it on Lewandowski..sure sounds like obstruction did he answer the last question? 1000 prosecutors? Edited July 24, 2019 by plenzmd1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrober38 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 (edited) Mueller can't be anymore clear that he thinks Trump obstructed justice. It will be very interesting to see what happens once he's out of office. Edited July 24, 2019 by jrober38 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted July 24, 2019 Author Share Posted July 24, 2019 The point is made, Russia attacked our country and Trump took illegal actions to stop the investigation. 8 minutes ago, DC Tom said: I'm far more concerned with Google's interference in our 2020 election. I bet you are! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, jrober38 said: Mueller can't be anymore clear that he thinks Trump obstructed justice. Will be very interesting to see what happens once he's out of office. He could have been more clear in his report. Instead he punted. And RR and Barr ruled. It's over. No obstruction will be brought, now or after. That's why the focus on it by the left is so silly and a waste of time. ESPECIALLY when you look back at how this started. This didn't start with an accusation of obstruction. It started with accusations of TREASON. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted July 24, 2019 Author Share Posted July 24, 2019 The internet is against Trump now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, jrober38 said: Mueller can't be anymore clear that he thinks Trump obstructed justice. It will be very interesting to see what happens once he's out of office. Yep, everyone has their preconceived notions confirmed by this hearing, but nothing changes. This is just a campaign stunt. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Cicilline is trying his best to lie here... Mueller's investigation was not ended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrober38 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: He could have been more clear in his report. Instead he punted. And RR and Barr ruled. It's over. No obstruction will be brought, now or after. That's why the focus on it by the left is so silly and a waste of time. ESPECIALLY when you look back at how this started. This didn't start with an accusation of obstruction. It started with accusations of TREASON. Doubtful. If it was over, they wouldn't be interviewing Mueller right now. Everything he's saying about obstruction was in the report. 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: Yep, everyone has their preconceived notions confirmed by this hearing, but nothing changes. This is just a campaign stunt. If I was Trump I'd be very worried. Mueller has said numerous times today that Trump can be charged once he's out of office. Edited July 24, 2019 by jrober38 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 3 minutes ago, B-Man said: She's not wrong..................... Rep. @Jim_Jordan just rips the bark off Mueller: "You can charge 13 Russians, no one has ever heard of, you can charge all kinds of people around the president with false statements, but the guy who puts this whole story in motion, you can’t charge him?" . I guess everyone hears what they want to hear... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Whoever this is questioning is stupid...reads @Deranged Rhino twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, jrober38 said: Doubtful. If it was over, they wouldn't be interviewing Mueller right now. Everything he's saying about obstruction was in the report. He didn't make a conclusion on obstruction in the report -- so he could have been more clear, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Gun Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 2 minutes ago, Tiberius said: The internet is against Trump now No it's not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrober38 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: He didn't make a conclusion on obstruction in the report -- so he could have been more clear, right? He clearly stated in the report that Trump may have obstructed justice around 12 times, that he can't indict a sitting President, and that if they felt Trump didn't commit any crimes they'd have said so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 He didn't reach any conclusions in the report before he wrote the report? Time machine FTW. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Having listened to it for about an hour the ONLY thing we’ve learned is that Mueller is old and clueless. Where do they find these people? I’d have fired his arse for his utter inability to have any idea what he’s doing at work on any given day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 1 minute ago, jrober38 said: He clearly stated in the report that Trump may have obstructed justice around 12 times, that he can't indict a sitting President, and that if they felt Trump didn't commit any crimes they'd have said so. That's not how it works. Which is the point. That answer is a punt, not a real answer from a SCO. Which is why it's over. Barr and RR ruled already. It's done. Anyone saying it's not is lying to you. Like they lied to you about Russia working with Trump to steal the election for the last three years. Sooner or later you have to stop believing the words of proven liars. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 1 minute ago, Buftex said: I guess everyone hears what they want to hear... Or, like an adult, you could actually listen to the questions and answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 3 minutes ago, jrober38 said: If I was Trump I'd be very worried. Mueller has said numerous times today that Trump can be charged once he's out of office. He can't even be impeached for it now. And you're only hearing what you want to hear. There's no evidence of obstruction, just vague feelings and interpretations of conflicting opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Here comes Swalwell! Can't wait to see how this guy ***** this up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 18 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Give me a better answer. They charged everyone else who lied to them (and even some who didn't lie). But they didn't charge Mifsud -- because doing so would expose him to discovery and cross, which would expose him as a western intelligence asset, not a Russian asset as Mueller's report claims. As McCabe claimed. As Comey claimed. This is just like Nader. They had his laptop. Knew there was CP on it, yet they didn't charge him because they wanted his testimony for the report... Truly you are speculating on the reason..do you disagree it is speculation? Pretty simple i think??? 14 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: ... Because for 3 years people like Nadler and Swalell and Jeffries have told the American public that Trump was a traitor and they had evidence. Mueller would prove it. yet now, crickets. I dont think anyone is wondering whether the president would be charged with collusion if not the president, he would not. However there is plenty of question if he would be charged with obstruction if not the president..so that's the focus..as it should be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubs Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, jrober38 said: Doubtful. If it was over, they wouldn't be interviewing Mueller right now. Everything he's saying about obstruction was in the report. If I was Trump I'd be very worried. Mueller has said numerous times today that Trump can be charged once he's out of office. Guess they will have to wait for 2024 for that and I’m sure Nikki Haley or Mike Pence will give Trump a gentleman’s pardon. Edited July 24, 2019 by dubs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 Trump wants to fire Mueller but his attorney tells him it would be construed as obstruction...so Trump DOESN’T FIRE HIM! Where’s the story here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 24, 2019 Share Posted July 24, 2019 4 minutes ago, jrober38 said: He clearly stated in the report that Trump may have obstructed justice around 12 times, that he can't indict a sitting President, and that if they felt Trump didn't commit any crimes they'd have said so. "[C]learly stated Trump may have..." Do you even understand how stupid that sounds? How do you indict on 12 counts of "may have obstructed?" 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts