• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Former FBI Director Mueller appointed special counsel for Trump-Russia investigation

M

maquiladora

Member
Why would we see the pee tape, if it exists? It would be the Russians that have it - why would they leak it when it can be used as leverage against Trump?
 
S

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
maquiladora said:
Why would we see the pee tape, if it exists? It would be the Russians that have it - why would they leak it when it can be used as leverage against Trump?
Click to expand...


Because even if trump was already gone, releasing the tape would show how embarrassing our nation is to have voted for this Jaffa-hued poltroon.
 
S

Slaythe

Member
The Lamp said:
If he covers all of the angles and provides a sound analysis I will respect the conclusion. Trump is an idiot, but he may not be a conspiring criminal.

I do think there's too much smoke to say nothing at all is going on, though. Maybe others are guilty of something treasonous.
Click to expand...

Basically, there needs to be blood spilled.

If it's revealed Trump is an ignorant puppet, so be it.

But we need to find the masterminds. Because there are masterminds, at this point it's rather obvious.

If he comes out saying "nothing to see here", then we'd have to look into his background and recent ties with member of his family or whatever that could guarantee nothing interfered with the investigation.

There are far too many elements for all of it to be "nothing".
 
E

Escape Goat

Member
VaultBoy101 said:
I don't even understand the clamoring for the pee tape. Right wingers, evangelicals included, would just wave it off with "Boys will be boys!" And if it included Obama hatred in some fashion, his approval rating with that group would probably get a bump.

What we really need is a tape of him admitting that he's ok with immigrants/gays/choice or any combination thereof.

But that, of course, does not exist.
Click to expand...

Can't a guy be interested in a pee tape? I thought this was America.
 
F

facelike

Member
rec0ded1 said:
No new news? booo I don't even want to pick up a controller anymore. Well at least we know Mueller is all over this now.
Click to expand...

Through part of me thinks this is good, I keep getting a feeling there's​ more to this going on. Especially after the news about the AG deputy knowing that Trump was going to fire Comey in advance. Something funky going on and I'm reserving any excitement till cuffs are on Trump and his cabinet.
 
K

kirblar

Member
StrongArmSteady said:
I believe this is what we were waiting for

Edit: Source
Click to expand...
President Trump called the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, weeks after he took office and asked him when federal authorities were going to put out word that Mr. Trump was not personally under investigation, according to two people briefed on the call.

Mr. Comey told the president that if he wanted to know details about the bureau’s investigations, he should not contact him directly but instead follow the proper procedures and have the White House counsel send any inquires to the Justice Department, according to those people.

After explaining to Mr. Trump how communications with the F.B.I. should work, Mr. Comey believed he had effectively drawn the line after a series of encounters he had with the president and other White House officials that he felt jeopardized the F.B.I.’s independence. At the time, Mr. Comey was overseeing the investigation into links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia.

Those interactions included a dinner in which associates of Mr. Comey say Mr. Trump asked him to pledge his loyalty and a meeting in the Oval Office at which Mr. Trump told him he hoped Mr. Comey would shut down an investigation into Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn. Mr. Trump has denied making the request.

The day after the Flynn conversation, Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, asked Mr. Comey to help push back on reports in the news media that Mr. Trump’s associates had been in contact with Russian intelligence officials during the campaign.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's attempted obstruction, repeatedly.
 
B

BlastProcessing

Member
StrongArmSteady said:
I believe this is what we were waiting for

Edit: Source
Click to expand...

NYT said:
Mr. Wittes said that in another conversation he told Mr. Comey he was encouraged by the fact that the Senate was likely to confirm Rod J. Rosenstein, a longtime federal prosecutor, as the deputy attorney general.

To Mr. Wittes’s surprise, Mr. Comey did not completely agree with him.

“He said, ‘I don’t know. I have some concerns. He’s good, he’s solid but he’s also a survivor and you don’t survive that long without making some compromises and I’m concerned about that.’”
Click to expand...

That's remarkable.
 
B

BlastProcessing

Member
EatinOlives said:
So if Mueller actually files charges, who rules on it? The Supreme Court?
Click to expand...

Mueller can't file charges against the President, only Congress can try a sitting President through impeachment. A majority of the House votes to impeach and then the Justice of the Supreme Court would oversee a Senate hearing. It would take a 2/3 Senate vote to convict.

Every other charge would go through district court.
 
C

Cindro

Member
Everything I've read about Comey since his firing makes him seem like an incredibly remarkable guy, incorruptible and with a clear focus on doing the right thing.

