Page 60 of 77 FirstFirst ... 51525354555657585960616263646566676869 ... LastLast
Results 886 to 900 of 1141

Thread: Ex-FBI Director Mueller appointed DOJ Special Counsel

  1. #886
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    17,229
    Quote Originally Posted by montgomery View Post
    And another thread. Speaking of which, what's going on with with this forum and it's glitches? I see now it's not just me that's having trouble. And too, why no button for starting new threads? Does that come with time and post count?
    We've been having problems with the forum for some time unfortunately, and there's nothing we can do about it. And yes, new threads are limited to time on the board.

    For the moment, I suggest that you read both the forum rules and the unofficial survival guide.

    For starters, you can stop insulting people like OoE. You are the newcomer here, I suggest you comport your behavior accordingly. Thank you.
    “You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if the Senate determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role… because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”
    ~ Lindsey Graham

    "The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress no matter whether you are the party in power or not in power is wrong. Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles."
    ~ Trey Gowdy

  2. #887
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    17,229
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    The world neither needs nor deserves to know that report.
    Sir, I'm afraid the vast majority of Americans, across the entire political spectrum, disagree with that.

    A 4 page summary, by Trump's own AG, is not sufficient given the gravity and magnitude of the situation.

    Or to quote a USC law professor:

    Imagine if the Starr Report had been provided only to President Clinton's Attorney General, Janet Reno, who then read it privately and published a 4-page letter based on her private reading stating her conclusion that President Clinton committed no crimes.

    No sir, the world needs and deserves that report.
    “You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if the Senate determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role… because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”
    ~ Lindsey Graham

    "The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress no matter whether you are the party in power or not in power is wrong. Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles."
    ~ Trey Gowdy

  3. #888
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,556
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    snapper,



    i stand corrected, you are Anne Applebaum . :-)
    No, though a very distant relative of her Husbands.

  4. #889
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Oct 06
    Posts
    788
    Quote Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post
    Sir, I'm afraid the vast majority of Americans, across the entire political spectrum, disagree with that.

    A 4 page summary, by Trump's own AG, is not sufficient given the gravity and magnitude of the situation.

    Or to quote a USC law professor:

    Imagine if the Starr Report had been provided only to President Clinton's Attorney General, Janet Reno, who then read it privately and published a 4-page letter based on her private reading stating her conclusion that President Clinton committed no crimes.

    No sir, the world needs and deserves that report.
    And to quote a response to that...
    if. fucking. only.
    and....

    “Of the many criticisms that were launched at the special prosecutor legislation, a frequent one was that the report requirement was unfair to people who got caught up in investigations but were not charged with anything,” Harriger tells TIME. “You can have a lot of facts that don’t look good but they don’t add up to a crime. The rationale that prosecutors always use is that we speak with our indictments, and if we don’t indict, we don’t speak, because there are lots of people who get investigated but never get prosecuted. That criticism was a frequent one.”

    The lurid detail in Starr’s report heightened that criticism, contributing to what she calls a “bipartisan sense of unfairness.”
    In an essay for the magazine, Richard Lacayo argued that the world “would all be better off if Starr had exercised his prosecutorial discretion and left the White House Kama Sutra a closed book. What the President did ranged from the silly to the squalid, but the investigation is worse, turning a private mess into a public eyesore. It’s Starr, after all, who has given us the dirtiest paperback ever to top the best-seller list.”
    if I've interpreted things correctly, the Starr report is precisely why the law was changed in that regard. (edit: that was meant to be a question not a statement)
    Last edited by bfng3569; 29 Mar 19, at 20:38.

  5. #890
    Banned Patron
    Join Date
    26 Mar 19
    Location
    vancouver island
    Posts
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post
    Sir, I'm afraid the vast majority of Americans, across the entire political spectrum, disagree with that.

    A 4 page summary, by Trump's own AG, is not sufficient given the gravity and magnitude of the situation.

    Or to quote a USC law professor:

    Imagine if the Starr Report had been provided only to President Clinton's Attorney General, Janet Reno, who then read it privately and published a 4-page letter based on her private reading stating her conclusion that President Clinton committed no crimes.

    No sir, the world needs and deserves that report.
    You are spot on right with your comment on the Starr report only being released to Janet Reno.

    The level to which Trump supporters are willing to stoop is totally mindboggling. The only consolation to that is Trump's acting out his psychopathy are of little concern to the rest of the world's countries. On the other hand, his stated position on Russia being in Venezuela, can be passed off as his careless overreach, as it appears has already happened with that particular blunder. We'll find out soon I suspect!

  6. #891
    Banned Patron
    Join Date
    26 Mar 19
    Location
    vancouver island
    Posts
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post
    Sir, I'm afraid the vast majority of Americans, across the entire political spectrum, disagree with that.

    A 4 page summary, by Trump's own AG, is not sufficient given the gravity and magnitude of the situation.

    Or to quote a USC law professor:

    Imagine if the Starr Report had been provided only to President Clinton's Attorney General, Janet Reno, who then read it privately and published a 4-page letter based on her private reading stating her conclusion that President Clinton committed no crimes.

    No sir, the world needs and deserves that report.
    The question certainly arises now on just how bad the report by Mueller is and how condemning it is of Trump?

    Judging by Barr's theatrics to keep it hidden, it's likely plenty to cause the impeachment of Trump. It's going to be a long fight now between Trump's forces of evil and the Dems. But at least it now appears that Barr has destroyed his credibility so time is against Trump and his accomplices.

    In my opinion your country is falling into a crisis situation and you Americans can't afford another 4 years of Trump.

  7. #892
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,727
    Quote Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post
    Sir, I'm afraid the vast majority of Americans, across the entire political spectrum, disagree with that.

    A 4 page summary, by Trump's own AG, is not sufficient given the gravity and magnitude of the situation.

    Or to quote a USC law professor:

    Imagine if the Starr Report had been provided only to President Clinton's Attorney General, Janet Reno, who then read it privately and published a 4-page letter based on her private reading stating her conclusion that President Clinton committed no crimes.

    No sir, the world needs and deserves that report.
    The American People needs and deserves that report. Everyone else can sit on their thumbs for all the obligations the US owes them which is exactly zero.

    Edit: Some thoughts. The full report will never be released. There is a lot of class protected intel here. I do not and cannot believe that intel would not be redacted. Mueller's report is based on DOJ's legal requirements, ie the letter of the law. Whatever is in the report, we do know that Mueller himself found nothing legally actionable against Trump himself. He has laid out evidence on both sides of the arguement and would let the authorized readers to decide for themselves.

    Intel does not work that way. Intel works on the basis of odds, not legality and the reactions the same way. Is Trump compromised? We don't know but we are monitoring each and everyone of his communications to know if and when such a compromise could occur. Counter-intel's goals isn't to punish the man for treason. It is to stop the compromise by any means necessary.

    Already, those who understands the legality of the situation are already debating their first born sons on the merits. The same would be true for those who understands intel. Mix them together and everyone would start getting fogs in their heads. Lawyers ask did he do it? Spooks ask how do we stop him? Layman would ask if he isn't guilty, why do we have to stop him without understanding that intel doesn't care if he's guilty or not. They just want to make sure he can't do it.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 30 Mar 19, at 16:59.

  8. #893
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,727
    Quote Originally Posted by montgomery View Post
    What the hell are you all about?
    Science and history. The facts. I've given you facts. I have you the numbers to PROVE MAD is no longer viable but your worship of Stanley Krubrick just makes you a damned troll.

    Quote Originally Posted by montgomery View Post
    What's the point of it all when we both know that the sides have carefully avoided a direct attack against the other because of the knowledge each side has of almost certain escalation.
    Wrong! We did escalate. And so did they. The Berlin Wall Incident. The Berlin Airlift. Aside from the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Yom Kapur War, we also stopped the Soviets from attacking China. The history and facts are against you.

    Which you conviently ignored.

    Quote Originally Posted by montgomery View Post
    Stop fighting your imaginary war from your rocking chair. It's getting a little tedious M-M.
    You're still showing your stupidity to the hilt. This forum is dominated by military professionals, a lot of us stood the wall long before you were borned. We were trained to fight WWIII. We discuss those facts and our roles in them. You're in the wrong forum touting Stanley Kubrick as your mentor.

    If you want to praise the Soviets for something, praise them for being smart enough to back down thinking nuclear war ain't worth it because we were certainly stupid enough to think it was.

    I know he sent his brother with a letter to the Soviet Ambassador detailing this but if you think this means that Kruschev didn't backed down, you're off your rockers.

    1) Kruschve had 340 nukes. Kenedy had 5000.

    2) Of those 340 nukes, only 20 on ICBMs can reached the US. The US had 170 ICBMs that can hit Russia from the US. The reason why Kruschev wanted Cuban was to add another 40 nukes to hit the US with.

    3) As a face saving measure FOR KRUSCHEV, he asked the JUPITER 1s to be dismantled in both Italy and Turkey. Kenedy agreed.

    4) The Soviet POLITBURO was pissed off! They went through this entire exercise for nothing and had to run from Cuba with their tails between their legs. Removing the JUPITER 1s did EXACTLY zero to remove the 170 ICBMs.

    5) The Soviet Politburo believed they lost face and they threw Kruschev out onto the streets.

    The facts ARE AGAINST YOU!
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 30 Mar 19, at 05:40.

  9. #894
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    15,003
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    z,

    you're making my case for me. you believe the DOJ/FBI/intel agencies to be massively corrupt, agents of the political deep-state aimed at undermining President Trump. the extent of the crimes/abuses/whatever that you describe means a deep level of conspiracy.
    They (senior leadership) undoubtedly became highly politicized and partisan under Obama.

    of course i completely disagree with this-- but that's not the point of my discussion with bfng. he thinks i'm over-exaggerating your point, but i think i've described it pretty accurately here.
    You are overstating. You are assuming I think the general rank and file are corrupt and I think its the leadership. Most of which has been fired for cause. Lets not forget that Holder was the first AG ever to be held in contempt of Congress.

