Page 3 of 4

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 1:56 am
by USN_Hokie
HokieFanDC wrote:
Mueller has been around long enough, and has been reputable, respected, and distinguished for a long time, that it should take more than Newt bitching, to get rid of him.
That's a lazy, sophist argument. Let me translate: "Ignore all the evidence presented in this thread that he's disreputable...because he's reputable." Also, I don't even need to point out the strawman you threw in there. Good job.

This is usually the part of the thread where you say the words instead of framing a legitimate argument.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:00 am
by USN_Hokie
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote: They withheld evidence in a previous case.
Who, and what cases?
Did you or did you not admit in another thread that Trump had the right to fire Comey? If so, the entire premise of this purse fight is moot.
I didn't "admit" that, that's a bizarre way to put it, but Trump certainly has the authority to do so.
Not sure how that is meaningful.
Great. THEN WHY are you arguing that this is anything but a partisan witch hunt? The entire premise for you arguing in this thread is illogical if you agree Trump was within his powers to fire Comey.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:43 am
by RiverguyVT
HokieFanDC wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:Mueller needs to go

Why??
Comey essentially picked him by creating this situation.
His conflicts of interest where Comey is involved.
His hires so far are just the opposite of impartial.
The first one may be valid.
The second one is valid.
The third one is whiney nonsense. Anyone he picks is going to have some political affiliation. They are professionals, though.
Whiney or not, any one of these reasons alone is enough by itself.

The next 25 posts aren't needed if one reason, alone, is enough.
This whole thing is a circus, unnecessary, etc.
Mueller has been around long enough, and has been reputable, respected, and distinguished for a long time, that it should take more than Newt bitching, to get rid of him.
So, 2 sets of rules. That's your answer.
Newt talking about the conditions listed, does not create the conditions listed. Newt has nothing to do with the fact that the conditions exist.

There exists a very real conflict of interest. Period. End of story.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:53 am
by UpstateSCHokie
If Mueller truly has all of this "honor" & "integrity" like the media & Democrats are running around telling us, then he would resign because there is now a clear conflict of interest if he's changing his focus to "obstruction."

Although I have no idea what Trump could be "obstructing" since the whole collusion conspiracy theory has been proven to be BS. Doesn't there have to be a crime for obstruction to occur? Or does the rule of law not apply in a witch hunt?

=====================================

Jarrett: Mueller Needs to Resign – “This Is the Kind of Stuff Over Which Lawyers Get Disbarred” (VIDEO)
Jim Hoft
Jun 15th, 2017 6:13 pm

FOX News legal expert Gregg Jarrett suggested today Robert Mueller should disqualify himself from special counsel due to his relationship with James Comey.

The special counsel could not find any evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia so now they are going for obstruction of justice charges according to the latest deep state leads to the liberal media.

Donald Trump responded tonight to this ongoing witch hunt.

He asked about Hillary’s crooked dealings with Russia.
And Hillary Clinton’s obstruction of justice.
Gregg Jarrett: If you look at the special counsel statute it says you cannot serve as special counsel if you have a personal relationship with someone who is central to the case. If this Washington Post story is true, it’s now Trump against Comey. Comey is now the star witness, the key witness against Trump. Well, guess what? Comey and Mueller are longtime close personal friends, partners, allies. They were joined at the hip at the DOJ and FBI. It’s a mentor-protege relationship. How is this fair to Donald Trump because Mueller is now going to decide whether to believe his good friend or the man who fired his good friend…

… This is the kind of stuff over which lawyers get disbarred. If does not resign then Rod Rosenstein out to fire Mueller.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/06 ... red-video/

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:34 pm
by USN_Hokie
Image

They have nothing. Rosenstein is telegraphing that everything in the news is bullshit. The media and establishment are trying to create a scenario where Trump fires Mueller to try and trip him on a technicality in the law or some nonsense...because they have nothing.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:41 pm
by cwtcr hokie
USN_Hokie wrote:Image

They have nothing. Rosenstein is telegraphing that everything in the news is bullshit. The media and establishment are trying to create a scenario where Trump fires Mueller to try and trip him on a technicality in the law or some nonsense...because they have nothing.
yea, that is what struck me, Trumps lawyers even said releasing that someone is under investigation is not how things are done, this morning it is now Jared Kushner, this is such a crap show but at least we know they are moving fast as nobody is even talking about russian collusion anymore

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:51 pm
by 133743Hokie
HokieFanDC wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:Mueller needs to go

Why??
Comey essentially picked him by creating this situation.
His conflicts of interest where Comey is involved.
His hires so far are just the opposite of impartial.
The first one may be valid.
The second one is valid.
The third one is whiney nonsense. Anyone he picks is going to have some political affiliation. They are professionals, though.
Whiney or not, any one of these reasons alone is enough by itself.

