Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Surly Horns

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Featured Replies

Mueller needs the Heisman after this for stiff arming all attempts to tip the scales in any political direction. 

  • Replies 34.3k
  • Views 2.4m
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • Just to make sure I have the alternative facts straight...  Our government -- but I'm guessing only the deep state part of it --- is now guilty of torturing a poor, naive Russian exchange student who

  • Incredulity
    Incredulity

    liberals suddenly being terrified of Russia and manic for election integrity is just pure comedy gold.

  • I don't believe for a moment that any of this is entertaining to you.  I think it gives you a bit of anxiety knowing that your best weapon against a group who you despise is a bumbling fraud as a busi

Posted Images

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

I didn't get a clear feeling the question about charging POTUS after he leaves office was referring to this specific POTUS or more of a hypothetical.

I agree, i think Mueller thought he was answering it as a hypothetical but the question was "the President" not "a President" so in effect, he was answering it about Trump.

2 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

It's not really partisan. It's a simple question that is all that really needs to be asked. You don't need any of the rest of this shitshow. Just one yes/no question. 

"We understand that a sitting President can not be indicted while in office.  Given the results of the investigation, would Trump have been indicted for obstruction of justice had he not been in office?"

If yes, start impeachment proceedings.  If no, give it up and wait for Trump to go down on fraud charges in NY in 2021. Or impeach based on those charges if you want to. 

And if "I can't get into that?" 

Just now, HenryJames said:

Oh.

Twitter is awesome, and Muellers follow up was worded in such a way that it won't translate in the same way. 

Pubs talking nearly 100% about Vol I, Dems nearly 100% about Vol II. 

WTF Bob.  Did you interview the guy or not?

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

And if "I can't get into that?" 

But he can. In fact, it's the entire purpose of the investigation. 

1 minute ago, sachick said:

I agree, i think Mueller thought he was answering it as a hypothetical but the question was "the President" not "a President" so in effect, he was answering it about Trump.

I think it's clear that Robert Mueller thinks Donald Trump broke the law that the only reason he didn't indict him is because he's currently president.

That should be enough to start impeachment proceedings.

 

2 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

Oh.

Impeachment inquiry hearings are overdue 

So it seems like the  Pubs are not very happy with the conclusion of Muller's report?  I guess they would support a re-do with a new Special Prosecutor?

Just now, FondrenRoad said:

But he can. In fact, it's the entire purpose of the investigation. 

But he's already said that he can't.   So you won't get an answer to that question. 

Our legal scholar President has weighed in.

 

the attempt to discredit him is a bad strategy. i don't know what a good strategy for republicans on the committee might be, but it ain't being adversarial and accusing mueller of partisanship, when he basically did a huge limbo on indicting the president, and, in fact, did your party a favor by not even mentioning impeachment. you dumb fucks. 

Just now, 4th&Five said:

Our legal scholar President has weighed in.

 

#totallynotwatchingthetestimony

9 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I didn't get a clear feeling the question about charging POTUS after he leaves office was referring to this specific POTUS or more of a hypothetical.

Um, I got a pretty clear feeling that it applied to Trump.

28 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

initial thoughts: 

republicans going full on histrionic junkyard dog against mueller is an extremely bad look. i especially think the not-so-veiled accusations of partisanship are clearly aimed at donald j trump and his 12 ANGRY DEMOCRATS tweets, and i think that will be to the shame of their legacy. they could actually move the questioning away from trump toward russia and actually look somewhat patriotic while somewhat cleverly steering the testimony away from trump. 

instead they are all in on strojk ,or however you spell his name.

but hoo boy, did louie gohmert fucking deliver with his spreading feces on the walls act. so did jim jordan and matt gaetz. what a selection of fucking clowns.

 

Oh I tell my friends I can’t wait to read the wiki articles on this decade in politics in a few years. History is the ultimate judge and while I understand how they pander to their base, I truly believe republican strategy, claims and behaviors will come off with a Nixon-like stench that will be the subject of a lot of material.  

Just now, David Dennison said:

I think it's clear that Robert Mueller thinks Donald Trump broke the law that the only reason he didn't indict him is because he's currently president.

That should be enough to start impeachment proceedings.

 

Oh I think it's obvious he does.

  • Author
1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

WTF Bob.  Did you interview the guy or not?

Let's say Mueller did interview Kilimnik but Putin didn't know about it, do you think it would be a good idea to confirm the interview happened?

It gets dicey when you're talking about interactions with GRU intelligence officers currently inside Russia.  

Just now, hayden_horn said:

the attempt to discredit him is a bad strategy. i don't know what a good strategy for republicans on the committee might be, but it ain't being adversarial and accusing mueller of partisanship, when he basically did a huge limbo on indicting the president, and, in fact, did your party a favor by not even mentioning impeachment. you dumb fucks. 

They have no choice but to play the Fox News and talk radio talking points. It's all their base has been fed for two years about the report.  If they had an ounce of integrity they would help the dems prove up obstruction, but since they don't we get the clown show. 

26 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

seriously, that was way more of a moment than i thought we would get.

Edit:  Disregard, answered above 

Edited by Homercles

5 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

WTF Bob.  Did you interview the guy or not?

What? 

Of course he did or did not interview the guy. But that doesn't mean Mueller should necessarily answer whether he did. 

Don't you see that?

Have the Dems asked about whether, if not for the obstruction, there might have been evidence to prove the conspiracy?  

  • Author
Just now, deech said:

They have no choice but to play the Fox News and talk radio talking points. It's all their base has been fed for two years about the report.  If they had an ounce of integrity they would help the dems prove up obstruction, but since they don't we get the clown show. 

Yep.  They played themselves into this approach. 

the dumbass dems trying to get mueller to read need to stop. 

every time they try to do that, mueller basically answers "fuck you, i'm not your monkey"

4 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

the attempt to discredit him is a bad strategy. i don't know what a good strategy for republicans on the committee might be, but it ain't being adversarial and accusing mueller of partisanship, when he basically did a huge limbo on indicting the president, and, in fact, did your party a favor by not even mentioning impeachment. you dumb fucks. 

Sir, your investigation and report did NOT result in my client being charged with a crime or removed from office.   Isn't it true that your investigation was poorly conducted, biased and should be disregarded... wait what??

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

Have the Dems asked about whether, if not for the obstruction, there might have been evidence to prove the conspiracy?  

if they have, and maybe they have, this isn't confirmation, i can confidently tell you that mueller would answer "i'm not going to speculate" or "i'm not going to get into that."

lol 

defense attorney for someone indicted for attempted murder to victim: did he kill you?

victim: no

defense attorney: there is no there there

Debbie Lesko seems like an idiot.

WTF is this WaPo angle?  God Republicans are a fucking beating.  The NYT?  Fox News?

2 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

if they have, and maybe they have, this isn't confirmation, i can confidently tell you that mueller would answer "i'm not going to speculate" or "i'm not going to get into that."

He would have because it's in the report:

"In an important but somewhat overlooked passage, the Mueller report states that in light of these “identified gaps,” in the evidence, “the Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in the report.” 

Edited by Mojo Hand

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Debbie Lesko with an own goal.

Jesus what an idiot.  

WOW, Lesko needs to yield FAST.  How fucking embarrassing

 

3177527.gif

.  

but only 25 for Fox!  Checkmate your honor!

And then she tries to get Mueller to "answer" a "question".  

lulz at this lady trying to indicate that volume ii is based strictly on regurgitated news stories.

  • Author

I wish Mueller would say something like, "My investigation was completely unencumbered except for all the witnesses lying about their contacts and interactions with Russians."

Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.