Can somebody link me to a good article about why his letter regarding the Clinton investigation that leaked before the election was so out of line? I remember seeing the outrage on GAF, and I just assumed Comey was a partisan hack because of it, but I never checked into the full story myself. But everything about Comey's handling of Trump reveals a dude with admirable character, so I find it hard to believe he intentionally tried to interfere with the election.
 
E

EatinOlives

Member
BlastProcessing said:
Mueller can't file charges against the President, only Congress can try a sitting President through impeachment. A majority of the House votes to impeach and then the Justice of the Supreme Court would oversee a Senate hearing. It would take a 2/3 Senate vote to convict.

Every other charge would go through district court.
Click to expand...

So was this tweet incorrect?

8qizCoG.png
Click to expand...
 
C

Chococat

Member
EatinOlives said:
So was this tweet incorrect?
Click to expand...


Don't think so unless I an reading this wrong

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/18/donald-trump-special-prosecutor-questions-238536

Mueller will have all the authority of a typical U.S. attorney to convene grand juries, issue subpoenas, file criminal charges and pursue those charges to trial, if he deems it appropriate.
Click to expand...

Maybe not against Trump, but there are plenty of others. :Cough: Flynn :Cough: Manafort
 
F

Felix Lighter

Member
Cindro said:
Everything I've read about Comey since his firing makes him seem like an incredibly remarkable guy, incorruptible and with a clear focus on doing the right thing.

Can somebody link me to a good article about why his letter regarding the Clinton investigation that leaked before the election was so out of line? I remember seeing the outrage on GAF, and I just assumed Comey was a partisan hack because of it, but I never checked into the full story myself. But everything about Comey's handling of Trump reveals a dude with admirable character, so I find it hard to believe he intentionally tried to interfere with the election.
Click to expand...

On the surface, what Comey did during the final weeks of the election were at the very least, massively inappropriate. However, later stories came out suggesting it was more complicated and his hands were tied to a degree, though we'll never know if his decision was the right one. All we know is Trump is now President.

In the moment, with the knowledge we had at the time, there wasn't many other ways to interrupt his decision to alert congress about reopening the Clinton email case weeks before the election other than an FBI head attempting to tip the scales of the election.
 
A

Allard

Member
Cindro said:
Everything I've read about Comey since his firing makes him seem like an incredibly remarkable guy, incorruptible and with a clear focus on doing the right thing.

Can somebody link me to a good article about why his letter regarding the Clinton investigation that leaked before the election was so out of line? I remember seeing the outrage on GAF, and I just assumed Comey was a partisan hack because of it, but I never checked into the full story myself. But everything about Comey's handling of Trump reveals a dude with admirable character, so I find it hard to believe he intentionally tried to interfere with the election.
Click to expand...

It was an honor coded rule basically to not publicly declare any on going investigations leading into an election due to the partisan nature of the election. It was a matter of showing impartiality to the voting process and unless he had means to convict and try someone they shouldn't come out and say anything. Its why Comey handling of not just the October surprise letter but also the nature of the non-prosecution was given so much scrutiny. His department should have given the results of their finding without even giving a recommendation of whether they should be prosecuted as that was the DoJ's job to decide. Due to the inherent partisan nature of the DoJ he felt the need to make some grand impartial ruling public. The October letter was actually never supposed to see the light of the public (it was a promise that if anything opened up in the investigation he would let Congress know) but when he sent that letter to congress; that rat Chaffetz was planning to publish it, thus forcing Comey to again make a public statement on it. He didn't intentionally try interfere with the election, but he got caught in the extremely partisan machinations of the election against his will in trying to keep the FBI independent, by putting his neck out and instead of staying silent during the election he ended up becoming a pawn of the republican attack apparatus against Clinton. As such due to that honor coded rule and timing of the letter it looked like the FBI was intentionally trying to tip the scales of the election, and all signs point to it being the tipping point. Not the biggest reason Clinton lost, but the point when her polling went south leading into the final week of the election.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Financial Times: How Brad Smith used Microsoft’s $1bn law and lobbying machine to win Activision battle
News Drama Business 2 3
127
11K
Topher replied
  • Locked
Poland says it will not respect EU law ; EU: LOL
News
0
2K
Cyberpunkd replied
FBI Raids Office Of Longtime Trump Attorney Michael Cohen
2
84
8K
Harksteed replied
Judge rejects Manaforts motion to dismiss charges in Russia probe.
5
1K
n0razi replied
Microsoft—now trying to get its $75 billion deal for Activision approved—has taken a friendly role with regulators. (WSJ)
Opinion News 4 5 6 7 8
397
42K
Frank Horrigan replied
Top Bottom