And here we go... Mueller time

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
35,478
6,380
113
I have read it, and I encourage others to do so. It contains no proof of Mueller leaking. It includes a statement that Trump's counsel has accused Mueller of leaking, and Turley says it would be worrisome if Mueller were leaking. That's it.

But hey, tough guy, show that I'm a fool by quoting the portion that proves Mueller leaked. I dare you.
Ah. We finally get the real answer. Mueller is leaking because you say so.

Excuse me, Mr. Lawyering Jesus, but I think I will exit this conversation and go find someone to talk to who hasn't become a non-thinking partisan robot.
Washington Post is reporting that Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election has now expanded to look into whether President Donald Trump attempted to obstruct justice.
Read the motto on Turley’s blog.
 

Marvin the Martian

Hall of Famer
Sep 4, 2001
27,441
10,486
113
Washington Post is reporting that Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election has now expanded to look into whether President Donald Trump attempted to obstruct justice.
Read the motto on Turley’s blog.
The WaPo article is paywall so I kept going to it reading what I could before the ad covered it. On what I read, it says the strategy is changing but says so after noting a change in people called and questions asked. Again, could not the witnesses or their spokespeople have called the reporter?
 

Rockfish1

Hall of Famer
Sep 2, 2001
36,245
6,771
113
The WaPo article is paywall so I kept going to it reading what I could before the ad covered it. On what I read, it says the strategy is changing but says so after noting a change in people called and questions asked. Again, could not the witnesses or their spokespeople have called the reporter?
WaPo variously sources to "officials", "five people briefed on the requests", "people familiar with the matter", and "people familiar with the probe". The article notes that "[t]he investigation has been cloaked in secrecy and it’s unclear how many others have been questioned by the FBI."

CO. claims it's obvious that Mueller was the source because res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself). CO. simultaneously asserts that these leaks are damaging to Mueller, which means that Mueller must be a hapless boob. If only former FBI director Mueller possessed CO.'s sophisticated understanding of how these high level prosecutions work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheVegasHoosier

Marvin the Martian

Hall of Famer
Sep 4, 2001
27,441
10,486
113
Because defense lawyers never leak. Are you really a lawyer?
A question, can the various defense attorneys talk to each other? If I am called to testify, after I am done can my lawyer call the next White House employee's lawyer? Or, can I talk to the next witness?
 

Rockfish1

Hall of Famer
Sep 2, 2001
36,245
6,771
113
A question, can the various defense attorneys talk to each other? If I am called to testify, after I am done can my lawyer call the next White House employee's lawyer? Or, can I talk to the next witness?
The prosecution can't talk, and grand jurors can't talk. Everyone else can talk. But CO. insists that if there's any news about Mueller's investigation, it necessarily must have come from Mueller. This is silly.
 
Jan 6, 2017
2,006
755
113
Thanks, switched to Opera and got right in.
I used Firefox for years but was having some trouble with it and switched to Chrome. Used that about a year and switched back. Still not thrilled with Firefox. Someone told me a few months ago to try Opera. Never did.

How do you like it overall? I'm a computer moron so is it hard to use?
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
35,478
6,380
113
A question, can the various defense attorneys talk to each other? If I am called to testify, after I am done can my lawyer call the next White House employee's lawyer? Or, can I talk to the next witness?
That depends on a number of factors. So there is no one-size-fits-all answer.

Some of the factors are:

The presence or absence of a joint defense agreement--meaning that the privileges and the work product is shared among all the defense counsel.

Whether a court has entered a sequestration or gag order, meaning that nobody can talk to anybody about their testimony,

Whether the prosecution is offering a deal in return for testimony to one or more of the defendants.
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
35,478
6,380
113
Because defense lawyers never leak. Are you really a lawyer?
Of course defense lawyers leak. Unless there is a gag order, nothing is wrong or unethical about that. Usually what a defense lawyer says isn't a leak, they just issue public statements.
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
35,478
6,380
113
The prosecution can't talk, and grand jurors can't talk. Everyone else can talk. But CO. insists that if there's any news about Mueller's investigation, it necessarily must have come from Mueller. This is silly.
I don't know what's silly about it. And I didn't say it must come from Mueller. I implied it must come from Mueller's shop.
 