The next 25 posts aren't needed if one reason, alone, is enough.
This whole thing is a circus, unnecessary, etc.
Mueller has been around long enough, and has been reputable, respected, and distinguished for a long time, that it should take more than Newt bitching, to get rid of him.
People thought that about Comey too. But once he got out of his element and into the realm of the politicos he got eaten up. Mueller is another honest and forthright guy, but he established that reputation in his narrow field of expertise and activity. He is now stepping outside of that zone and into the swamp of politics. Can he withstand the tug? Comey couldn't and it ruined his credibility.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:58 pm
by 133743Hokie
I always thought that a special counsel/special prosecutor was brought in to investigate after it was determined that laws had been broken. Instead it looks like one is being brought in to dig and probe to try and find something that might have occurred that might have been illegal. Seems bass-akwards to me.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 1:13 pm
by UpstateSCHokie
133743Hokie wrote:I always thought that a special counsel/special prosecutor was brought in to investigate after it was determined that laws had been broken. Instead it looks like one is being brought in to dig and probe to try and find something that night have occurred that night have been illegal. Seems bass-akwards to me.
That's the difference between an investigation & a witch hunt.

An investigation takes place AFTER it's been established that crime has been committed.

A witch hunt takes place to target an individual or group of individuals in the hopes of finding a crime, making up a crime, or causing the target to commit a process crime as a result of the witch hunt.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:54 pm
by HooFighter
USN_Hokie wrote:Image

They have nothing. Rosenstein is telegraphing that everything in the news is bullshit. The media and establishment are trying to create a scenario where Trump fires Mueller to try and trip him on a technicality in the law or some nonsense...because they have nothing.
This probably means that part of the Steele dossier is getting ready to "leak". :lol:

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:03 pm
by RiverguyVT
HooFighter wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:Image

They have nothing. Rosenstein is telegraphing that everything in the news is bullshit. The media and establishment are trying to create a scenario where Trump fires Mueller to try and trip him on a technicality in the law or some nonsense...because they have nothing.
This probably means that part of the Steele dossier is getting ready to "leak". :lol:
I see what you did there!
:lol:

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:09 pm
by HokieFanDC
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
Mueller has been around long enough, and has been reputable, respected, and distinguished for a long time, that it should take more than Newt bitching, to get rid of him.
That's a lazy, sophist argument. Let me translate: "Ignore all the evidence presented in this thread that he's disreputable...because he's reputable." Also, I don't even need to point out the strawman you threw in there. Good job.

This is usually the part of the thread where you say the words instead of framing a legitimate argument.
The evidence is weak. There are now 6 people known to be on the team. 2 have donated solely to Dems. 1 has donated to both parties. 3 have not made donations to any party. All are respected attorneys. Mueller's staff is not a reason for him to go.

You can argue that his relationship with Comey is reason to take him off the case, but that's opinion, not fact. I lean toward it being enough that he should recuse himself, but it's not black and white.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:11 pm
by HokieFanDC
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote: They withheld evidence in a previous case.
Who, and what cases?
Did you or did you not admit in another thread that Trump had the right to fire Comey? If so, the entire premise of this purse fight is moot.
I didn't "admit" that, that's a bizarre way to put it, but Trump certainly has the authority to do so.
Not sure how that is meaningful.
Great. THEN WHY are you arguing that this is anything but a partisan witch hunt? The entire premise for you arguing in this thread is illogical if you agree Trump was within his powers to fire Comey.
Being within his powers doesn't mean that the intent behind the firing doesn't break the law.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:13 pm
by cwtcr hokie
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote: They withheld evidence in a previous case.
Who, and what cases?
Did you or did you not admit in another thread that Trump had the right to fire Comey? If so, the entire premise of this purse fight is moot.
I didn't "admit" that, that's a bizarre way to put it, but Trump certainly has the authority to do so.
Not sure how that is meaningful.
That is the whole point of the special prosecutor, Comey in open testimony said he nor the FBI was affected by anything Trump did or said, the other officials that Trump supposedly per the Wa Po pressured into making waves on the Flynn investigation have also testified that they were never pressured at all by anyone. Comey and ALL AGREE that Trump could fire Comey for any reason at any time, the dems wanted him fired months and months ago!!!

