The Mueller Report thread

[GMDino]

(05-23-2019, 01:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The fact that this is an apples and oranges comparison aside, I'm wondering why you brought it up in this thread as it's completely off the subject and nothing to do with the post you're responding to.

Because you complete me. " "

(05-23-2019, 01:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Trump did do something shady, in this case before his election.  This was a known quantity prior to his election, ergo one can logically conclude that the voters, while aware of it, elected him POTUS regardless.

Oh!  So voters "knew" he paid off the pornstar?  Weird how the first story about it was January, 2018 then. (Note: Even then DJT denied it ever happened and he had an evolving story until it just that yeah it happened but there was no crime committed.)


Did they all have time machines to read about it and then decide that they didn't care and go back and vote for him?  

Maybe you meant they all knew he did shady things?  Perhaps.  Would this incident have been a little different?  We'll never know because there was a cover up (there's that phrase again) until after the election.

(05-23-2019, 01:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Hence, it is a non-factor to  me.

Yes....you.  One voter.  

(Who also apparently owned a time machine?)

(05-23-2019, 01:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Apologies, not 9/11, the "Holy Land Foundation" case.  Funding terrorism not directly related to 9/11 is better.

Not better.  Accurate.  And less "touch an american nervey" and less "racist implicationsy"

(05-23-2019, 01:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: "It was indeed named as an “unindicted co-conspirator or joint venturer” in the Holy Land Foundation case--an Islamic charity that in 2008 was convicted of funding Islamic militant groups"

federal Judge Jorge A. Solis denied CAIR’s request that its name be publicly striken from the list. He said that the government “has produced ample evidence” to establish the association of CAIR and other organizations with entities such as the Holy Land Foundation, the Islamic Association for Palestine and with the Hamas militant group.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-king-hearings-is-cair-a-terrorist-organization/2011/03/10/AB3AdTQ_blog.html?utm_term=.097ae0d8bf9a

Still looking for that consistency.

Quickly before I answer you (repeated) plea for consistency:  They did appeal and the appeals panel said the ruling "went too far" but didn't change anything.  FWIW.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2010/11/judges-ruling-on-islamic-groups-as-unindicted-co-conspirators-made-public-030922

So let's talk "consistency".

In the apple bin we have a case when the one group you brought up is named as unindicted co-conspirators to funnelling money to a terrorist group (Hamas) in a report where there were 300 (yes, bolded for emphasis) unindicted co-conspirators named as possible contributors.

(I'm not defending CAIR.  I'm pointing out what the story is.)

In the orange cart (see what I did there) we have one person who actually did the thing (we have the check and his signature) that he is accused of and where the other guy involved went to jail.  While his unindicted co-conspirator is in a position where it is believed he cannot even be indicted.

And you HAVE defended Trump by saying "voters don't care".  Whether he can be indicted or is guilty of something or not...you don't care.

"Consistency"

In a thread about an investigation into the actions of the sitting POTUS you want to talk about Muslims.  Interesting consistency.