Pecker Problems (Mueller+ Investigation Thread v. 21)

[waiguoren]

Who cares?

This thread, and this investigation, aren't referendums on CNN's reporting.

The retraction puts another bullet in the "Russia collusion" conspiracy theory.

 

[SBJJ]

You think he was doing his job, but the article stated that the heads of M15, MI6, and the GCHQ thought he was just there "trying to stir up controversy" and didn't grant Nunes the meetings he requested.

Lol. Would you expect them to say anything different.

 

[waiguoren]

how in gods name does this support Trump, or put a bullet in collusion? Cohen's already giving dirt on him, and including a statement from an attorney that came late to the story, that is already contradicted by the facts, would make no sense.

"Russia collusion" already had many bullets in it. Bernstein's now-discredited story was one of the few prayers the "muhh collusion" crowd had left. Now that's gone.

Cohen's going to compose any kind of story he thinks the investigators want to hear. He's far from credible, as this latest "fake news" incident demonstrates.

But of course, in a week were trumps personal lawyer and campaign manager were both found guilty of crimes

The crimes to which you refer have nothing to do with "Russia collusion", which is the original purpose of the Mueller investigation, which is the topic of this thread. It's amusing to watch you and others shift your rhetoric away from "muhh Russia" and toward any and all wrongdoing that Trump or Trump associates might have committed in their lives as "muhh Russia" makes you look worse and worse.

 

[waiguoren]

Can you explain why Don Jr met with Russians specifically to receive assistance from the Russian government specifically for the election?

Here's an interview with Trump Jr. on that very subject:

 

[Strychnine]

Sources: Second Trump Org employee discussed immunity deal


"That employee ultimately did not receive immunity after prosecutors in the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York decided against granting such protection. The person was not called to testify before the grand jury, the people familiar with the matter said.
The employee's identity couldn't be determined by CNN. Spokespeople for the US Attorney's office and Trump Organization declined to comment."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/29/politics/trump-organization-employee-immunity-deal/index.html


It's like people on the titanic heading for the exits.

 

[ScottE]

Here's an interview with Trump Jr. on that very subject:

Seems to be a far cry from the initial denials and deflections over the meetings purpose.

 

[Strychnine]

Here's an interview with Trump Jr. on that very subject:

Yeah...
Informing the FBI about the Russians looking to influence our election might've been a good start there DonJr.

 

[Darkballs]

Cohen's going to compose any kind of story he thinks the investigators want to hear. He's far from credible, as this latest "fake news" incident demonstrates.

Jesus mate. You could have just saved us both the time and said you were preparing to dismiss whatever Cohen says because you know it will make you look like a fool. I mean, we all knew that was coming, but try and get to it quicker next time ok?

The crimes to which you refer have nothing to do with "Russia collusion", which is the original purpose of the Mueller investigation, which is the topic of this thread. It's amusing to watch you and others shift your rhetoric away from "muhh Russia" and toward any and all wrongdoing that Trump or Trump associates might have committed in their lives as "muhh Russia" makes you look worse and worse.

So it's a stain on us that trump associates were convicted of crimes that were uncovered during the natural course of an investigation about "Russian Collusion," because those crimes weren't explicitly about said collusion. Well I'm fine with that.

And of course that's only if we ignore what bearing a cooperating former personal lawyer would have should Trump (changed his story about this four times now), turns out to be, gasp, lying. And of course we'd have to ignore the implications of Manafort taking pay from Russian government officials earlier and repeatedly lying about it. But yeah, if you ignore the two most obvious points, then it's just a totally unrelated crime.

 

[waiguoren]

So it's a stain on us that trump associates were convicted of crimes that were uncovered during the natural course of an investigation about "Russian Collusion," because those crimes weren't explicitly about said collusion. Well I'm fine with that.

Yes. It makes you look like fools.

It's been obvious for years that Manafort and Cohen were engaged in dodgy dealings that had nothing to do with Donald Trump. The tax convictions of Manafort and the guilty pleas of Cohen surprised no one, and any competent team of federal prosecutors could have secured them for far less than the $20 million Mueller's team has spent.

The anti-Trump forces are trying to spin these tax convictions as somehow "vindicating" Mueller, when if anything they do the opposite. People aren't going to forget that Mueller wouldn't have been appointed except for the "Russian collusion" narrative. When that narrative finally dies, independents will start to come over to Team Trump. I remember when this happened to President Clinton circa 1998. The caveat is that the SDNY investigation---not the Mueller investigation--- could lead to significant problems for Trump and obscure the fact that "Russian collusion" was a joke from the beginning. Time will tell.

Notice that Trump's poll numbers haven't budged. I'll wager that his job approval polling average does not drop by more than 3% in the next two weeks as the new polls begin to reflect the convictions and guilty pleas.

 

[waiguoren]

Manafort taking pay from Russian government officials earlier and repeatedly lying about it.

Let's see you offer a source for this claim. Alleged payments from Ukrainian political parties wouldn't count, obviously.

 

[tehJameson]

A bunch of sleazeballs surrounded by crime, color me shocked.

 

[tehJameson]

Here's an interview with Trump Jr. on that very subject:

Lol are we supposed to take anything this fuckhead says seriously? Surprised hannity didn't get on his knees and blow him right then and there.

Posting any hannity video = minus 10 points

 

[waiguoren]

Lol are we supposed to take anything this fuckhead says seriously? Surprised hannity didn't get on his knees and blow him right then and there.

Posting any hannity video = minus 10 points

Since you don't accept Trump Jr.'s explanation for the meeting, what's your belief about the reason for the meeting?

 

[computer fogie]

Here's an interview with Trump Jr. on that very subject:

Well I guess this wraps it up. We know this guy would never lie. He's the best one to believe about the meeting.

 

[waiguoren]

Well I guess this wraps it up. We know this guy would never lie. He's the best one to believe about the meeting.

I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Why would you assume he would never lie? As for the best person to believe about the meeting, I'll disagree again. I don't think any one person should be trusted fully. All accounts should be considered, which is why I posted the video.

 

[computer fogie]

I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Why would you assume he would never lie? As for the best person to believe about the meeting, I'll disagree again. I don't think any one person should be trusted fully. All accounts should be considered, which is why I posted the video.

 

[tehJameson]

Since you don't accept Trump Jr.'s explanation for the meeting, what's your belief about the reason for the meeting?

To get some crumlin penis in his mouth.

 

[tehJameson]

I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Why would you assume he would never lie? As for the best person to believe about the meeting, I'll disagree again. I don't think any one person should be trusted fully. All accounts should be considered, which is why I posted the video.

What in the flying fuck are you trying to say

 

[waiguoren]

What in the flying fuck are you trying to say

To understand that, you'd have to go back a few posts to see how this began. @Rational Poster wanted to know why Trump Jr. attended the meeting. I posted Trump Jr.'s own explanation of it. That seems like the best starting point, right?

 

[Darkballs]

CNN doesn't have to issue a retraction, but that is the standard response whenever a media outlet prints a thoroughly discredited story.

And there's where you went full retard.

It's similar to how you still have not admitted that you were wrong to assert that CBP separated the crying migrant girl on the TIME cover from her mother.

Dred Scott