Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

UNLV2001

A deal is made

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Rebelbacker said:

I don't nor do you.

But that doesn't stop you, in the absence of evidence, in thinking Mueller has the goods. 

You don’t make a deal with a witness unless that witness has something or someone to deliver. Mueller has flipped mobsters that have sworn blood oaths never to roll. How hard do you think it’s going to be for him to flip Cohen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jackmormon said:

You don’t make a deal with a witness unless that witness has something or someone to deliver. Mueller has flipped mobsters that have sworn blood oaths never to roll. How hard do you think it’s going to be for him to flip Cohen?

Haha. How'd Mueller do with Whitey Bulger?

Even that noted hard core right winger Alan Dershowitz has issues with Mueller. https://www.newsmax.com/politics/alan-dershowitz-mueller-political-zealot/2018/04/08/id/853235/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Rebelbacker said:

LOL. Only an idiot like you still thinks with everything we know that Hillary didn't break any laws with her email scandal. 

So anything not yet found on trump means he's totally innocent........and after dozens of investigations on HRC led by the GP they came up with nothing and you think she's guilty 

Ok, Like I said you have your own reality like a lot of other GOP'ers who've been trained over the years 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jackmormon said:

 

 

If you look up your history, they actually had a crime to investigate.  The investigation also didn't take years to find evidence against the president.

When again is Trump going to be charged?  You said he wouldn't last a year and now he is about to be running for re-election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

So anything not yet found on trump means he's totally innocent........and after dozens of investigations on HRC led by the GP they came up with nothing and you think she's guilty 

Ok, Like I said you have your own reality like a lot of other GOP'ers who've been trained over the years 

Still posting, still no facts.

Still your only response is to call anyone who disagrees with you stupid or racist.    

You prove me right every time you post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

Still posting, still no facts.

Still your only response is to call anyone who disagrees with you stupid or racist.    

You prove me right every time you post.

Timeline of events:

Post #1: UNLV2001 points out that 12 years and dozens of partisan investigations lead by the other party into Hillary Clinton turned up no indictments let alone convictions likely means there's nothing criminal to find, whereas plenty of both have happened after only a single year of the Mueller investigation.

Post #1: Rebelbacker calls UNLV2001 an "idiot" (stupid) for UNLV coming to the conclusion that there's nothing major to find on Hillary Clinton.

Post #2: UNLV2001 points out the glaring differences in burden of proof being applied by Rebelbacker between Hillary and Trump

Post #3: Bluerules says that UNLV2001 posts no facts and calls people who disagree with him stupid (or "idiots" if you prefer)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, nocoolnamejim said:

Timeline of events:

Post #1: UNLV2001 points out that 12 years and dozens of partisan investigations lead by the other party into Hillary Clinton turned up no indictments let alone convictions likely means there's nothing criminal to find, whereas plenty of both have happened after only a single year of the Mueller investigation.

Post #1: Rebelbacker calls UNLV2001 an "idiot" (stupid) for UNLV coming to the conclusion that there's nothing major to find on Hillary Clinton.

Post #2: UNLV2001 points out the glaring differences in burden of proof being applied by Rebelbacker between Hillary and Trump

Post #3: Bluerules says that UNLV2001 posts no facts and calls people who disagree with him stupid (or "idiots" if you prefer)

You miss the whole point of the conversation.  USSR2001 has went off on the hillary tangent to hide the fact he can't defend Obama and his claims are based on his soft racism.

USSR2001 claims Obama has accomplishments that make him a great president.   We were asking for him to list them, yet all he can do is call people stupid or racist.  Just like every other lefty.

By the way anyone who thinks Hillary didn't break the law is an idiot, I don't care if there were 100 years of investigations.  It just shows how corrupt the justice department and FBI and anyone else involved is by not at least admitting she broke the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

You miss the whole point of the conversation.

USSR2001 claims Obama has accomplishments that make him a great president.   We were asking for him to list them, yet all he can do is call people stupid or racist.  Just like every other lefty.

