I don't think this will ever happen; but I would like to see a few marched out of the courtroom in handcuffs. The babbling Mueller should be allowed out to pasture and disappear into obscurity. His legacy has been set forever.
Will The Real Author Of The Mueller Report Please Stand Up!
- Thread starter Robo
- Start date
I don't think this will ever happen; but I would like to see a few marched out of the courtroom in handcuffs. The babbling Mueller should be allowed out to pasture and disappear into obscurity. His legacy has been set forever.
STFU you brain dead hyper partisan hack. You couldn't get anything right if the answers were handed to you. You're probably too uneducated to read.
Trump is a Wharton grad, multi-billionaire and President of the most powerful nation on the planet. What are you? An uneducated, lying leftist goofball sitting in front of a computer screen desperately trying to remove any doubt what a low IQ asshole you are.
You have succeeded. Now do yourself a favor and STFU.
If you say so, but I think the your position is incredibly ignorant of how it works.
I agree with you, I think you replied to the wrong post. I understand how reports are written.
What is incredibly stupid is the guy leading the investigation not knowing what was in the fucking report. I would think that after almost two years, Mueller would have had that laughable mess he authored memorized.
But here you go again, a low IQ leftist loser desperately trying to defend the indefensible. This massive HOAX was juvenile in it's authoring and glaring lack of professionalism.
One of the first things the Special Counsel should be doing is vetting his team to remove any appearance of bias or impropriety. The man didn't even know he was hiring Trump hating Obama holdovers on the staff?
It's obvious you had to have been the shittiest lawyer on the planet with your delusional ideas of the law and processes.
Yes, Jarod is almost as stupid as you are. Like you, he suffers from a low IQ, is a hyper partisan hack and a liar.
PRICELESS!!! Jarod already drunk first thing in the morning. What a loser. 
Robo
Verified User
https://thenationalsentinel.com/201...l-mueller-hiring-dem-donors-to-obama-hillary/
(National Sentinel) Special counsel: It’s looking more and more like the “independent” counsel appointed to investigation alleged “Russia” interference in the November elections is going to be less independent and more focused on hijacking Donald J. Trump’s presidency.
As reported by Lifezette, a number of new hires made by former FBI Director Robert Mueller are all lawyers who have either worked for Democrats and their organizations, or have donated to their political campaigns, including former President Barack Obama and 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton:
Four top lawyers hired by Mueller have contributed tens of thousands of dollars over the years to the Democratic Party and Democratic candidates, including former President Barack Obama and President Donald Trump’s 2016 opponent, Hillary Clinton.
One of the hires, Jeannie Rhee, also worked as a lawyer for the Clinton Foundation and helped persuade a federal judge to block a conservative activist’s attempts to force Bill and Hillary Clinton to answer questions under oath about operations of the family-run charity.
The site also noted that a review of campaign finance reports indicate Rhee donated the maximum individual amount of $2,700 to Clinton in 2015 and 2016. In addition, she gave Obama 2,300 in 2008 and $2,500 in 2011. While still working for the Justice Department, she donated $250 to the Democratic National Committee Services Corp.
More to follow.
What’s more, Rhee is also a financial supporter of other Democratic senators including Mark Udall of New Mexico, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.
There’s more, as noted by Lifezette:
James Quarles, who worked on the Watergate investigation as a young prosecutor, has an even longer history of supporting Democratic politicians. He gave $1,300 to Obama in 2007 and $2,300 in 2008. He also gave $2,700 to Clinton last year.
He has supported a number of other Democratic candidates, including Van Hollen, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), former Rep. John Spratt (D-S.C.), former Vice President Al Gore, 2004 presidential candidate John Kerry, former Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), and Colorado congressional candidate Gail Schwartz.
In addition, Quarles gave money to former Sen. John Walsh (D-Mont.) and three current Democratic senators — Ron Wyden of Oregon, Ed Markey of Massachusetts, and Robert Menendez of New Jersey. He chipped in $300 to the DNC Services Corp. $300 in 2012.
Also, Andrew Weissmann, a former Justice Department lawyer who now is at Jenner & Block, contributed $2,300 to Obama in 2008 and $2,000 to the DNC Services Corp. in 2006. Weissmann served as chief of the Justice Department’s criminal fraud section and worked on the Enron fraud case.
And one additional lawyer on Mueller’s team, Michael Dreeben, donated $1,000 to Clinton 2006 and $250 to Obama in both 2007 and 2008. He was deputy solicitor general and has appeared many times before the Supreme Court.
