If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If you are having difficulty logging in, please REFRESH the page and clear your browser cache and try again.
If you still can't get logged in, please try using Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera, or Safari to login. Also be sure you are using the latest version of your browser. Internet Explorer has not been updated in over seven years and will no longer work with the Forum software. Thanks
These are certainly questions Mueller will have to answer if he wants to push a conspiracy charge.
I've been assured by Jeff Buchanan this investigation is only into Russian meddling, and not anything to do with Trump. So every time Trump and his supporters point out what a crock this investigation actually is, they are doing real serious damage to our law enforcement apparatus
obviously I get that. If Mueller had thought for a second that Cohen was the missing piece of this entire investigation, he wouldn't have kicked it to the Southern District of NY.
You still need agreement to commit an illegal act. In the first example, the agreement is to the illegal result and you're liable even if you only commit overt legal acts. In the second, the agreement is to the illegal means and you're liable even though the overarching purpose is legal.
As the definition you cite says ... "people work together by agreement to commit an illegal act"
Two humorous recent articles about Very Stable Genius:
A group in Washington DC has petitioned the Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration to revoke the liquor license of the Trump International Hotel because the owner is "not a person of good character" as required by regulation. The petition cites Trump's long public record of deceit, lying, business fraud and sexual misconduct. Hearing date has not yet been set.
In Madrid Spain, a prostitute was arrested, in the act, for providing 'services' in a back alley. According to the report, the woman would wear a Donald Trump mask for an additional five euro while providing the purchased oral support.
“Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx
Precinct-by-Precinct voting results for 2016 (as well as county).
Found this the other day. Among other interesting things, just at a glance, it appears Grove City is the most Trump-friendly suburb around Columbus, even more so than the wealthy northern rim burbs
It's possible Mueller believes Cohen has relevant information with regards to the Mueller investigation, but the only case to be built against him deals more with election/financial fraud, which is why it was sent to SDNY. The SDNY case would then theoretically be used as leverage to get any relevant Russia info.
Cohen, we should all remember, hasn't been indicted yet. There's a (small?) chance he never will be. But everyone, including Cohen, seems to suspect it's only a matter of time. That said, we don't know what charges he's facing until that shoe falls.
Manafort's trial starts tomorrow. If he flips at some point and starts verifying Cohen's story about the Trump Tower meeting, that will be a bad turn for the Trumps, even if "collusion isn't a crime" and they're both recognized liars.
EDIT: Correction: The first of Manafort's two trials begins tomorrow (the case in VA)
Manafort's attorneys have indicated that they no longer plan on arguing about the legitimacy of Mueller's appointment. This is a notable development because much of the noise surrounding the Manafort trial began in May. It was then that Judge T.S. Ellis III questioned Mueller's authority and intentions.
Ever supercilious. I guess you'll get to tell me "I told you so" in 500 years. Maybe 1000. Maybe 2000.
Well I apologize for debasing the quality of discourse here, which you have worked so hard to maintain at a certain quality. But this stuff is already happening. Trade is a great example. A minority of below-average folks cannot do what you expect them to and struck back, voting for a person who has hurt us all and our economy by undoing a policy that is good for many but not all. Free traders have always given some lip service to the idea of some compensatory benefits for the losers. If the policy was designed in a way to protect those below-average losers, such as through retraining programs, then it would have been a more resilient policy.
Instead, we're in this weird spot in which Trump has kind of finally done just that -- (if you believe that $12bn goes to actual people rather than Big Ag) and the people on the right who decry picking winners and subsidizing losers say nothing, and the people on the left who wanted some help for the losers now criticize Trump for the hypocracy of, if that money is spent on retraining or something, doing what they always wanted to be done. IMO we need less of this foolish reactionary stuff in which we support things our enemies dislike for no other reason. Policy should be driven by evidence. Or at least backed by it, if you insist on an ideological starting point.
She must be top shelf. Hard to imagine a bigger turn off than that mug. Has to be difficult to finish the task under those circumstances. Or she deals with some bona fide freak shows.
Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]? Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
Tweet
Comment