By the way anyone who thinks Hillary didn't break the law is an idiot, I don't care if there were 100 years of investigations.  It just shows how corrupt the justice department and FBI and anyone else involved is by not at least admitting she broke the law.

Actually, that was never a conversation in this thread. This thread is not about Obama's accomplishments or lack thereof. The topic in this thread was about the Mueller investigation. A part of that was a comparison to the various Clinton investigations, their length, their results and the burden of proof required.

I can't speak for what has happened in other threads, but in THIS thread my previous post is an accurate summary of the previous four posts I referenced before I posted. I can now add

Post #5: bluerules tries to change the subject and distract by bringing in things from other threads, calls people he disagrees with stupid "an idiot" and shows the exact same burden or proof differences that UNLV2001 just pointed out for Rebelbacker rather than concede the timeline of events in the current thread.

I mean, don't you feel just a LITTLE hypocritical for in consecutive posts saying that UNLV2001's only response to people who disagree with him is to call them stupid...and in your very next post calling anyone who thinks decades of investigations into Hillary Clinton finding nothing shows there's nothing criminal to find idiots?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

 

If you look up your history, they actually had a crime to investigate.  The investigation also didn't take years to find evidence against the president.

When again is Trump going to be charged?  You said he wouldn't last a year and now he is about to be running for re-election.

Today is the one year anniversary of Mueller being named special prosecutor.

I said he wouldn’t make it through his first term.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rebelbacker said:

Haha. How'd Mueller do with Whitey Bulger?

Even that noted hard core right winger Alan Dershowitz has issues with Mueller. https://www.newsmax.com/politics/alan-dershowitz-mueller-political-zealot/2018/04/08/id/853235/

Ahhhh, newsmax....

And you are chasing Sean Hannity conspiricy theories now.

“I was the federal judge who presided over a successful lawsuit brought against the government by two of those men and the families of the other two, who had died in prison. Based on the voluminous evidence submitted in the trial, and having written a 105-page decision awarding them $101.8 million, I can say without equivocation that Mr. Mueller, who worked in the United States attorney’s office in Boston from 1982 to 1988, including a brief stint as the acting head of the office, had no involvement in that case. He was never even mentioned.”

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a19863153/trump-hannity-mueller-whitey-bulger/

Dershowitz also says OJ and Klause Von Beulow are innocent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, UNLV2001 said:

So anything not yet found on trump means he's totally innocent........and after dozens of investigations on HRC led by the GP they came up with nothing and you think she's guilty 

Ok, Like I said you have your own reality like a lot of other GOP'ers who've been trained over the years 

Oh, they came up with plenty. The FBI and DOJ wouldn't prosecute. But we'll be hearing all about that pretty soon. 

 

 

9 hours ago, nocoolnamejim said:

Timeline of events:

Post #1: UNLV2001 points out that 12 years and dozens of partisan investigations lead by the other party into Hillary Clinton turned up no indictments let alone convictions likely means there's nothing criminal to find, whereas plenty of both have happened after only a single year of the Mueller investigation.

Post #1: Rebelbacker calls UNLV2001 an "idiot" (stupid) for UNLV coming to the conclusion that there's nothing major to find on Hillary Clinton.

Post #2: UNLV2001 points out the glaring differences in burden of proof being applied by Rebelbacker between Hillary and Trump

Post #3: Bluerules says that UNLV2001 posts no facts and calls people who disagree with him stupid (or "idiots" if you prefer)

I didn't call USSR2001 an idiot about Clinton. There are so many other things to call him an idiot about. 

Please tell me the glaring difference in evidence on Hillary and Trump? There is no proof Trump broke any law. We have plenty of proof Hillary did. 

 

Oh and by the way USSR2001 still hasn't said what Obama accomplished while in office. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jackmormon said:

Ahhhh, newsmax....

And you are chasing Sean Hannity conspiricy theories now.

“I was the federal judge who presided over a successful lawsuit brought against the government by two of those men and the families of the other two, who had died in prison. Based on the voluminous evidence submitted in the trial, and having written a 105-page decision awarding them $101.8 million, I can say without equivocation that Mr. Mueller, who worked in the United States attorney’s office in Boston from 1982 to 1988, including a brief stint as the acting head of the office, had no involvement in that case. He was never even mentioned.”

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a19863153/trump-hannity-mueller-whitey-bulger/

Dershowitz also says OJ and Klause Von Beulow are innocent.

That's not exactly the truth.

Albano was appalled that, later that same year, Mueller was appointed FBI director, because it was Mueller, first as an assistant US attorney then as the acting US attorney in Boston, who wrote letters to the parole and pardons board throughout the 1980s opposing clemency for the four men framed by FBI lies.

Of course, Mueller was also in that position while Whitey Bulger was helping the FBI cart off his criminal competitors even as he buried bodies in shallow graves along the Neponset.

“Before he gets that extension,’’ Mike Albano said, “somebody in the Senate or House needs to ask him why the US Attorney’s office he led let the FBI protect Whitey Bulger.’’

I called FBI headquarters in Washington and tried to do just that. The nice lady who answered suggested I talk to one of the FBI’s “public affairs specialists.’’ But my call was not returned.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/1970/01/19/one-lingering-question-for-fbi-director-robert-mueller/613uW0MR7czurRn7M4BG2J/story.html

 

Even HuffPo says he has abused his power.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/conflicts-of-interest-and-ethics-robert-mueller-and_us_5936a148e4b033940169cdc8

Long before he became FBI Director, serious questions existed about Mueller’s role as Acting U.S. Attorney in Boston in effectively enabling decades of corruption and covering up of the FBI’s illicit deals with mobster Whitey Bulger and other “top echelon” informants who committed numerous murders and crimes. When the truth was finally uncovered through intrepid investigative reporting and persistent, honest judges, U.S. taxpayers footed a $100 million court award to the four men framed for murders committed by (the FBI operated) Bulger gang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, jackmormon said:

Today is the one year anniversary of Mueller being named special prosecutor.

I said he wouldn’t make it through his first term.

 

Of course the investigation started before Trump was elected but again your lack of honesty is typical of lefties like you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, nocoolnamejim said:

Actually, that was never a conversation in this thread. This thread is not about Obama's accomplishments or lack thereof. The topic in this thread was about the Mueller investigation. A part of that was a comparison to the various Clinton investigations, their length, their results and the burden of proof required.

I can't speak for what has happened in other threads, but in THIS thread my previous post is an accurate summary of the previous four posts I referenced before I posted. I can now add

Post #5: bluerules tries to change the subject and distract by bringing in things from other threads, calls people he disagrees with stupid "an idiot" and shows the exact same burden or proof differences that UNLV2001 just pointed out for Rebelbacker rather than concede the timeline of events in the current thread.

I mean, don't you feel just a LITTLE hypocritical for in consecutive posts saying that UNLV2001's only response to people who disagree with him is to call them stupid...and in your very next post calling anyone who thinks decades of investigations into Hillary Clinton finding nothing shows there's nothing criminal to find idiots?

Sticking to the ignorant racist lefty playbook, call everyone stupid and/or racist.

That's all you have in your empty suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, nocoolnamejim said:

Timeline of events:

Post #1: UNLV2001 points out that 12 years and dozens of partisan investigations lead by the other party into Hillary Clinton turned up no indictments let alone convictions likely means there's nothing criminal to find, whereas plenty of both have happened after only a single year of the Mueller investigation.

Post #1: Rebelbacker calls UNLV2001 an "idiot" (stupid) for UNLV coming to the conclusion that there's nothing major to find on Hillary Clinton.

Post #2: UNLV2001 points out the glaring differences in burden of proof being applied by Rebelbacker between Hillary and Trump

Post #3: Bluerules says that UNLV2001 posts no facts and calls people who disagree with him stupid (or "idiots" if you prefer)

Like trying to make a door knob understand reality - it has no concept of reality either 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rebelbacker said:

Oh, they came up with plenty. The FBI and DOJ wouldn't prosecute. But we'll be hearing all about that pretty soon. 

 

Good response !! The RW media indoctrination worked well on you - If the facts go against your reality, go CONSPIRACY Theory !!! 

Next thing you trot out will be the Pizza parlor child slavery ring !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rebelbacker said:

That's not exactly the truth.

Albano was appalled that, later that same year, Mueller was appointed FBI director, because it was Mueller, first as an assistant US attorney then as the acting US attorney in Boston, who wrote letters to the parole and pardons board throughout the 1980s opposing clemency for the four men framed by FBI lies.

Of course, Mueller was also in that position while Whitey Bulger was helping the FBI cart off his criminal competitors even as he buried bodies in shallow graves along the Neponset.

“Before he gets that extension,’’ Mike Albano said, “somebody in the Senate or House needs to ask him why the US Attorney’s office he led let the FBI protect Whitey Bulger.’’

I called FBI headquarters in Washington and tried to do just that. The nice lady who answered suggested I talk to one of the FBI’s “public affairs specialists.’’ But my call was not returned.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/1970/01/19/one-lingering-question-for-fbi-director-robert-mueller/613uW0MR7czurRn7M4BG2J/story.html

 

Even HuffPo says he has abused his power.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/conflicts-of-interest-and-ethics-robert-mueller-and_us_5936a148e4b033940169cdc8

Long before he became FBI Director, serious questions existed about Mueller’s role as Acting U.S. Attorney in Boston in effectively enabling decades of corruption and covering up of the FBI’s illicit deals with mobster Whitey Bulger and other “top echelon” informants who committed numerous murders and crimes. When the truth was finally uncovered through intrepid investigative reporting and persistent, honest judges, U.S. taxpayers footed a $100 million court award to the four men framed for murders committed by (the FBI operated) Bulger gang.

You didn’t read what the judge who heard the case said. She addresses the conspiracy theory.

And now we have Nancy Gertner, a lecturer at Harvard Law School, but also the federal judge who heard the case of the four innocent men and who awarded them their $105 million, explaining in an op-ed in The New York Times that any attempt to involve Mueller in any of this is a dishonest attempt to undermine Mueller’s investigation.

I was the federal judge who presided over a successful lawsuit brought against the government by two of those men and the families of the other two, who had died in prison. Based on the voluminous evidence submitted in the trial, and having written a 105-page decision awarding them $101.8 million, I can say without equivocation that Mr. Mueller, who worked in the United States attorney’s office in Boston from 1982 to 1988, including a brief stint as the acting head of the office, had no involvement in that case. He was never even mentioned.

Gertner makes clear that Mueller had no involvement in the Barboza case, let alone in anything having to do with Whitey Bulger. One of the more awkward episodes in this latest attempt at diversion involves a Springfield mayor named Mike Albano, who has been dining out on his claim that he saw a letter from Mueller opposing parole for one of the four men. Dershowitz ran this rap on a radio show. Gertner, again:

But no copy of that letter has ever been produced, and Mr. Dershowitz now says in a statement that several days after making his remarks on the Catsimatidis show, The Boston Globe “revealed for the first time to my knowledge that no such letter has been found. I never repeated the allegation after that.” Still, he said, “further investigation seems warranted, since absence of evidence is not conclusive evidence of absence, especially in government files.”

Lovely. At this point in his career, the Dersh is reduced to quoting Donald Rumsfeld on the lack of WMDs in Iraq while pretending to be William Kunstler. Boston somehow gets involved in everything. It’s part of why we’re so damned insufferable.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UNLV2001 said:

Good response !! The RW media indoctrination worked well on you - If the facts go against your reality, go CONSPIRACY Theory !!! 

Next thing you trot out will be the Pizza parlor child slavery ring !!

Conspiracy theory huh?

With little fanfare, he has been conducting a sprawling probe of the FBI’s handling of the 2016 investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. His full report, which could set off shockwaves, is expected by the early spring.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/372457-ig-poised-to-reignite-war-over-fbis-clinton-case

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...