There is no way these people are going to be fair to Trump – a fact not lost on former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, an informal advisor to the president, who made this known in a tweet on Monday, which left progressives apoplectic:
Newt Gingrich
✔
@newtgingrich
Republicans are delusional if they think the special counsel is going to be fair. Look who he is hiring.check fec reports. Time to rethink.
Robo
Verified User
It's absolutely apparent to me that Robert Mueller wrote zero, nota, none of it nor did the old demented fellow even bother to read any of it. How about you?
I think you fall for slickness. Robert Mueller is not slick.
Robo
Verified User
I figure the old demented fellow was simply appointed by the criminal Rosenstein precisely because of his stellar reputation, his "Never Trump" RINO ideology and because Rosenstein knew he was a shell of his one time abilities and could be easily manipulated & encouraged to hire the bleeping gang of rabid mad junkyard dog democrat Trump hating lawyers. It seems Mueller's demented condition was only a secret to general America, the swamp knew exactly who and what was left of him.
Robo
Verified User
Get your silly act together lefties!!!!!
Robo
Verified User
The demented old fellow Mueller is the least of the swamp sickness! I do believe that Mr. Barr is about to expose the really, really SICK-Os infested with SWAMP LIAR FEVER & CORRUPTION SYNDROME, what do you think?
Of course, the intelligence agencies do not hire based on politics since they have to leave politics at the door. You cannot understand that people can just do their job regardless of political affiliation. You think they are all like you., Trump is all you care about. The intelligence agencies are heavily Republican. Dems are not crying about that like you do. We expect them to do their job properly. That is exactly what Mueller did.
That was predictable. You have a Red persecution complex like Trump. Mueller was taciturn. That is his nature. But he answered every question that he felt it was legal to do. He gave short and honest answers, often one word like "true". He was heavily involved in the report and the investigation. You know who knows nothing about its inner workings?..YOU.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Robo,
How wrong could you be?
Wrong. It was not impeachment hearings.
Wrong The Mueller Report is quite real.
Wrong. Robert Mueller attests to it's accuracy.
Wrong. He is not suspicious at all. He is a well respected public servant. [/QUOTE]
Wrong.
"Weissmann has a bachelor's degree from Princeton University (1980). Following a Fulbright scholarship to the University of Geneva, he attended and graduated from Columbia Law School (1984). He then clerked for Judge Eugene Nickerson in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.[2]
From 1991 to 2002, Weissmann worked in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York. While there he tried more than 25 cases involving members of the Genovese, Colombo and Gambino crime families.[1] He led the prosecution team in the Vincent Gigante case, in which Gigante was convicted.[3]
From 2002 to 2005, Weissmann was deputy director and then director of the task force investigating the Enron scandal.[1] His work resulted in the prosecution of more than 30 people for crimes including perjury, fraud, and obstruction including three of Enron's top executives, Andrew Fastow, Kenneth Lay. and Jeffrey Skilling. In a follow-up case in U.S. District Court, Weissmann also was successful at arguing that auditing firm Arthur Andersen LLP had covered up for Enron. In that case, which resulted in the destruction of Andersen, he convinced the district judge to instruct the jury that they could convict the firm regardless of whether its employees knew they were violating the law.[3] That ruling was later unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, in which the court held that "the jury instructions failed to convey the requisite consciousness of wrongdoing."[3]
In 2005 Weissmann worked as special counsel under Mueller at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, then went into private practice at Jenner & Block in New York. In 2011 he returned to the FBI, serving as General Counsel under Mueller.[4] Since 2015 he has headed the criminal fraud section at DOJ. Weissmann has taught at NYU School of Law, Fordham Law School, and Brooklyn Law School.[2]
On June 19, 2017, Weissmann joined Special Counsel Mueller's team in investigating Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections.[5][6] He was said to be "the architect of the case against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort." A news report in March 2019 said he would soon leave the Justice Department and become a faculty member at New York University and to work on public service projects.[7] " -wiki
Wrong. He was guided by DOJ order 3915-2017 Appointment of the Special Counsel To Investigate Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential Election
Wrong. See the DOJ order to investigate Russian interference.
Correct. Digging into the Clinton campaign and looking for wrongdoing is not part of Russian interference into the election. It was clear the Russians were not trying to help the Clinton campaign.
Wrong. That's a made-up opinion which is not based in verifiable fact.
Wrong. Bias evident.
Wrong. Fabricated and unsupported. Fake news.
Wrong. That was only a small part of the agenda.
Wrong. When Mueller was chosen, he was praised by both sides as being fair and impartial. And that is how he carried out is mission, which was evident in his testimony.
Wrong. This is purely conjecture and not supported by fact. WE learned no such thing. YOU have attempted to establish it, but failed.
Wrong. You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.
Wrong 14 out of 15 times. Your version of things bears little resemblance to reality. But I get it. That is Trump's world. The only way to remain supportive of President Trump is to buy in to his alternate version of reality, which is not based in fact, but innuendo. This is evident by the way the story keeps changing, such as Trump's praise for Wikleaks during the campaign, and his later criticism of Wikileaks. Trump's version of events is constantly altered to fit the current narrative. Another example would be when President Trump claimed 'total and complete exoneration' upon the release of the Mueller Report, but then later walked that back and claimed that a prosecutor cannot actually exonerate anybody.
How wrong could you be?
Wrong. It was not impeachment hearings.
Wrong The Mueller Report is quite real.
Wrong. Robert Mueller attests to it's accuracy.
Wrong. He is not suspicious at all. He is a well respected public servant. [/QUOTE]
Wrong.
"Weissmann has a bachelor's degree from Princeton University (1980). Following a Fulbright scholarship to the University of Geneva, he attended and graduated from Columbia Law School (1984). He then clerked for Judge Eugene Nickerson in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.[2]
From 1991 to 2002, Weissmann worked in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York. While there he tried more than 25 cases involving members of the Genovese, Colombo and Gambino crime families.[1] He led the prosecution team in the Vincent Gigante case, in which Gigante was convicted.[3]
From 2002 to 2005, Weissmann was deputy director and then director of the task force investigating the Enron scandal.[1] His work resulted in the prosecution of more than 30 people for crimes including perjury, fraud, and obstruction including three of Enron's top executives, Andrew Fastow, Kenneth Lay. and Jeffrey Skilling. In a follow-up case in U.S. District Court, Weissmann also was successful at arguing that auditing firm Arthur Andersen LLP had covered up for Enron. In that case, which resulted in the destruction of Andersen, he convinced the district judge to instruct the jury that they could convict the firm regardless of whether its employees knew they were violating the law.[3] That ruling was later unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, in which the court held that "the jury instructions failed to convey the requisite consciousness of wrongdoing."[3]
In 2005 Weissmann worked as special counsel under Mueller at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, then went into private practice at Jenner & Block in New York. In 2011 he returned to the FBI, serving as General Counsel under Mueller.[4] Since 2015 he has headed the criminal fraud section at DOJ. Weissmann has taught at NYU School of Law, Fordham Law School, and Brooklyn Law School.[2]
On June 19, 2017, Weissmann joined Special Counsel Mueller's team in investigating Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections.[5][6] He was said to be "the architect of the case against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort." A news report in March 2019 said he would soon leave the Justice Department and become a faculty member at New York University and to work on public service projects.[7] " -wiki
Wrong. He was guided by DOJ order 3915-2017 Appointment of the Special Counsel To Investigate Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential Election
Wrong. See the DOJ order to investigate Russian interference.
Correct. Digging into the Clinton campaign and looking for wrongdoing is not part of Russian interference into the election. It was clear the Russians were not trying to help the Clinton campaign.
Wrong. That's a made-up opinion which is not based in verifiable fact.
Wrong. Bias evident.
Wrong. Fabricated and unsupported. Fake news.
Wrong. That was only a small part of the agenda.
Wrong. When Mueller was chosen, he was praised by both sides as being fair and impartial. And that is how he carried out is mission, which was evident in his testimony.
Wrong. This is purely conjecture and not supported by fact. WE learned no such thing. YOU have attempted to establish it, but failed.
Wrong. You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.
Wrong 14 out of 15 times. Your version of things bears little resemblance to reality. But I get it. That is Trump's world. The only way to remain supportive of President Trump is to buy in to his alternate version of reality, which is not based in fact, but innuendo. This is evident by the way the story keeps changing, such as Trump's praise for Wikleaks during the campaign, and his later criticism of Wikileaks. Trump's version of events is constantly altered to fit the current narrative. Another example would be when President Trump claimed 'total and complete exoneration' upon the release of the Mueller Report, but then later walked that back and claimed that a prosecutor cannot actually exonerate anybody.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Robo,
It would be in appropriate to ask prospectives about their political positions. The proper method of vetting prospective team members is to look at their work record.
It would be in appropriate to ask prospectives about their political positions. The proper method of vetting prospective team members is to look at their work record.
I think you are dishonest and never answer a question honestly. Obama was slick. You fell for him. Trump, not so slick and you hate him.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Robo,
I disagree.
And I don't think you have anything to back up what you say, which appears to be completely contrived.
I disagree.
And I don't think you have anything to back up what you say, which appears to be completely contrived.