Will the Mueller Investigation Be Fair?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

I think mueller has some major conflicts to be the special counsel in this case. If he was completely honest he would resign. We already know of his close ties with Comey now read this and  you decide

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/13/report-3-members-of-special-counsel-muellers-team-donated-to-dems-including-hillary-obama/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+breitbart+(Breitbart+News)

[homersapien 11,357]

Seriously? 

[AcUmen 242]

Of course it won't be fair.  Prosecutors have one job: To investigate a crime and bring charges.  They are not "independent" in any sense, whether that be on the local level or the national level.  Prosecutors on the local level routinely railroad innocent people for crimes they didn't commit.  Why?  Because their job is to prosecute someone -- anyone.  The difference here, however, is there has not even been a crime alleged which makes this special counsel all the more curious (and bogus).

We already know they have no evidence of "muh Russia" but that doesn't matter.  Now they have moved on to Trump trying to quash the Russian investigation (which is a fake investigation to begin with).  This special counsel, like all special counsels, is nothing but a fishing expedition.  Their goal is to give Trump the Scooter Libby treatment.

Remember, Clinton's special counsel (Ken Starr) started out investigating the Whitewater real estate deal and ended up getting Clinton on perjury charges over a blowjob in the Oral Office.  I expect the same thing here.  My prediction is they will find some incorrect tax deductions from 1987 and bring charges on that -- something that I guarantee would be the case with any billionaire in the country if you looked hard enough at his financial life.

This "investigation" is not about Russia and has never been about Russia.  The Democrats know this.  You don't need a special counsel to read classified intelligence reports about the Russian hacking -- that stuff is already available to the Congressional intelligence committees.  Even the Democrats themselves have had to admit that they've seen "no direct evidence of collusion."  Diane Feinstein, James Clapper, John Brennan, Mike Rogers, James Comey (among many others) have stated this many times.

As Stalin's right hand man, Laverinty Beria, said: "Show me the man and I'll show you the crime."

[AUDub 11,147]

Anyone remember a few weeks ago when folks on both sides of the aisle were praising Mueller's appointment? I 'member.

And here we have an explanation on this sudden turnabout. The marching orders leaked.

[AuCivilEng1 10,995]

Brietbart....HA. Ypu can tell a lot about someones political views and grasp on reality and facts by how much they pay attention to Brietbart. 

[homersapien 11,357]

5 hours ago, AcUmen said:

.... Now they have moved on to Trump trying to quash the Russian investigation (which is a fake investigation to begin with).  This special counsel, like all special counsels, is nothing but a fishing expedition.....  

The first opportunity Trump has to meet with the Russians in the Oval Office, what does he talk about … he says “the pressure is off on the Russia investigation.” He says good news, the guy who is doing the investigation is a nut, and I just fired him.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

14 hours ago, Proud Tiger said:

I think mueller has some major conflicts to be the special counsel in this case. If he was completely honest he would resign. We already know of his close ties with Comey now read this and  you decide

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/13/report-3-members-of-special-counsel-muellers-team-donated-to-dems-including-hillary-obama/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+breitbart+(Breitbart+News)

There's no reason other than the RNC talking points being issued out to question Mueller's integrity.  Would you doubt their ability to do their jobs right and not favor Trump if they'd donated to GOP candidates?  Of course not.  Not to mention, this article (Breitbart lol) says nothing about Mueller himself giving to any particular candidate.  And the same folks who are lambasting Comey now were praising him for his statements on Hillary in the days leading up to the election.

This worn out playbook of scorched earth smearing any time it looks like one of "our" guys might get in trouble is lame.  Come up with something better.

[80Tiger 899]

4 hours ago, Bigbens42 said:

Anyone remember a few weeks ago when folks on both sides of the aisle were praising Mueller's appointment? I 'member.

And here we have an explanation on this sudden turnabout. The marching orders leaked.

Reminds me of how everyone called for Comey's firing back in the fall.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

16 minutes ago, 80Tiger said:

Reminds me of how everyone called for Comey's firing back in the fall.