  10. #895
    Banned Patron
    Join Date
    26 Mar 19
    Location
    vancouver island
    Posts
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Science and history. The facts. I've given you facts. I have you the numbers to PROVE MAD is no longer viable but your worship of Stanley Krubrick just makes you a damned troll.

    Wrong! We did escalate. And so did they. The Berlin Wall Incident. The Berlin Airlift. Aside from the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Yom Kapur War, we also stopped the Soviets from attacking China. The history and facts are against you.

    Which you conviently ignored.

    You're still showing your stupidity to the hilt. This forum is dominated by military professionals, a lot of us stood the wall long before you were borned. We were trained to fight WWIII. We discuss those facts and our roles in them. You're in the wrong forum touting Stanley Kubrick as your mentor.

    If you want to praise the Soviets for something, praise them for being smart enough to back down thinking nuclear war ain't worth it because we were certainly stupid enough to think it was.

    I know he sent his brother with a letter to the Soviet Ambassador detailing this but if you think this means that Kruschev didn't backed down, you're off your rockers.

    1) Kruschve had 340 nukes. Kenedy had 5000.

    2) Of those 340 nukes, only 20 on ICBMs can reached the US. The US had 170 ICBMs that can hit Russia from the US. The reason why Kruschev wanted Cuban was to add another 40 nukes to hit the US with.

    3) As a face saving measure FOR KRUSCHEV, he asked the JUPITER 1s to be dismantled in both Italy and Turkey. Kenedy agreed.

    4) The Soviet POLITBURO was pissed off! They went through this entire exercise for nothing and had to run from Cuba with their tails between their legs. Removing the JUPITER 1s did EXACTLY zero to remove the 170 ICBMs.

    5) The Soviet Politburo believed they lost face and they threw Kruschev out onto the streets.

    The facts ARE AGAINST YOU!
    Thank you for your revised version of history. I'm sticking with the original version.See the link I posted above and get back to me.

  11. #896
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,477
    Quote Originally Posted by montgomery View Post
    Here's a link that will serve as my reply to your request that I 'name them'. You'll note that it's a little outdated and stops at 37 but we can possibly add Syria and Lybia to that. And then the coming planned war with Venezuela to round it out.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-has...war-ii/5492051
    That site has been flagged many times on this board over the years as being purveyors of bull crap.

    Your other links to RT give us a better idea of where you inform yourself

  12. #897
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,727
    Quote Originally Posted by montgomery View Post
    Thank you for your revised version of history. I'm sticking with the original version.See the link I posted above and get back to me.
    God, YOU ARE DAMNED STUPID! ANSWER THIS!

    WHY DID KRUSCHEV LOST HIS JOB?

  13. #898
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,477
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    It is quite amusing to me - and possibly quite an accomplishment - that 'montgomery' has managed to unite myself and the gallant Colonel in rejecting his bs.
    I noticed and checked to see if the sun rose in the west these past few days : D

  14. #899
    Banned Patron
    Join Date
    26 Mar 19
    Location
    vancouver island
    Posts
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    That site has been flagged many times on this board over the years as being purveyors of bull crap.

    Your other links to RT give us a better idea of where you inform yourself
    Thank you for your opinion. Do you have something specific to refute from 'that' site?

  15. #900
    Banned Patron
    Join Date
    26 Mar 19
    Location
    vancouver island
    Posts
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    God, YOU ARE DAMNED STUPID! ANSWER THIS!

    WHY DID KRUSCHEV LOST HIS JOB?
    Do you mean, 'why did Kruschev lose his job?
    I really don't know but I'll take your version of the story, fwiw.

    For the sake of discussion, how could Kruschev have handled the situation any better, considering that he was responsible for creating the standoff in the first place, as a counter move to the US plans of missiles in Turkey.

    I think you may be suggesting that Kruschev would have lost his job because of his acts of brinkmanship. But I'm not able to accept that because it was 'successful' brinkmanship. Can you explain your thoughts on that.

    We were *led to believe for so many years that the US got the upper hand on Russia by turning back the missile threat they had intended to install in Cuba. Only to learn that it wasn't a US success story after all. That's my understanding of the issue but I'm happy to entertain some other spin on it.

    *led, not lead as with the metal.

    And please, can we keep this on a polite level? I see no reason why you need to be so angry at hearing opinions of others?
    Last edited by montgomery; 30 Mar 19, at 17:38.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Director Comey fired
    By Ironduke in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 459
    Last Post: 21 Feb 20,, 02:32
  2. Somalia: Abdiweli Mohamed Ali appointed prime minister
    By tomkent45 in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 23 Jun 11,, 16:10
  3. A Chat With ISAF's Director Of Intelligence
    By S2 in forum Operation Enduring Freedom and Af-Pak
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05 Nov 09,, 16:57
  4. Dennis Ross appointed NSC senior director
    By Ironduke in forum The Staff College
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 26 Jun 09,, 16:56
  5. Nambiar appointed UN chief of staff
    By Tronic in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01 Jan 07,, 22:26

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •