• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Is Robert Mueller’s Russian Troll Farm Indictment Falling Apart?

TrainedRage

Banned
Feb 3, 2018
9,302
14,339
1,080
35
USA
And here he comes to prove my point.
Clearly you don't understand sarcastic comments. But please do tell what point did I just prove? Was it supposed to be obvious? She broke federal law. Her campaign was literally trashing things, that's about it. I mean clearly it worked out for her.
 

bucyou

Member
Feb 3, 2018
3,130
6,747
715
if obstruction is nothing then what case is there against trump? Kinda going against the point you are "trying" to make..
 

Autoignition

Member
Apr 13, 2016
1,918
367
265
Hey man, rather than just dismissing that Mueller is an inside agent of the deep state, why not debate it like adults? Looks like you have some growing up to do.

I'm not debating anything with anyone about anything until I get even a single shred of evidence that a "deep state" exists.

Verifiable, quantifiable, written, collected data. Not conspiracy theories. I'm not here to entertain fantasies. I want data.

Until then? THERE IS NO DEEP STATE. And if there is no deep state, then Mueller can't very well be controlled by it, can he?
 

bucyou

Member
Feb 3, 2018
3,130
6,747
715
I'm not debating anything with anyone about anything until I get even a single shred of evidence that a "deep state" exists.

Verifiable, quantifiable, written, collected data. Not conspiracy theories. I'm not here to entertain fantasies. I want data.

Until then? THERE IS NO DEEP STATE. And if there is no deep state, then Mueller can't very well be controlled by it, can he?


Kinda the same thing we want about trump's "obstruction and collusion"

i think your words are fitting "Verifiable, quantifiable, written, collected data. Not conspiracy theories. I'm not here to entertain fantasies. I want data."
 

Autoignition

Member
Apr 13, 2016
1,918
367
265
Kinda the same thing we want about trump's "obstruction and collusion"

i think your words are fitting "Verifiable, quantifiable, written, collected data. Not conspiracy theories. I'm not here to entertain fantasies. I want data."

We all want that. That's why I keep screaming at you all to wait until the investigation is over instead of demanding results from something that's still in progress.
 

infinitys_7th

Member
Oct 1, 2006
12,753
22,914
1,885
I'm not debating anything with anyone about anything until I get even a single shred of evidence that a "deep state" exists.

Verifiable, quantifiable, written, collected data. Not conspiracy theories. I'm not here to entertain fantasies. I want data.

Until then? THERE IS NO DEEP STATE. And if there is no deep state, then Mueller can't very well be controlled by it, can he?

"Deep state" is a label for unelected bureaucrats who have entrenched, long-term jobs that are difficult for a new administration to turn over.

If people want to think that "deep state" means a shadowy cabal in smoke-filled rooms, like an alienless Syndicate, that's not my problem. Those described by the label obviously exist, and have a great influence on the government.

By this definition, the "deep state" appears to hate Trump.
 
Last edited:

Autoignition

Member
Apr 13, 2016
1,918
367
265
"Deep state" is a label for unelected bureaucrats who have entrenched, long-term jobs that are difficult for a new administration to turn over.

If people want to think that "deep state" means a shadowy cabal in smoke-filled rooms, like an alienless Syndicate, that's not my problem. Those described by the label obviously exist, and have a great influence on the government.

That's nice.

That's not evidence that a deep state exists in the sense that they're all collaborating in order to bring down Trump or what the hell ever. Hell, I've never seen evidence that most of these people even know each other.
 
W

Whataborman

Unconfirmed Member
That's nice.

That's not evidence that a deep state exists in the sense that they're all collaborating in order to bring down Trump or what the hell ever. Hell, I've never seen evidence that most of these people even know each other.


Peter Strzok and Lisa Paige are the textbook definition of deep state. They exist and were collaborating with themselves and others to bring harm to the Trump administration.
 

Autoignition

Member
Apr 13, 2016
1,918
367
265
Pardon?

Are you not familiar with the transcripts of text messages between Peter Strzok and Lisa Paige?

Yeah. They shittalked candidates during the election. That's not evidence of collaboration to bring down the administration. Who among us doesn't talk shit about their boss?
 
Jan 22, 2015
854
84
410
Government employees are not forbidden from having political opinions. In fact, to not be able to have them would be terrifying and an indicator of an authoritarian regime.
 
W

Whataborman

Unconfirmed Member
Yeah. They shittalked candidates during the election. That's not evidence of collaboration to bring down the administration. Who among us doesn't talk shit about their boss?


I have a feeling that no matter what evidence or facts that someone provides about the deep state, you'll just move the goal posts and ask for more .
 
Jan 22, 2015
854
84
410
As with any crackpot conspiracy - you believing it is your problem and not mine. It's not my job to go out and not find the Illuminati.
 

bucyou

Member
Feb 3, 2018
3,130
6,747
715
As with any crackpot conspiracy - you believing it is your problem and not mine. It's not my job to go out and not find the Illuminati.


A lead FBI special agent discussing with his mistress how to get to a FISA judge without alerting others to have "clandestine" conversations, also discussing insurance policies against a trump presidency, which the transcripts come from the dept of justice, is a crackpot conspiracy?


You are ridiculous.
 

Autoignition

Member
Apr 13, 2016
1,918
367
265
I have a feeling that no matter what evidence or facts that someone provides about the deep state, you'll just move the goal posts and ask for more .

I haven't moved any goal posts. I have said out loud to my co-workers that I hope that our company gets sued and/or that my bosses get fired. That does not mean that me and said coworkers are actively collaborating to take down the company and/or get my bosses fired. The evidence that you've provided does not support your conclusion. If this was a science lab, you'd be thrown out as a laughing stock.

Until you have actual evidence of actual collaboration between actual US officials, this conversation is over.
 
W

Whataborman

Unconfirmed Member
A lead FBI special agent discussing with his mistress how to get to a FISA judge without alerting others to have "clandestine" conversations, also discussing insurance policies against a trump presidency, which the transcripts come from the dept of justice, is a crackpot conspiracy?


You are ridiculous.

You are correct on all counts.

I get the feeling that there are a couple of people here that won't be convinced no matter how much evidence is presented. These are the same people who will likely continue to claim that President Trump is a Russian puppet long after there's proof that he isn't.
 
Jan 22, 2015
854
84
410
A lead FBI special agent discussing with his mistress how to get to a FISA judge without alerting others to have "clandestine" conversations, also discussing insurance policies against a trump presidency, which the transcripts come from the dept of justice, is a crackpot conspiracy?


You are ridiculous.

Correct. This is reasonable grounds for removing them from the investigation so that it remains impartial. This is not convincing evidence that there's a secret society of government officials secretly running things, which is more challenging to prove.

Opinion unchanged: Claim filed under "crackpot conspiracy theory for right-wing nut-jobs"
 
Last edited:

Tevious

Member
Aug 30, 2011
2,505
183
855
You are free to step out of your echochamber and debate...

Its lazy to go directly to "oh look theres dissenting opinions here and i dont agree, must be the donald"

To be fair, that thread title is baiting. Your OP is clearly biased and filled with baseless accusations. If you truly wanted a real discussion and debate, you wouldn't be doing the very things you accuse Mueller of doing; trolling. It's fine to have your own opinion, but at least post the basic facts of the matter (or link a proper news article), then offer your opinion and reasoning for it. The only people that are going to bother to reply to a thread like this are people within your own echo-chamber, those you've managed to bait, and those who would call you out.
 

TrainedRage

Banned
Feb 3, 2018
9,302
14,339
1,080
35
USA
To be fair, that thread title is baiting. Your OP is clearly biased and filled with baseless accusations. If you truly wanted a real discussion and debate, you wouldn't be doing the very things you accuse Mueller of doing; trolling. It's fine to have your own opinion, but at least post the basic facts of the matter (or link a proper news article), then offer your opinion and reasoning for it. The only people that are going to bother to reply to a thread like this are people within your own echo-chamber, those you've managed to bait, and those who would call you out.

Your point is completely valid, but you are replying are you not? You are part of the chamber. Just like me.

Yet the OP may still learn something from you or others, even if his intent was to "troll" as you say.
 

Texas Pride

Banned
Feb 27, 2018
2,997
5,616
665
Texas
I doubt that guilty pleas to crimes “will probably amount to nothing” ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ but please by all means keep moving this goal
posts around.



I was never told any of that with any kind of certainty. Sounds like you’ve been following some questionable or sensational sources. The possibility has been raised, which is one of the reasons we have an investigation.



I would be quite shocked if it were true, but you do realize the investigation is still ongoing, right? Why would we know the answer to those questions with certainty already?


Let's be honest okay. The reason there's an investigation is bcs Hillary and the Democrats lost and since she was a lock to win and didn't they've got to blame anyone but themselves for it. And as long as they keep moving the goalposts and expanding the investigation A) It looks likely with each passing day this is all bullshit and B) It'll just continue on without resolution with the desired effect of keeping negative shit about Trump in the news. If the dude is guilty okay great get it over with but dragging the shit on indefinitely reeks of desperation and bias.
 

Texas Pride

Banned
Feb 27, 2018
2,997
5,616
665
Texas
Yep nothing to see here folks. Even though the Clinton campaign was asked to provide those emails and phones BEFORE they were destroyed. But nah, everyone has a government private server running out of a small mom and pop shop. And yeah they are super secure!!! Don't question Hillary!!!
Everyone does this!!!
She dindu nothing!!!


It's perfectly normal to destroy evidence during an investigation apparently. I can just imagine if Trump destroyed evidence he was directed to hand over how he wouldn't be afforded the same benefit of the doubt Hillary is getting. This is what hypocrisy looks like. It's only wrong if it's the other team doing it. Justice shouldn't take political sides if you're interested in the truth.
 
Last edited:

Sàmban

Banned
Feb 21, 2014
811
302
0
It's perfectly normal to destroy evidence during an investigation apparently. I can just imagine if Trump destroyed evidence he was directed to hand over how he wouldn't be afforded the same benefit of the doubt Hillary is getting. This is what hypocrisy looks like. It's only wrong if it's the other team doing it. Justice shouldn't take political sides if you're interested in the truth.

Why don’t you guys write letters to your republican congressmen to open another investigation into Hilary on this matter? Since apparently the last ones where Republicans themselves found nothing was not enough. They definitely can do one now.

All you guys do is bitch about Hilary as a convenient deflection for any criticism of your party forgetting who holds all the power right now. Do something.
 
Last edited:

404Ender

Member
Jun 17, 2006
3,839
300
1,535
Let's be honest okay. The reason there's an investigation is bcs Hillary and the Democrats lost and since she was a lock to win and didn't they've got to blame anyone but themselves for it. And as long as they keep moving the goalposts and expanding the investigation A) It looks likely with each passing day this is all bullshit and B) It'll just continue on without resolution with the desired effect of keeping negative shit about Trump in the news.

Ok bud, whatever helps you sleep at night.

If the dude is guilty okay great get it over with but dragging the shit on indefinitely reeks of desperation and bias.

I get that social media has destroyed most people's attention spans, and Trump's absurdity and the constant scandals surrounding his administration combined with a 24/7 news cycle has warped everyone's sense of time, but "dragging this shit on indefinitely"? Mueller is moving very quickly compared to previous special counsel investigations.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-russia-investigation-is-moving-really-freaking-fast/
 
Feb 8, 2018
1,323
1,741
635
Weren't private email servers being used by all of Trump's aides in the White House, and if you're within spitting distance from the oval office would you not be privy to a whole lot of confidential nonsense.

Get Hillary though, having an ex-cia director as secretary of state guarantees no dodginess, so ...
 
Dec 6, 2008
6,634
369
1,270
TX
Weren't private email servers being used by all of Trump's aides in the White House, and if you're within spitting distance from the oval office would you not be privy to a whole lot of confidential nonsense.

Get Hillary though, having an ex-cia director as secretary of state guarantees no dodginess, so ...
Aren't a bunch of them still using personal emails to conduct government business?
 

infinitys_7th

Member
Oct 1, 2006
12,753
22,914
1,885
Ok bud, whatever helps you sleep at night.



I get that social media has destroyed most people's attention spans, and Trump's absurdity and the constant scandals surrounding his administration combined with a 24/7 news cycle has warped everyone's sense of time, but "dragging this shit on indefinitely"? Mueller is moving very quickly compared to previous special counsel investigations.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-russia-investigation-is-moving-really-freaking-fast/

They are measuring it "moving fast" in terms of total counts of indictments, which does not indicate it is moving fast, particularly when the 13 Russians all worked together. Most of the work Mueller has done has been on decades-old crimes unrelated to the election and bullying people for lying.

It's actually moving pretty slowly, and the 13 Russians may well be acquitted because Mueller does not have his shit together.
 
Last edited:

404Ender

Member
Jun 17, 2006
3,839
300
1,535
They are measuring it "moving fast" in terms of total counts of indictments, which does not indicate it is moving fast, particularly when the 13 Russians all worked together. Most of the work Mueller has done has been on decades-old crimes unrelated to the election and bullying people for lying.

It's actually moving pretty slowly, and the 13 Russians may well be acquitted because Mueller does not have his shit together.

He specifically said "dragging the shit on indefinitely", as if the investigation has been a long one. A reference more to length than velocity. Most previous investigations lasted years.
 

Texas Pride

Banned
Feb 27, 2018
2,997
5,616
665
Texas
He specifically said "dragging the shit on indefinitely", as if the investigation has been a long one. A reference more to length than velocity. Most previous investigations lasted years.


It has been long IMO and the whether the metric is length or velocity the results this far are underwhelming to put it gently. I get it. This is a team sport for you. If this was truly a team sport though your team went in at halftime and hasn't come out until they are assured they can't lose by getting the other team thrown out.
 
Last edited:

404Ender

Member
Jun 17, 2006
3,839
300
1,535
It has been long IMO and the whether the metric is length or velocity the results this far are underwhelming to put it gently. I get it. This is a team sport for you. If this was truly a team sport though your team went in at halftime and hasn't come out until they are assured they can't lose by getting the other team thrown out.

That’s nice that you, Texas Pride, feel like it’s been going on a long time. But objectively, compared to previous investigations, it has not.

The results can’t be underwhelming or overwhelming yet because it’s an ongoing investigation and we don’t have all of the information yet. Again with the impatience.

Oh and what “team” am I on, exactly?
 

JDB

Banned
Dec 12, 2015
3,827
210
0
That’s nice that you, Texas Pride, feel like it’s been going on a long time. But objectively, compared to previous investigations, it has not.

The results can’t be underwhelming or overwhelming yet because it’s an ongoing investigation and we don’t have all of the information yet. Again with the impatience.

Oh and what “team” am I on, exactly?
Team Deep State
 

Dontero

Banned
Apr 19, 2018
3,046
3,373
650
Correct. This is reasonable grounds for removing them from the investigation so that it remains impartial. This is not convincing evidence that there's a secret society of government officials secretly running things, which is more challenging to prove.

Opinion unchanged: Claim filed under "crackpot conspiracy theory for right-wing nut-jobs"

How about president directly telling you about it ?

 

bucyou

Member
Feb 3, 2018
3,130
6,747
715
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Lawyers for Russian company Concord Management and Consulting, LLC, formally entered a “not guilty” plea in federal court Monday in a case special counsel Robert Mueller probably never thought would happen.


Mueller, weathering significant criticism that his Russian collusion case was thin, unveiled a grandiose indictment Feb. 16 against 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies. The 13 Russians in question were charged with waging “information warfare” in the United States, interfering with the 2016 presidential election, and conspiracy to defraud the United States.


Mueller generated headlines with the February indictment, safe in the knowledge the 13 Russians were beyond U.S. jurisdiction. Therefore, there would be no trial — only sensational Russian collusion accusations.

Mueller may now have to try the case, and Concord’s lawyers have put the special counsel on notice. The Russian company’s lawyers intend to invoke “discovery” to obtain U.S. intelligence about what they knew of Russian activities.


“I guess Mueller thought it was a freebie, for sure,” former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy told The Daily Caller News Foundation after the court proceeding.


“He thought it could make this association (of Russian collusion) and it would never be challenged in court,” McCarthy, also a National Review contributing editor, said.


Concord retained the services of two attorneys at mega law firm Reed Smith, and the company is demanding a speedy trial. The lawyers indicated they were going to exercise Concord’s rights under discovery to examine all of Mueller’s “evidence” of the conspiracy.



In starting Wednesday’s trial, Eric A. Dubelier, a Reed Smith law partner, entered a “not guilty” plea in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. He also repeated his client’s interest for a “speedy trial.”


McCarthy called Mueller’s entire indictment an “unforced error.”


“One thing you never want to do is to indict in a case that you’re not prepared to try,” McCarthy said.


Mueller tried to delay Wednesday’s hearing and floated a claim Concord had not been properly served notice.


“Until the Court has an opportunity to determine if Concord was properly served, it would be inadvisable to conduct an initial appearance and arraignment at which important rights will be communicated and a plea entertained,” Mueller’s lawyers filed in federal court.


But Concord opposed the motion. “The Special Counsel is not entitled to special rules and is required like the Attorney General to follow the rules of the Court,” Dubelier stated in his response to Mueller.


U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich agreed with Concord and rejected Mueller’s request for a delay in the trial without comment, which led to Wednesday’s arraignment.


Concord wants a “speedy trial” as provided by federal law, the company’s lawyers also repeated Wednesday. The case will resume July 9.


It is the second legal headache for Mueller in two weeks. Last week, federal Judge T.S. Ellis, III, a Reagan appointee, threatened to throw out the special counsel’s indictment of Paul Manafort since the charges against President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager did not relate to any charges of Russian collusion. Instead, the charges were tied to banking activities that went as far back as 2005 — more than a decade before Trump announced his intention to run for president.
http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/09/russian-collusion-trial-robert-mueller-first-casualty/

So will special counsel embarrassingly withdraw or go ahead with discovery?
 

cryptoadam

Banned
Feb 21, 2018
24,152
51,440
1,215
So will special counsel embarrassingly withdraw or go ahead with discovery?

So from what I understand, Mueller indicted these 13 Russians because he knew it would never go to trial, but now they are taking Mueller to court to get all of his evidence?

So is this more of Trump in bed with Russians that the left can spin that Trump wants all the evidence?

And why would Mueller indict these Russians if he knew it wasn't going to go anywhere?

I am having a hard time following this whole thing and Left/Right both put their own spin on it so I don't know what is true or false. I thought Mueller was trying to link Russia to stealing the election for Trump. Yet now we are talking about Hannity's propery, Cohens business dealings, porn stars, and AT&T possibly bribery. Cohen seems like a shady lawyer but how does all of this tie back to Russians hacking the election so Hillary lost and they installed a Manchurian candidate in Trump?
 
W

Whataborman

Unconfirmed Member
And why would Mueller indict these Russians if he knew it wasn't going to go anywhere?


It's kind of hard to indict people when they haven't committed a crime. At the same time, you can't spend millions of dollars on a high profile special counsel and walk away doing nothing. So, you hedge your bets and indict a bunch of Russians for actions that may not even technically be criminal and hope they ignore the indictments long enough that everyone forgets in a couple of years.

Mueller is a political swamp creature. He knows he's been handed a bag of shit and at this point he's just trying to get a bunch of good press while figuring a way out of the mess that leaves his reputation mostly intact. The investigation will end, he'll go quiet for awhile, and the pop up somewhere else. That's what all political swamp creatures do.


So is this more of Trump in bed with Russians that the left can spin that Trump wants all the evidence?


No. This is someone calling Mueller's bluff because they know he's in a lose/lose situation.

If he withdraws the indictment he may as well just close up the investigation and go home. On the other hand, if he goes forward with trial, all of his evidence becomes public. In that case, everyone either sees that he really doesn't have much evidence to begin with or, if he does, we get to see exactly what he has. My bet is that he really doesn't have much to begin with.
 

bucyou

Member
Feb 3, 2018
3,130
6,747
715
So from what I understand, Mueller indicted these 13 Russians because he knew it would never go to trial, but now they are taking Mueller to court to get all of his evidence?

So is this more of Trump in bed with Russians that the left can spin that Trump wants all the evidence?

And why would Mueller indict these Russians if he knew it wasn't going to go anywhere?

I am having a hard time following this whole thing and Left/Right both put their own spin on it so I don't know what is true or false. I thought Mueller was trying to link Russia to stealing the election for Trump. Yet now we are talking about Hannity's propery, Cohens business dealings, porn stars, and AT&T possibly bribery. Cohen seems like a shady lawyer but how does all of this tie back to Russians hacking the election so Hillary lost and they installed a Manchurian candidate in Trump?

whataborman is correct. The simplest and most non partisan way I can put it is that Mueller brought indictments against these Russian companies as mostly symbolic, having 99% certainty they would not show up and special counsel can count it as a win and move on to the next case. It screwed their plan up when attorneys showed up to the hearing to enter their clients not guilt plea, and demanded as their right to see ALL evidence related to the case, which would be anything involving russian collusion basically, that of which special counsel will refuse to give up(or they dont actually have any). special counsel is now in a pickle, they can withdraw the case and retreat with their tails between their legs, or they must hand over the relevant documents to the defendants via discovery.

Also special counsel tried to pull a cheap move filing a motion that the trial should not continue since they are not sure defendants were properly served with subpoena, even though they served everyone INCLUDING the russian government, lol.
 
Last edited:
W

Whataborman

Unconfirmed Member
Also special counsel tried to pull a cheap move filing a motion that the trial should not continue since they are not sure defendants were properly served with subpoena, even though they served everyone INCLUDING the russian government, lol.

This should tell everyone that they absolutely, positively don't want the trial to continue for whatever reason.

My suspicion is that it's because there's no evidence of anything related to "russian collusion" beyond the posting of some memes on social media. Once that particular cat is out of the bag, the entire special investigation starts to crumble.
 

TheMikado

Banned
Jan 3, 2018
1,405
571
225
This should tell everyone that they absolutely, positively don't want the trial to continue for whatever reason.

My suspicion is that it's because there's no evidence of anything related to "russian collusion" beyond the posting of some memes on social media. Once that particular cat is out of the bag, the entire special investigation starts to crumble.

I've actually been waiting to address this because people aren't posting full articles.

I love to use the OPs articles so I will start there.

From the article
1.) On Friday, Mueller’s team revealed that attorneys for the company had made numerous discovery requests. Those requests were aimed at nonpublic details about the government’s case and underlying investigation. Mueller’s prosecutors were apparently caught off-guard by those requests–it’s been widely assumed that no one named in the February indictment would even bother to respond to the accusations, much less fight back against them and force Mueller’s team to reveal what they know.

FACT: The legal moves by Concord could be aimed at forcing Mueller’s team to turn over material that might expose or undermine the broad investigation or to reveal sensitive intelligence information, legal analysts said, and elicit those disclosures in a case involving a company rather than a trial that exposed accused individuals to risk .
The request, prosecutors have said, included asking for identities of online platforms discovered by federal investigators and any related, charged or uncharged individuals; names of potential witnesses; any statements, recordings or surveillance of Concord employees; and any instances since 1945 in which the U.S. government interfered with elections or political processes of other countries.

Mueller did not abide by these requests. Let's start here. Even if Mueller had the authorization to declassify these documents it would turn over NATIONAL SECURITY secrets to an foreign Russian agent. The request was unbelievable absurd and please remember this is prosecuting a Russian Troll, farm..... This is literally Troll to the American legal system and I cannot imagine any true American would believe we should turn over national security information including names if Americans to a foreign entity.

2.) Politico even suggested that Concord Management’s aggressive lawyering could result in an “embarrassing dismissal.”


Fact: In case you are unaware: Proper serving of a defendant is REQUIRED. This is because the case will be dismissed if improperly served. Because it is a Russian company the request must be submitted through the Russia government through the proper channels or the case will be dismissed outright.

"Federal prosecutors had asked a federal judge to postpone the arraignment until it could be confirmed that Concord and its attorneys were submitting to the jurisdiction of the court given that the case involved a “foreign corporate defendant, controlled by another, individual foreign defendant, that has already demanded production of sensitive intelligence gathering, national security, and foreign affairs information.”

Because of this:
"The prospect that the Russian defendants, including companies, would appear in court to face prosecution had seemed unlikely. None of the individuals were in U.S. custody at the time of indictment, and Russia does not allow its citizens to be extradited to the United States to face trial. Additionally, Mueller prosecutors said in a filing last week that Russia’s prosecutor general has declined to accept summonses for the defendants, and the Russian government has taken no steps under a mutual legal assistance treaty to serve them. "

Summary:
Mueller filed charges against an entity operating illegal operations in the US, served then as best they could to a foreign government which the Russia prosecutor general declined to accept summons for. Further the defendants in response decide to further troll the American legal system knowing they can't be legally touching by requesting US intelligence information since 1945.

Just so Americans could go back and spread this nonsense on Facebook to discredit Mueller without any context or understanding of international legal procedure or domestic procedure. Because apparently Americans in general are gullible idiots.

I don't understand why simple Google searches are difficult.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.450a9e350443
 
W

Whataborman

Unconfirmed Member
The request, prosecutors have said, included asking for identities of online platforms discovered by federal investigators and any related, charged or uncharged individuals; names of potential witnesses; any statements, recordings or surveillance of Concord employees; and any instances since 1945 in which the U.S. government interfered with elections or political processes of other countries.

Mueller did not abide by these requests. Let's start here. Even if Mueller had the authorization to declassify these documents it would turn over NATIONAL SECURITY secrets to an foreign Russian agent.

Aside from the list of times that the US interfered with elections, everything requested seems reasonable and if Mueller and his team are going to proceed with the trial they are going to have to turn over the information. The defense has the right to see it.


The request was unbelievable absurd and please remember this is prosecuting a Russian Troll, farm..... This is literally Troll to the American legal system and I cannot imagine any true American would believe we should turn over national security information including names if Americans to a foreign entity.


The request wasn't absurd at all. Do you not expect the defendant to mount a defense?

Speaking of the defendant, in the US legal system they are innocent until proven guilty. If Mueller didn't want national security information to fall into the hands of the defense he should have thought about that fact before he indicted them.
 

TheMikado

Banned
Jan 3, 2018
1,405
571
225
Aside from the list of times that the US interfered with elections, everything requested seems reasonable and if Mueller and his team are going to proceed with the trial they are going to have to turn over the information. The defense has the right to see it.

The request wasn't absurd at all. Do you not expect the defendant to mount a defense?

Speaking of the defendant, in the US legal system they are innocent until proven guilty. If Mueller didn't want national security information to fall into the hands of the defense he should have thought about that fact before he indicted them.

Ok, I want to make sure I'm not being trolled..
Please tell me with a straight answer that you believe that the US should be turning over the names and identities of potential American investigators and methods to a foreign agent that they are investigating for international crimes.
Are you really saying that? Are you an American? Real question just curious.

You're telling me the fault is Mueller's for pressing charges in a crime????? The information requested is not important to the evidence obtained and designed to not be complied with. This cannot be a serious argument.
 

bucyou

Member
Feb 3, 2018
3,130
6,747
715
Ok, I want to make sure I'm not being trolled..
Please tell me with a straight answer that you believe that the US should be turning over the names and identities of potential American investigators and methods to a foreign agent that they are investigating for international crimes.
Are you really saying that? Are you an American? Real question just curious.

You're telling me the fault is Mueller's for pressing charges in a crime????? The information requested is not important to the evidence obtained and designed to not be complied with. This cannot be a serious argument.

Im not sure you even know how the courts work
 

TheMikado

Banned
Jan 3, 2018
1,405
571
225
Im not sure you even know how the courts work
Then explain it to me. Or the Washington Post or the writer of the original article in the original post which states the same information in its links sources... That sound like you need to explain it to alot of different people then.

I'm all ears, Please educate me.
 
W

Whataborman

Unconfirmed Member
Please tell me with a straight answer that you believe that the US should be turning over the names and identities of potential American investigators and methods to a foreign agent that they are investigating for international crimes.
Are you really saying that? Are you an American? Real question just curious.

I'm an American citizen and I believe in the American justice system. So yeah, I believe that Mueller should have to turn this information over to the defense. It's the only way to ensure a fair trial.

You're telling me the fault is Mueller's for pressing charges in a crime?????

Yes. You would assume that he knew the ins and outs of the American legal system and would know that the information in question would be requested as part of the discovery period of the trial. If he didn't want that information to be public he shouldn't have issued the indictment.

The information requested is not important to the evidence obtained and designed to not be complied with.

Names of potential witnesses; any statements, recordings or surveillance of Concord employees; and any instances since 1945 in which the U.S. government interfered with elections or political processes of other countries.

Yes, all of that is important evidence as a defendant has a right to face their accusers in court. Likewise, the burden of proof rests on the prosecution. They are going to have to prove that the defendant is guilty. I don't see how a trial could happen without this information being presented. Even the last bit, as the defense will show that the United States government has engaged in the same activities it's now saying are "criminal"

Just so we're perfectly clear, as a US Citizen I hope that the Russian Troll farms and their lawyers wipe the floor with Mueller and the justice department. It's not that I agree with what the troll farms did, it's that I think the US shouldn't be prosecuting anyone for "crimes" that they themselves have engaged in multiple times. Plus, I think the whole "Russian Collusion" narrative is a total farce.
 

TheMikado

Banned
Jan 3, 2018
1,405
571
225
I'm an American citizen and I believe in the American justice system. So yeah, I believe that Mueller should have to turn this information over to the defense. It's the only way to ensure a fair trial.



Yes. You would assume that he knew the ins and outs of the American legal system and would know that the information in question would be requested as part of the discovery period of the trial. If he didn't want that information to be public he shouldn't have issued the indictment.



Names of potential witnesses; any statements, recordings or surveillance of Concord employees; and any instances since 1945 in which the U.S. government interfered with elections or political processes of other countries.

Yes, all of that is important evidence as a defendant has a right to face their accusers in court. Likewise, the burden of proof rests on the prosecution. They are going to have to prove that the defendant is guilty. I don't see how a trial could happen without this information being presented. Even the last bit, as the defense will show that the United States government has engaged in the same activities it's now saying are "criminal"

Just so we're perfectly clear, as a US Citizen I hope that the Russian Troll farms and their lawyers wipe the floor with Mueller and the justice department. It's not that I agree with what the troll farms did, it's that I think the US shouldn't be prosecuting anyone for "crimes" that they themselves have engaged in multiple times. Plus, I think the whole "Russian Collusion" narrative is a total farce.

Hmm would you like to make a poll? I’d love to hear how many other people agree with you. Let’s let the democratic process to see who gets more support?

This is of course me merely entertaining that fact that you are willing to risk American lives and national security secret just because YOU who have no affiliation to the investigation don’t think it’s warranted. Glad to know how much American lives are worth to you.
 
Last edited:
W

Whataborman

Unconfirmed Member
I’d love to hear how many other people agree with you. Let’s let the democratic process to see who gets more support?

It doesn't matter if people agree or not. The law is the law. I doubt you'd find very many people willing to fundamentally change our legal system just to make things easier for Mueller. Everyone has to play by the same rules.

This is of course me merely entertaining that fact that you are willing to risk American lives and national security secret just because YOU who have no affiliation to the investigation don’t think it’s warranted.

Once again, this falls into the category of "Mueller should have known better." And you're right, I don't think the investigation is warranted. A lot of people agree with me.


I'm curious, how do you think this is supposed to play out? Do you support the American justice system? Do you believe that everyone has the right to a fair trial? Do you believe that everyone has the right to face their accuser in court? Do you believe that people are innocent until proven guilty and that the burden of proof rests on the prosecution? How do you think that Concord can mount a defense without knowing all of the evidence against them, or are you one of those people who think they are automatically guilty just because Mueller indicted them?

You're spending a lot of time telling me how this is wrong, without explaining how it's supposed to work within the bounds of our legal system.
 

TheMikado

Banned
Jan 3, 2018
1,405
571
225
It doesn't matter if people agree or not. The law is the law. I doubt you'd find very many people willing to fundamentally change our legal system just to make things easier for Mueller. Everyone has to play by the same rules.



Once again, this falls into the category of "Mueller should have known better." And you're right, I don't think the investigation is warranted. A lot of people agree with me.


I'm curious, how do you think this is supposed to play out? Do you support the American justice system? Do you believe that everyone has the right to a fair trial? Do you believe that everyone has the right to face their accuser in court? Do you believe that people are innocent until proven guilty and that the burden of proof rests on the prosecution? How do you think that Concord can mount a defense without knowing all of the evidence against them, or are you one of those people who think they are automatically guilty just because Mueller indicted them?

You're spending a lot of time telling me how this is wrong, without explaining how it's supposed to work within the bounds of our legal system.
I’m not spending any time doing anything but trying to explain to you how the legal system works.
The requests were absurd otherwise he judge would have compelled them to provide the information: which is what the prosecution argued:

Just because a defendant requests something doesn’t mean the prosecution has to provide it. That’s not how any of this works. It’s like a mob murder criminal requesting the addresses and phone numbers of the officers that arrested them. Any judge would immediately strike that down. It’s almost as if you have no idea how US courts work.
 
Last edited:
W

Whataborman

Unconfirmed Member
The requests were absurd otherwise he judge would have compelled them to provide the information: which is what the prosecution argued:


You don't understand what is going on at all. The judge hasn't done anything, aside from deny Mueller's request to delay arraignment. Concord's lawyers are exercising their right to a speedy trial. If the trial moves forward, Mueller will be compelled to turn all evidence related to Concord to the defense. If they don't the judge will intervene and compel them to do so.

So far the judge has not ruled one way or the other on the defense's request for discovery evidence.

The entire point of Concord pleading not guilty is to force Mueller to either drop the charges or try a case he never intended to try. That's why the not guilty plea is brilliant. It forces Mueller to put all of his cards on the table.

You need read a bit more about the case, specifically about what the judge has or hasn't done up to this point.
 

TheMikado

Banned
Jan 3, 2018
1,405
571
225
You don't understand what is going on at all. The judge hasn't done anything, aside from deny Mueller's request to delay arraignment. Concord's lawyers are exercising their right to a speedy trial. If the trial moves forward, Mueller will be compelled to turn all evidence related to Concord to the defense. If they don't the judge will intervene and compel them to do so.

So far the judge has not ruled one way or the other on the defense's request for discovery evidence.

The entire point of Concord pleading not guilty is to force Mueller to either drop the charges or try a case he never intended to try. That's why the not guilty plea is brilliant. It forces Mueller to put all of his cards on the table.

You need read a bit more about the case, specifically about what the judge has or hasn't done up to this point.

What are you talking about, remember I gave you the links.
The only thing the Judge has done is deny the request to delay arraignment, the discovery request came in first and was prompted Mueller to respond in the first place and request for a delay to ensure that the Russia company had been properly served to avoid a dismissal. The judge has not compelled Mueller to comply with any of the discovery requests at present. You seem to be very mistaken in what actually has occurred and I suggest you take your own advice. Concord cannot force Mueller to turn over anything unless the judge allows it which would be improper due to the nature and security surrounding it. I'm looking forward to hear the judges take on the requested discovery items and I look forward to seeing your replies.