The 2017 General Salma Hayek discussion thread...Part 3!!!

[SheepDog4Life]

I'm not distrustful of you, there are plenty of people I respect, that sometimes seem to point out my "bad logic," but seem perfect willing to overlook other instances (i.e. Jamil). I may have been wrong in this instance and as such apologize... but I do wish folk would call out bad logic more often, when encountered.

Here is a very logical article on the futility of SP Mueller's stated purpose, written by a former AUSA (basically, it is impossible for Mueller to prove Russians, Russians, Russians as a matter of criminal law, it's really a political impeachment investigation):

Russian Cyberespionage: Does Mueller Have Proof beyond a Reasonable Doubt? | National Review

If you have one that logically lays out the converse, I'd welcome it. I would really prefer to think that SP Mueller's investigation is not a political witch hunt, but have seen nothing to disprove it (i.e. some shred of evidence of a crime to support such a criminal investigation)

And I see we are all still having a great time in here........

Sleeping dogs sleep... awoken dogs bark... I'll go fetch the muzzle now.

 

[jamil]

And I see we are all still having a great time in here........

Yeah. Pull up a chair. Have some popcorn. A good time will be had by all. Cheers.

 

[jamil]

Here is a very logical article on the futility of SP Mueller's stated purpose, written by a former AUSA (basically, it is impossible for Mueller to prove Russians, Russians, Russians as a matter of criminal law, it's really a political impeachment investigation):

Russian Cyberespionage: Does Mueller Have Proof beyond a Reasonable Doubt? | National Review

If you have one that logically lays out the converse, I'd welcome it. I would really prefer to think that SP Mueller's investigation is not a political witch hunt, but have seen nothing to disprove it (i.e. some shred of evidence of a crime to support such a criminal investigation)

I do think it’s a political witch hunt. The longer this drags on the more obvious that becomes. Seems like half the country—the left half—thinks that an indictment on Trump/Russia is eminent. They believe it because they want it to be true.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

I do think it’s a political witch hunt. The longer this drags on the more obvious that becomes. Seems like half the country—the left half—thinks that an indictment on Trump/Russia is eminent. They believe it because they want it to be true.

I agree... I haven't seen anything to conrtary... that Mueller will continue until the 2018 elections, leaking embarassing but non-criminal tax returns, bank statements, etc, hoping for impeachment fodder with a new Democrat-controlled House and/or Senate complete with partisan leaks to help make it so. Purely political.

Suggested move for Trump:

Time limit Mueller's investigation. Mueller was appointed in mid-May of this year and was fully staffed by the beginning of July. So, July 1, 2018, Mueller's investigation ends to avoid corrupting the political process of the 2018 elections (Hatch Act). That gives him at least a year, plus more than a year of prior surveillance and investigation under Comey. If you can't come up with something of substance in 2 years, it ain't there.

Prime evidence, no repeat of Comey in 2016.

Put up (bring meaningful indictments under his charter as Special Prosecutor on Russian involvement and collusion in the 2016 election) or shut up.

Thoughts?

 

[Fargo]

Yes, do go back and re-read the sheriff Joe exchange. My argument was that he was convicted without a jury for something he did not do... the conviction was for continuing to arrest individuals "solely upon being present illegally" which he was specifically barred by injunction from doing. The convicting document itself contradicted that... those he detained were not "solely illegally present" but also priority enforcement targets (i.e. felons) under Obama's ICE edicts. THAT is not "solely illegally present" , they had wants and warrants by federal authorities. For all of his sins, this was not one of them.

But that is not what you wanted to debate, instead going to all manner of other accusations against him that were not before the court... you don't like Joe, I don't blame you for that nor take issue with it... but when you want to convict and incarcerate an opponent based upon political animosity, THAT makes you a "true believer" in something other than the rule of law and impartial justice, IMO.

Joe has said and done some dispicable things... I don't doubt that. Prove them in a court of LAW and convict him by a fair jury trial, and you'll not hear a whimper of sympathy from me. This was not that, not in the least.

The final coup de grace was when you not only took a quote out of context, omitting the discussion prior to and after the quote, a common tactic of hard-pressed partisan warriors from both sides when they don't have "real" facts, but also DELETED PART OF THE QUOTED SENTENCES. That, IMO, is a bridge to far and a dishonesty akin to splicing together different bits of a tape recording to render something never said. (in the link below, red was omitted)

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...trump-pardons-sheriff-joe-36.html#post7217998

I called you out on it. You vowed to never engage me again... I don't blame you as I will call out such tactics by those who put their "true beliefs" above blind and impartial justice and feel the need to "manufacture" facts in doing so.

LOL, that you took my post lamenting banging my head against the brick wall of your reading comprehension as indicating that I want to do so again says a lot about...... ......well your reading comprehension.

 

[jamil]

I agree... I haven't seen anything to conrtary... that Mueller will continue until the 2018 elections, leaking embarassing but non-criminal tax returns, bank statements, etc, hoping for impeachment fodder with a new Democrat-controlled House and/or Senate. Purely political.

Suggested move for Trump:

Time limit Mueller's investigation. Mueller was appointed in mid-May of this year and was fully staffed by the beginning of July. So, July 1, 2018, Mueller's investigation end to avoid corrupting the political process of the 2018 elections (Hatch Act). That gives him at least a year, plus more than a year of prior surveillance and investigation under Comey. If you can't come up with something of substance in 2 years, it ain't there.

Put up (bring meaningful indictments under his charter as Special Prosecutor on Russian involvement and collusion in the 2016 election) or shut up.

Thoughts?

In this case I’m not sure he should have that much time. Given all the surveillance tools I’m sure they used during the election campaign, I think they already have all they’re going to get on Trump concerning Russia. I’d give them another month to wrap up all the further indictments of stupid people who lied about doing things that weren’t illegal anyway.

 

[Alpo]

I just can't do opening night of a blockbuster. I don't like crowded theaters. I have patience to wait a week or two and see it during a non-peak time.

That's normally my method as well. However, this film has great reviews and an extended run time of 2 1/2 hours. The theatres now have nice recliner seats, reserved in advance. I got a pair right where I want them. The price of the opening night is higher because its a day before general release and they throw in popcorn and a drink and its 3D. That's going to keep the kiddies away to some extent, so it should be a better show from a bacteriological perspective (walking petri dishes in December can be unkind to old farts).

So, all in all, I couldn't pass it up.

 

[Kutnupe14]

In this case I’m not sure he should have that much time. Given all the surveillance tools I’m sure they used during the election campaign, I think they already have all they’re going to get on Trump concerning Russia. I’d give them another month to wrap up all the further indictments of stupid people who lied about doing things that weren’t illegal anyway.

Ok, let's apply this logic to Flynn. Do you think the one thing he has been charged with, is the only thing he could be charged with? And if so, what's his inspiration for cooperating with the investigation? That makes zero sense. Rather than go trial and fight a charge that you say "weren't illegal anyways," Flynn accepts the single charge, and then, in light of being charged with that one thing, cooperates with the investigation. I don't know about you, but if I was "guilty" of one crime, and there being an absence of another crime to charge me with, I see no reason to cooperate with the investigation. That defies logic.
I think we all know, are at least have a very strong suspicion, that there are plenty of other crimes (illegal crimes) that Flynn could've been charged with.

Further, I'm missing the how people are justifying "time limits," on this investigation. Ken Starr had FOUR years. No one here has any knowledge of how intricate this investigation is, nor what other doors that have possibly been opened. I find it odd that people outside of the investigation, and not "in the know," are calling for an end to an investigation that they haven't the slightest idea about how involved it is. It's like someone getting one piece of a 5000 piece puzzle, and thinking you know what the final picture will be.

 

[Spear Dane]

Starr should never have been given 4 years. What did he uncover in 4 years? What's Mueller gonna uncover? Even the Warren Commission only took 10 months from start to the time it birthed a huge report and that was the biggest political crime of the 20 th century.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

LOL, that you took my post lamenting banging my head against the brick wall of your reading comprehension as indicating that I want to do so again says a lot about...... ......well your reading comprehension.

Lol on the projection.

In this case I’m not sure he should have that much time. Given all the surveillance tools I’m sure they used during the election campaign, I think they already have all they’re going to get on Trump concerning Russia. I’d give them another month to wrap up all the further indictments of stupid people who lied about doing things that weren’t illegal anyway.

While I agree with you completely,they haven't found anything because there is nothing to be found, I think the "masses" would accept a full year as long enough and avoiding a Comey-part-deux is something almost all but the most partisan would accept as reasonable. Plus, with the that timeframe, Mueller is on notice to wrap-up whatever he might have and greatly diminishes the narrative that Trump is cancelling the investigation because it's getting "close" to something damning... i.e. the same narrative line, that the investigation is close to a "smoking gun", that has ran for a solid year now. Yawn.