In other words, if he's generally pissing off both sides at various times, he's doing his job right.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

2 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

There's no reason other than the RNC talking points being issued out to question Mueller's integrity.  Would you doubt their ability to do their jobs right and not favor Trump if they'd donated to GOP candidates?  Of course not.  Not to mention, this article (Breitbart lol) says nothing about Mueller himself giving to any particular candidate.  And the same folks who are lambasting Comey now were praising him for his statements on Hillary in the days leading up to the election.

This worn out playbook of scorched earth smearing any time it looks like one of "our" guys might get in trouble is lame.  Come up with something better.

All I can say is if it was a DEM being investigated and the appointed counsel was a very close friend of the just fired FBI director, they would be screaming. Forget Breitbart and whoever, surely you can see the POTENTIAL for conflict of interest. A special counsel should be as squeaky clean as possible, especially at the time he is appointed. The Dems wanted Sessions to recuse himself from the Russian investigation because of his possible discussion wth the Russian ambassador. Sessions did the right tthing and recused himself. Mueller should do the same. Otherwise a ton of money is going to be spent and the results will then be argued adnauseum.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

33 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

All I can say is if it was a DEM being investigated and the appointed counsel was a very close friend of the just fired FBI director, they would be screaming. Forget Breitbart and whoever, surely you can see the POTENTIAL for conflict of interest. A special counsel should be as squeaky clean as possible, especially at the time he is appointed. The Dems wanted Sessions to recuse himself from the Russian investigation because of his possible discussion wth the Russian ambassador. Sessions did the right tthing and recused himself. Mueller should do the same. Otherwise a ton of money is going to be spent and the results will then be argued adnauseum.

They could have appointed Ivanka as the special prosecutor and the second there was any hint that she might be investigating deeper into her father's possible role or that the investigation might not be turning Trump's way, this same cadre of message shapers would be fomenting a campaign of whispers about Ivanka's supposed bias and conflicts of interest.  It literally has nothing to do with anything other than trying to steer the narrative, damn the truth.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

You now give a zero possibility to avoid a realistic scenario. Mueller is THE appointed counsel and I think he has become tainted up front and certainly not now likely to produce and meaningful results except a waste of money. It's already all over the news. He has now made matters worse. He has appointed 13 more lawyers to his team, several of whom were significant donors to the DNC and Hillary.

[homersapien 11,357]

They were so eager to turn on Mueller, they didn't even do their homework before hand.  

Trump Loyalists Tarred One of Mueller’s Investigators as a Democratic Donor. They Had the Wrong Guy.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/06/15/michael_dreeben_a_member_of_robert_mueller_s_team_was_wrongly_accused_by.html

[homersapien 11,357]

To be clear, there’s nothing untoward about reporting on the political donations of Mueller’s investigators, even if it is deceptive to crow about how three of them supported Democrats without mentioning the fact that Mueller himself is a Republican who was appointed to the head of the FBI by George W. Bush. 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/06/15/michael_dreeben_a_member_of_robert_mueller_s_team_was_wrongly_accused_by.html

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

You now give a zero possibility to avoid a realistic scenario. Mueller is THE appointed counsel and I think he has become tainted up front and certainly not now likely to produce and meaningful results except a waste of money. It's already all over the news. He has now made matters worse. He has appointed 13 more lawyers to his team, several of whom were significant donors to the DNC and Hillary.

You stated why you *think* some of the other people on the team *might* have a conflict of interest (nevermind that it would be nigh near impossible to find qualified people to be on such a team who hadn't donated to some candidate or party in recent elections).  You've shown zero reason why Mueller himself would, much less that he's "tainted."  It's more of a smokescreen to cast doubt on any conclusion deemed unfavorable to Trump than it is a serious concern.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

They were so eager to turn on Mueller, they didn't even do their homework before hand.  

Trump Loyalists Tarred One of Mueller’s Investigators as a Democratic Donor. They Had the Wrong Guy.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/06/15/michael_dreeben_a_member_of_robert_mueller_s_team_was_wrongly_accused_by.html

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

15 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

You stated why you *think* some of the other people on the team *might* have a conflict of interest (nevermind that it would be nigh near impossible to find qualified people to be on such a team who hadn't donated to some candidate or party in recent elections).  You've shown zero reason why Mueller himself would, much less that he's "tainted."  It's more of a smokescreen to cast doubt on any conclusion deemed unfavorable to Trump than it is a serious concern.

Baloney. I did show very good reason he is tainted. He is long term friends with Comey. The two families took vacations together over the years. If you don't consider that reason for concern about a fair investigation there is no need to continue the discussion.

[homersapien 11,357]

....There was just one problem: The Michael Dreeben who donated that money to Obama and Clinton is not the same one who is working for Mueller. As first noted by Daniel Hemel, an assistant professor at the University of Chicago Law School, the tell is in the middle initials. The Justice Department Michael Dreeben is Michael R. Dreeben, whereas Democratic megadonor Michael Dreeben is Michael W. Dreeben. The former, according to the FEC, appears to have made no political donations to either Democrats or Republicans.

The Hill and CNN both published corrected versions of their stories after the DOJ spokesman detailed to the Mueller probe alerted them to their mistake. But that didn’t stop the false claim about Dreeban from being repeated on NewsMax, Townhall, Laura Ingraham’s website LifeZette, Instapundit, Lou Dobbs’ show on the Fox Business Channel, and countless message boards....

[quietfan 233]

The guilt or innocence of anyone investigated by Mueller & his team will be decided by a jury...if and after he is successful in getting a grand jury to indict.  Worry about whether juries and grand juries can be impartial and stop acting as if Mueller or his lieutenants will make that decision.

I also think it's disrespectful to FBI professionals to imply they can't separate their professional duties from their personal political leanings and be objective in performing those duties.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

quietfan....I didn't in any way mean to disparage all FBI agents but as we know many of them weren't happy with Comey's recommendation in the Hillary investigationand Comey himself has now maybe broken the law. I also am not questioning the basic integrity of Mueller. I'm just saying in this case  it may be hard for him to render a fair recommendation when a long time friend (Comey) is a central figure. In any event, the court of public opinion will also weigh in and no matter what the findings are many will claim bias. That would likely be the case anyhow but as you can readily see many are already making this an upfront issue. Just my opinion as a citizen of one but I just think it would be better if Mueller excused himself now..

[quietfan 233]

3 hours ago, Proud Tiger said:

quietfan....I didn't in any way mean to disparage all FBI agents but as we know many of them weren't happy with Comey's recommendation in the Hillary investigationand Comey himself has now maybe broken the law. I also am not questioning the basic integrity of Mueller. I'm just saying in this case  it may be hard for him to render a fair recommendation when a long time friend (Comey) is a central figure. In any event, the court of public opinion will also weigh in and no matter what the findings are many will claim bias. That would likely be the case anyhow but as you can readily see many are already making this an upfront issue. Just my opinion as a citizen of one but I just think it would be better if Mueller excused himself now..

As always, I respect your right to your opinion.

When Mueller was appointed, people on both sides of the political spectrum were quick to praise his professionalism, talent, and objectivity.  If he were to resign his appointment,  I have no reason to believe that anyone else could be appointed whose professionalism and objectivity wouldn't also be questioned by one side or the other.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

7 hours ago, quietfan said:

As always, I respect your right to your opinion.

When Mueller was appointed, people on both sides of the political spectrum were quick to praise his professionalism, talent, and objectivity.  If he were to resign his appointment,  I have no reason to believe that anyone else could be appointed whose professionalism and objectivity wouldn't also be questioned by one side or the other.

Yep unfortunately it is hard to find anyone who isn't biased is aome way. sad,

[TitanTiger 20,472]

7 hours ago, Proud Tiger said:

Yep unfortunately it is hard to find anyone who isn't biased is aome way. sad,

Or someone who wouldn't be painted as biased no matter how fair they would be.

[alexava 6,973]

On June 16, 2017 at 0:52 PM, TitanTiger said:

In other words, if he's generally pissing off both sides at various times, he's doing his job right.

This says it all.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

43 minutes ago, alexava said:

This says it all.

Didn't work out so well for Comey.