So what is the special prosecutor for? The collusion that has already been debunked and Sessions destroyed during his testimony. Do you dems think that all these people are suddenly going to do a 180 and throw Trump under the bus? Nobody is that dumb

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:18 pm
by HokieFanDC
RiverguyVT wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote: Comey essentially picked him by creating this situation.
His conflicts of interest where Comey is involved.
His hires so far are just the opposite of impartial.
The first one may be valid.
The second one is valid.
The third one is whiney nonsense. Anyone he picks is going to have some political affiliation. They are professionals, though.
Whiney or not, any one of these reasons alone is enough by itself.

The next 25 posts aren't needed if one reason, alone, is enough.
This whole thing is a circus, unnecessary, etc.
Mueller has been around long enough, and has been reputable, respected, and distinguished for a long time, that it should take more than Newt bitching, to get rid of him.
So, 2 sets of rules. That's your answer.
Newt talking about the conditions listed, does not create the conditions listed. Newt has nothing to do with the fact that the conditions exist.

There exists a very real conflict of interest. Period. End of story.
2 sets of rules, why do you keep saying that?

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:22 pm
by HokieFanDC
cwtcr hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote: They withheld evidence in a previous case.
Who, and what cases?
Did you or did you not admit in another thread that Trump had the right to fire Comey? If so, the entire premise of this purse fight is moot.
I didn't "admit" that, that's a bizarre way to put it, but Trump certainly has the authority to do so.
Not sure how that is meaningful.
That is the whole point of the special prosecutor, Comey in open testimony said he nor the FBI was affected by anything Trump did or said, the other officials that Trump supposedly per the Wa Po pressured into making waves on the Flynn investigation have also testified that they were never pressured at all by anyone. Comey and ALL AGREE that Trump could fire Comey for any reason at any time, the dems wanted him fired months and months ago!!!

So what is the special prosecutor for? The collusion that has already been debunked and Sessions destroyed during his testimony. Do you dems think that all these people are suddenly going to do a 180 and throw Trump under the bus? Nobody is that dumb
That's not the whole point of the special prosecutor. He wasnt brought in to investigate Trump's firing Comey at all.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:27 pm
by UpstateSCHokie
HokieFanDC wrote:
That's not the whole point of the special prosecutor. He wasnt brought in to investigate Trump's firing Comey at all.
Exactly, so why is that now the focus of the investigation (if we are to believe the WaPo's anonymous sources)? If there's no evidence of Trump collusion, then the "investigation" should be dropped. End of story.

And if Comey is now at the center of this new investigation, the Mueller should resign based on his close relationship with Comey.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:30 pm
by awesome guy
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
That's not the whole point of the special prosecutor. He wasnt brought in to investigate Trump's firing Comey at all.
Exactly, so why is that now the focus of the investigation (if we are to believe the WaPo's anonymous sources)? If there's no evidence of Trump collusion, then the "investigation" should be dropped. End of story.

And if Comey is now at the center of this new investigation, the Mueller should resign based on his close relationship with Comey.
Yep. But it's a witch hunt when they should be investigating the Witch of Chappaqua

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:31 pm
by HokieFanDC
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
That's not the whole point of the special prosecutor. He wasnt brought in to investigate Trump's firing Comey at all.
Exactly, so why is that now the focus of the investigation (if we are to believe the WaPo's anonymous sources)? If there's no evidence of Trump collusion, then the "investigation" should be dropped. End of story.

And if Comey is now at the center of this new investigation, the Mueller should resign based on his close relationship with Comey.
You're making an assumption that Comey is at the center.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:41 pm
by USN_Hokie
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
Mueller has been around long enough, and has been reputable, respected, and distinguished for a long time, that it should take more than Newt bitching, to get rid of him.
That's a lazy, sophist argument. Let me translate: "Ignore all the evidence presented in this thread that he's disreputable...because he's reputable." Also, I don't even need to point out the strawman you threw in there. Good job.

This is usually the part of the thread where you say the words instead of framing a legitimate argument.
The evidence is weak. There are now 6 people known to be on the team. 2 have donated solely to Dems. 1 has donated to both parties. 3 have not made donations to any party. All are respected attorneys. Mueller's staff is not a reason for him to go.

You can argue that his relationship with Comey is reason to take him off the case, but that's opinion, not fact. I lean toward it being enough that he should recuse himself, but it's not black and white.
Like I said - you think that if only half the team are frothing Hillary fanatics, that's moderate. The truth is one is all it takes to poison the well.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:53 pm
by UpstateSCHokie
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
That's not the whole point of the special prosecutor. He wasnt brought in to investigate Trump's firing Comey at all.
Exactly, so why is that now the focus of the investigation (if we are to believe the WaPo's anonymous sources)? If there's no evidence of Trump collusion, then the "investigation" should be dropped. End of story.