That's normally my method as well. However, this film has great reviews and an extended run time of 2 1/2 hours. The theatres now have nice recliner seats, reserved in advance. I got a pair right where I want them. The price of the opening night is higher because its a day before general release and they throw in popcorn and a drink and its 3D. That's going to keep the kiddies away to some extent, so it should be a better show from a bacteriological perspective (walking petri dishes in December can be unkind to old farts).

So, all in all, I couldn't pass it up.

My inclination is with you, but will likely wait until Saturday or later for the simple fact that I've been trying to dispel the notion among my closest that I am a "geek"... I'm not... merely a "nerd". Lol!

Ok, let's apply this logic to Flynn. Do you think the one thing he has been charged with, is the only thing he could be charged with? And if so, what's his inspiration for cooperating with the investigation? That makes zero sense. Rather than go trial and fight a charge that you say "weren't illegal anyways," Flynn accepts the single charge, and then, in light of being charged with that one thing, cooperates with the investigation. I don't know about you, but if I was "guilty" of one crime, and there being an absence of another crime to charge me with, I see no reason to cooperate with the investigation. That defies logic.
I think we all know, are at least have a very strong suspicion, that there are plenty of other crimes (illegal crimes) that Flynn could've been charged with.

If he could have realistically been charged with other, more serious crimes, he would have. I've posted articles from former AUSAs that indicate that how it is done with co-conspirators to gain, and keep, cooperation... they face serious repercussions if they fail to cooperate along the way. From what I've read, the normal sentence for someone with a clean record is 6 months probation. Balanced against years and millions to clear his name, AND, there is little doubt that Mueller would go after his son as well.

Yeah, I can see reasons for pleading out.

Further, I'm missing the how people are justifying "time limits," on this investigation. Ken Starr had FOUR years. No one here has any knowledge of how intricate this investigation is, nor what other doors that have possibly been opened. I find it odd that people outside of the investigation, and not "in the know," are calling for an end to an investigation that they haven't the slightest idea about how involved it is. It's like someone getting one piece of a 5000 piece puzzle, and thinking you know what the final picture will be.

It's nearly universal that previous Independent Counsels and Special Prosecutors way overstayed their stated goals. And, that it was a bad thing.

Not to defend Starr, but his investigation started with a bank examiner finding MILLIONS OF DOLLARS illegally funneled into a real estate venture of which Bill and HIllary were 50/50 partners with the McDougals and bank money illegally funneled into Bill Clinton's campaign fund. The evidence of a crime being committed was not only "probable cause", but "beyond a reasonable doubt", at the outset. The only question was who was guilty of what. The Clinton's were closely associated with 15 individuals convicted of embezzlement and loan fraud... the original Whitewater investigation focus, only the Clinton's escaped indictments and convictions. Also, Starr did not go on a fishing trip looking for the perjury, obstruction of justice and witness tampering charges, Paul Jones' lawyer handed them to him on a silver platter.

So, if within a reasonable period of time, one year, Mueller cannot come up with evidence of a crime related to his charter as Special Prosecutor, colluding with the Russian to influence the election, or evidence of some other crime the President or those closest to him committed that cannot be handled by the career FBI/DOJ folks, then his charter should end.

tl;dr: There hasn't been a shred of evidence, despite all of the political leaks, that would support even STARTING a Special Prosecutor investigation. Mueller needs to come up with that evidence in a reasonable period of time or face being shut down. In this country, we investigation based upon evidence of a crime and follow the facts. We do not investigate people in the absence of evidence in order to go on fishing trips.

 

[jamil]

Ok, let's apply this logic to Flynn. Do you think the one thing he has been charged with, is the only thing he could be charged with? And if so, what's his inspiration for cooperating with the investigation? That makes zero sense. Rather than go trial and fight a charge that you say "weren't illegal anyways," Flynn accepts the single charge, and then, in light of being charged with that one thing, cooperates with the investigation. I don't know about you, but if I was "guilty" of one crime, and there being an absence of another crime to charge me with, I see no reason to cooperate with the investigation. That defies logic.
I think we all know, are at least have a very strong suspicion, that there are plenty of other crimes (illegal crimes) that Flynn could've been charged with.