Marvin the Martian

Hall of Famer
Sep 4, 2001
27,441
10,486
113
I don't know what's silly about it. And I didn't say it must come from Mueller. I implied it must come from Mueller's shop.
You also said leaks hurt the prosecution. So defense can leak, instead of issuing public statements, to make the prosecution look bad?
 

Marvin the Martian

Hall of Famer
Sep 4, 2001
27,441
10,486
113
I used Firefox for years but was having some trouble with it and switched to Chrome. Used that about a year and switched back. Still not thrilled with Firefox. Someone told me a few months ago to try Opera. Never did.

How do you like it overall? I'm a computer moron so is it hard to use?
I use all the browsers, though Chrome is my usual first choice. Opera is fine, nothing about it is difficult.
 

Rockfish1

Hall of Famer
Sep 2, 2001
36,245
6,771
113
I don't know what's silly about it. And I didn't say it must come from Mueller. I implied it must come from Mueller's shop.
I don't know how to make this simpler without crayons. You have no evidence that Mueller has leaked, and you've admitted that people other than grand jury officials leak, but you nevertheless claim RIL that leaks must be coming from Mueller.

Why are you still digging?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zizkov

UncleMark

Hall of Famer
Sep 1, 2001
18,377
15,406
113
I used Firefox for years but was having some trouble with it and switched to Chrome. Used that about a year and switched back. Still not thrilled with Firefox.
I use Firefox exclusively. Not sure what "trouble" you had, but what I always suggest is that you get it lined out and set up the way you want, with all your plugins and add-ons, then stop updating both the browser and your plugins/add-ons. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Others will claim that's a security risk, but I support a bunch of Windows machines and have had no problems with browsers who follow my advise.
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
35,478
6,380
113
I don't know how to make this simpler without crayons. You have no evidence that Mueller has leaked, and you've admitted that people other than grand jury officials leak, but you nevertheless claim RIL that leaks must be coming from Mueller.

Why are you still digging?
You are applying a certainty standard. I am accustomed to looking at a preponderance standard. All things considered, the leaks coming from the SC office is the most likely.

You are posting like a partisan layman.
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
35,478
6,380
113
You also said leaks hurt the prosecution. So defense can leak, instead of issuing public statements, to make the prosecution look bad?
You are getting into convoluted territory here. Anything is possible when you wear a tinfoil hat.

Moreover, I don't think defense lawyers are privy to some of the leaked info.
 

UncleMark

Hall of Famer
Sep 1, 2001
18,377
15,406
113
Just today, I was trying to watch MSNBC on You Tube. Non-stop buffering.

Switched to Chrome and it didn't buffer a single time.
Not surprising that Google Chrome handles Google YouTube better than an independent open source browser.

It actually comes down to the Flash implementation. I won't bore you with the details.
 

UncleMark

Hall of Famer
Sep 1, 2001
18,377
15,406
113
I have Flash turned off, and I can't remember the last time I saw an unloaded plugin screen on any website. It's like it's totally dead, at least in sites I visit.
My understanding is probably outdated then. I once was much more active in the Linux development scene and was up on the status of that stuff. At one time, Google was using a proprietary version of Flash called Pepperflash, and it caused all sorts of Firefox problems.

I'll crawl back under my rock now..
 

Stuffshot

All-American
Feb 20, 2008
7,066
2,598
113
CNN, Reuters and WSJ all have it from "source(s) briefed on the matter." That doesn't sound like a juror to me. So there are three obvious possibilities:

1. Attorney or staffer on Mueller's team
2. Attorney or staffer in Rosenstein's office
3. Attorney or staffer on one of the defense teams

If they've already started making arrangements for arrests, it could also be someone in the Marshals Service. I'm sure there are other possibilities, too. A lot of people will have this information by now. If the news was leaked illicitly (which I assume is the case), it's unlikely anyone will ever find who did it.
You forgot No. 4: family member of poor shmuck who's been told he or she has to surrender on Monday (or sooner) and is trying to get affairs in order with emotional, blathering spouse and children before surrendering and being gone for unknown time.

Another question: how much will the bail be? Even though we don't know the charges, the bail will be fairly steep, right?
 

Latest posts