And if Comey is now at the center of this new investigation, the Mueller should resign based on his close relationship with Comey.
You're making an assumption that Comey is at the center.
Like I said, if we believe the WaPo's sources, then the Comey firing seems to be at the center of this new "investigation."
The obstruction-of-justice investigation of the president began days after Comey was fired on May 9, according to people familiar with the matter. Mueller’s office has taken up that work, and the preliminary interviews scheduled with intelligence officials indicate that his team is actively pursuing potential witnesses inside and outside the government.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 6289438cd9

What we know for sure is that Trump was NOT under investigation before he fired Comey. And if that's what he was told and that's what he believed, then how could firing Comey be seen as obstructing justice?

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:57 pm
by HokieFanDC
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
Mueller has been around long enough, and has been reputable, respected, and distinguished for a long time, that it should take more than Newt bitching, to get rid of him.
That's a lazy, sophist argument. Let me translate: "Ignore all the evidence presented in this thread that he's disreputable...because he's reputable." Also, I don't even need to point out the strawman you threw in there. Good job.

This is usually the part of the thread where you say the words instead of framing a legitimate argument.
The evidence is weak. There are now 6 people known to be on the team. 2 have donated solely to Dems. 1 has donated to both parties. 3 have not made donations to any party. All are respected attorneys. Mueller's staff is not a reason for him to go.

You can argue that his relationship with Comey is reason to take him off the case, but that's opinion, not fact. I lean toward it being enough that he should recuse himself, but it's not black and white.
Like I said - you think that if only half the team are frothing Hillary fanatics, that's moderate. The truth is one is all it takes to poison the well.
I think you have no proof that any of them are frothing fanatics. That's an assumption you are making based on no actual substance related to their careers.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:03 pm
by HokieFanDC
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
That's not the whole point of the special prosecutor. He wasnt brought in to investigate Trump's firing Comey at all.
Exactly, so why is that now the focus of the investigation (if we are to believe the WaPo's anonymous sources)? If there's no evidence of Trump collusion, then the "investigation" should be dropped. End of story.

And if Comey is now at the center of this new investigation, the Mueller should resign based on his close relationship with Comey.
You're making an assumption that Comey is at the center.
Like I said, if we believe the WaPo's sources, then the Comey firing seems to be at the center of this new "investigation."
The obstruction-of-justice investigation of the president began days after Comey was fired on May 9, according to people familiar with the matter. Mueller’s office has taken up that work, and the preliminary interviews scheduled with intelligence officials indicate that his team is actively pursuing potential witnesses inside and outside the government.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 6289438cd9

What we know for sure is that Trump was NOT under investigation before he fired Comey. And if that's what he was told and that's what he believed, then how could firing Comey be seen as obstructing justice?

It's possible that further evidence has been found that steps were being taken, or conversations had, that were geared toward hindering or stopping the investigation. So, while on the surface, the act of firing Comey may not be enough, but if there were other things going on, with other administration folks, that could be the tipping point.
Or, it could be another witch hunt. Right now, it's speculation as to all the key elements.

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:04 pm
by USN_Hokie
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
That's not the whole point of the special prosecutor. He wasnt brought in to investigate Trump's firing Comey at all.
Exactly, so why is that now the focus of the investigation (if we are to believe the WaPo's anonymous sources)? If there's no evidence of Trump collusion, then the "investigation" should be dropped. End of story.

And if Comey is now at the center of this new investigation, the Mueller should resign based on his close relationship with Comey.
This

Re: So Mueller is investigating for obstruction on a premise

Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:25 pm
by USN_Hokie
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
Mueller has been around long enough, and has been reputable, respected, and distinguished for a long time, that it should take more than Newt bitching, to get rid of him.
That's a lazy, sophist argument. Let me translate: "Ignore all the evidence presented in this thread that he's disreputable...because he's reputable." Also, I don't even need to point out the strawman you threw in there. Good job.

This is usually the part of the thread where you say the words instead of framing a legitimate argument.
The evidence is weak. There are now 6 people known to be on the team. 2 have donated solely to Dems. 1 has donated to both parties. 3 have not made donations to any party. All are respected attorneys. Mueller's staff is not a reason for him to go.

You can argue that his relationship with Comey is reason to take him off the case, but that's opinion, not fact. I lean toward it being enough that he should recuse himself, but it's not black and white.
Like I said - you think that if only half the team are frothing Hillary fanatics, that's moderate. The truth is one is all it takes to poison the well.
I think you have no proof that any of them are frothing fanatics. That's an assumption you are making based on no actual substance related to their careers.
It's cute how you have different standards for other people's arguments than you have for your own.

He has a lawyer who worked for the Clinton Foundation on his team. That's enough for me, though I suppose you consider that moderate. That's just the beginning of it, of course.