Further, I'm missing the how people are justifying "time limits," on this investigation. Ken Starr had FOUR years. No one here has any knowledge of how intricate this investigation is, nor what other doors that have possibly been opened. I find it odd that people outside of the investigation, and not "in the know," are calling for an end to an investigation that they haven't the slightest idea about how involved it is. It's like someone getting one piece of a 5000 piece puzzle, and thinking you know what the final picture will be.

1. Flynn. I don't know if perjury is the only crime Flynn could be charged with. If the FBI knows if perjury is not the only crime Flynn could be charged with, I'm sure they'll charge him--albeit, given the nature of this investigation, likely when it's most politically expedient. Is there evidence more crimes have been committed by Flynn? If so, sure. Pursue the leads. "I think we all know..." Bull****. Please cite the evidence of all these crimes. Given your belief in facts not in evidence, I have to suspect that all this evidence is confirmation bias. But maybe you're aware of facts I'm not aware of. So please inform me. Flynn had to accept the charge because he told people under oath one thing, and they have strong evidence the statements were false. They have him over a barrel. Why wouldn't he plead to that?

2. I did not say those were charges that "weren't illegal anyways". The charge of perjury is solid. That's a crime. He's guilty. But the thing he lied about was not illegal. It was just politically damaging. Just like Bill getting a ******* in the oval office, of all places, wasn't illegal. He lied about it which was illegal.

I'm glad you brought up Kenneth Star. That's a mirror of what Mueller is doing. He started investigating whitewater, and when it became apparent he wasn't going to find the dirt he was looking for, his investigation switched to the witch hunt phase in which he searched for anything he could pin on anyone. So he dug up the ******* affair, Clinton denied it, then was found to have lied, hence the perjury charge.

The investigation into whitewater ended with the goal achieved, at least partially, an impeachable offense.

 

[Fargo]

Flynn pled guilty pre-indictment, thereby waiving grand jury, discovery, potential suppression, trial, appeal, etc. A decorated General of substantial means tucked tail before even being charged with a low level felony that has potential defenses.

I cannot think of a single person who has done that other than in exchange for being charged with a lesser crime or being given immunity for others.

I have no idea what else may be out there, and I am skeptical that it is connected to the president, but there's definitely way more to this than just "oh I got caught". Petraeus pled to a misdemeanor for doing something way worse than what Flynn did.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Flynn pled guilty pre-indictment, thereby waiving grand jury, discovery, potential suppression, trial, appeal, etc. A decorated General of substantial means tucked tail before even being charged with a low level felony that has potential defenses.

I cannot think of a single person who has done that other than in exchange for being charged with a lesser crime or being given immunity for others.

I have no idea what else may be out there, and I am skeptical that it is connected to the president, but there's definitely way more to this than just "oh I got caught". Petraeus pled to a misdemeanor for doing something way worse than what Flynn did.

I agree that the comparison to Petraeus is apt. He could have been charged with, and likely indicted/convicted on felony charges, so instead he plead to misdemeanor charges, took the "disgrace" and was done.

IMO, Flynn is the same deal... he's done. Unless there is some unleaked immunity deal or sealed grand jury indictments for lengthy prison time that "forces" his cooperation, pleading out on lying doesn't secure that cooperation. It's just a scalp for Mueller to show something akin to "progress".

 

[SheepDog4Life]

1. Flynn. I don't know if perjury is the only crime Flynn could be charged with. If the FBI knows if perjury is not the only crime Flynn could be charged with, I'm sure they'll charge him--albeit, given the nature of this investigation, likely when it's most politically expedient. Is there evidence more crimes have been committed by Flynn? If so, sure. Pursue the leads. "I think we all know..." Bull****. Please cite the evidence of all these crimes. Given your belief in facts not in evidence, I have to suspect that all this evidence is confirmation bias. But maybe you're aware of facts I'm not aware of. So please inform me. Flynn had to accept the charge because he told people under oath one thing, and they have strong evidence the statements were false. They have him over a barrel. Why wouldn't he plead to that?

2. I did not say those were charges that "weren't illegal anyways". The charge of perjury is solid. That's a crime. He's guilty. But the thing he lied about was not illegal. It was just politically damaging. Just like Bill getting a ******* in the oval office, of all places, wasn't illegal. He lied about it which was illegal.

I'm glad you brought up Kenneth Star. That's a mirror of what Mueller is doing. He started investigating whitewater, and when it became apparent he wasn't going to find the dirt he was looking for, his investigation switched to the witch hunt phase in which he searched for anything he could pin on anyone. So he dug up the ******* affair, Clinton denied it, then was found to have lied, hence the perjury charge.

The investigation into whitewater ended with the goal achieved, at least partially, an impeachable offense.

Just a nit, and perhaps I mis-remember because it's been so long, but didn't Paula Jones' lawyer bring Starr the evidence of Clinton lying under oath during the Jones' lawsuit discovery deposition? My memory was that he was handed it on a silver platter, he didn't have to go looking for it and "dig it up", that Jones' lawyer did that. Clinton then compounded it further by lying more and trying to get Lewinsky to lie (the obstruction and witness tampering charges) after Starr became involved, but the original lie was pre-Starr.

 

[bwframe]

[video=youtube;OYZrhlasN6o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYZrhlasN6o[/video]

 

[BugI02]

And I see we are all still having a great time in here........

We're like family. Some arguments are never really over

 

[BugI02]

Lol on the projection.



While I agree with you completely,they haven't found anything because there is nothing to be found, I think the "masses" would accept a full year as long enough and avoiding a Comey-part-deux is something almost all but the most partisan would accept as reasonable. Plus, with the that timeframe, Mueller is on notice to wrap-up whatever he might have and greatly diminishes the narrative that Trump is cancelling the investigation because it's getting "close" to something damning... i.e. the same narrative line, that the investigation is close to a "smoking gun", that has ran for a solid year now. Yawn.




My inclination is with you, but will likely wait until Saturday or later for the simple fact that I've been trying to dispel the notion among my closest that I am a "geek"... I'm not... merely a "nerd". Lol!



If he could have realistically been charged with other, more serious crimes, he would have. I've posted articles from former AUSAs that indicate that how it is done with co-conspirators to gain, and keep, cooperation... they face serious repercussions if they fail to cooperate along the way. From what I've read, the normal sentence for someone with a clean record is 6 months probation. Balanced against years and millions to clear his name, AND, there is little doubt that Mueller would go after his son as well.

Yeah, I can see reasons for pleading out.



It's nearly universal that previous Independent Counsels and Special Prosecutors way overstayed their stated goals. And, that it was a bad thing.

Not to defend Starr, but his investigation started with a bank examiner finding MILLIONS OF DOLLARS illegally funneled into a real estate venture of which Bill and HIllary were 50/50 partners with the McDougals and bank money illegally funneled into Bill Clinton's campaign fund. The evidence of a crime being committed was not only "probable cause", but "beyond a reasonable doubt", at the outset. The only question was who was guilty of what. The Clinton's were closely associated with 15 individuals convicted of embezzlement and loan fraud... the original Whitewater investigation focus, only the Clinton's escaped indictments and convictions. Also, Starr did not go on a fishing trip looking for the perjury, obstruction of justice and witness tampering charges, Paul Jones' lawyer handed them to him on a silver platter.

So, if within a reasonable period of time, one year, Mueller cannot come up with evidence of a crime related to his charter as Special Prosecutor, colluding with the Russian to influence the election, or evidence of some other crime the President or those closest to him committed that cannot be handled by the career FBI/DOJ folks, then his charter should end.

tl;dr: There hasn't been a shred of evidence, despite all of the political leaks, that would support even STARTING a Special Prosecutor investigation. Mueller needs to come up with that evidence in a reasonable period of time or face being shut down. In this country, we investigation based upon evidence of a crime and follow the facts. We do not investigate people in the absence of evidence in order to go on fishing trips.

Given the ubiquitous accusations of Trump trying to distract from Russia, Russia, Russia™ I'm beginning to suspect reality is exactly 180° out. Without a doubt the original intent of the investigation, under Comey, was to generate uncertainty about the legitimacy of the Trump election while he was attempting to find his footing as president to weaken and damage him as much as possible

Now, however, I think perhaps Obama and Clinton et al are desperate to keep it alive as their distraction from what appear to be some very serious crimes that can be laid directly at their door

 

[ATM]

We're like family. Some arguments are never really over

 

[Alpo]

Would someone clamp off that bleeder?!!! We're losing him!!!

 

[ATM]

INGO family: putting the F U back in dysfunctional!