Wildcat said:

---

LeisureSuitLarry said:

---

The "lawyer mode" worked on my wife for a while but then she got tired of it. Now when she gets mad, she pouts for a couple of days. Either way, I consider it a win.

---

I hate to interrupt the circle jerk, but do you guys really "win" these arguments? Or is it that there is no judge in the room to tell you to sit down and shut-up, so you simply beat the loves of your lives down with persistence until they decide their cost-benefit ratio of having to listen to more of your bullsheet is upside down?

---

Lighten up, Francis.

fasthorses05 said:

---

I haven't paid any attention to the coming Mueller, and then Weissman, testimony, because Mueller will do what he said he would. He'll just reply that "it's in the report". If that doesn't work, can't he just plead the fifth?

And if THAT doesn't work, any question a Republican asks, will have the answer be extended for 4 minutes and 45 seconds to avoid another question (5 minutes being the maximum time for each legislator. IMO, I expect nothing out of these hearings, except knashing of teeth, and internal grinding of news organizations.

And Hawg, I can see him taking that course, but if he does, won't that point Barr/Durham in a different direction? Based on their history, I really like both of those guys, but I'm only 60% sold on them. Meaning I'm waiting on actions to justify my initial faith.

Or, as usual, I could be wrong.

---

I don't think Weissmann is going to testify, first off.

But go back to the origins of Crossfire Hurricane. Mifsud is the "Russian agent" who talked to Papadop. Where did Mueller get the idea Mifsud was a Russian agent? The IC. If he's not in fact a Russian agent then that is the IC's fault, not Mueller's.

That type of spin is what I was referencing.

"Or just restrict lawyers to only marrying each other."


Those marriages wouldn't last long enough to survive the honeymoon.

Don't respond to the troll. Flag him and move on.

The mods keep the libs out of this thread because all the libs want to do is get it deleted.

Rapier108 said:

---

Don't respond to the troll. Flag him and move on.

The mods keep the libs out of this thread because all the libs want to do is get it deleted.

---

Lighten-up, Francis.

Don't think Wildcat is a lib troll.

LeisureSuitLarry said:

---

The "lawyer mode" worked on my wife for a while but then she got tired of it. Now when she gets mad, she pouts for a couple of days. Either way, I consider it a win.

---

Great username.

Wildcat said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Don't respond to the troll. Flag him and move on.

The mods keep the libs out of this thread because all the libs want to do is get it deleted.

---

Lighten-up, Francis.

---

Touche'

George Nader is facing new charges.

Quote:

---

George Nader, who was a key witness in Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, was hit with new federal charges of sex trafficking for allegedly having sex with a 14-year-old boy he transported from Europe.

An indictment unsealed Friday morning in Eastern District of Virginia also charges Nader with counts of child pornography and obscenity. The charges come on top of separate child-porn charges leveled by the same prosecutors last month.

---

Quote:

---

He also helped broker a key meeting between Erik Prince, the former Blackwater CEO, and Kirill Dmitriev, the head of one of Russia's sovereign wealth funds, in the Seychelles in January 2017. That meeting came under intense scrutiny by Mueller's team and was described in its report as one of the ways the Russians tried to influence the incoming Trump administration.

Federal prosecutors in Virginia argued last month in court that Nader should be held in jail before trial, based in part on his prior criminal history. That history includes a 2003 conviction in the Czech Republic on charges of abusing minors, including a charge of transporting of a minor boy to the U.S. for sexual purposes. Federal prosecutors said Nader has had "hands-on contact with more than a dozen minor boys." Nader's lawyers called the U.S. government's argument weak because he was later acquitted of the Czech sex-trafficking charge.

---

LINK

I could come up with a few of my own charges on that guy!

fasthorses05 said:

---

I could come up with a few of my own charges on that guy!

---

Remember Team Mueller sat on a sealed indictment on Nader for over a year. Once they had no further use for him, they dropped him into the grease. I would have argued they should have dropped into the grease when the indictment came down but that would have affected the credibility of a sizable player in the Mueller Report.

Aannnddd, Mueller is still a POS.

Sarge 91 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

First of all, my brain doesn't think like Cleveland's, and apparently all attorneys. That's frickin' amazing she caught this information, or it is to me. Is there an investigatinve class they teach in law school that teaches extreme critical thinking? Or is it a pre-condition of living in DC in order to cover your ass?

---

Part of the Socratic method. Not all law schools follow it but yes, we are taught to think differently from before.

I remember at orientation before my first year we were told that if we were married, likely half of us would get divorced by our third year. Seemed kind of silly to me at the time but it was true. Largely a function of how we were retrained to actually argue a point, any point.

I have been married to The Hubs for over 20 years. Drives him crazy when we are having an argument and I go into what he calls "lawyer mode." Mostly drives him crazy because he knows he's about to lose the argument, however.

---

This is true. My wife hates it. I think part of the way we are taught is to see issues from all angles, including from the perspective of an opponent. That allows you to anticipate their positions and cut them off at the knees (not my wife, of course).

---

Rarely go lawyer mode with the wife, but the kids eventually learned to come clean when the cross-examination started.

LOL. Told ya.

Quote:

---

In yet another surprise development in the Michael Flynn case, on Tuesday Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered Flynn's former Covington and Burling lawyers to appear in court to receive a lecture on ethics from the senior legal ethics counsel for the District of Columbia Bar. While Sullivan's order expressed concern only over Covington and Burling's delay in providing Flynn's new attorney, Sidney Powell, access to his complete legal file, given recent revelations, one must wonder whether Sullivan is equally concerned that a conflict of interest existed in Covington and Burling's representation of Flynn.

Tuesday's order followed a briefing by Powell and federal prosecutors on the possible effects on Flynn's sentencing of recently unsealed court records in the criminal case against Flynn's former business partner, Bijan Rafiekian. Flynn, who pleaded guilty on December 1, 2017 to making false statements to the FBI, awaits sentencing before Sullivan.

---

LINK

akm91 said:

---

Don't think Wildcat is a lib troll.

---

No, he's a lawyer troll.

aggiehawg said:

---

fasthorses05 said:

---

I could come up with a few of my own charges on that guy!

---

Remember Team Mueller sat on a sealed indictment on Nader for over a year. Once they had no further use for him, they dropped him into the grease. I would have argued they should have dropped into the grease when the indictment came down but that would have affected the credibility of a sizable player in the Mueller Report.

Aannnddd, Mueller is still a POS.

---

I haven't paid super close attention to Nader specifically. Are you saying they sat on a child sex traffic indictment for a year in order to serve the purposes of the Russian influence investigation?

If so, I cant believe I missed that. Oh, and these people really suck at humanity.

policywonk98 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

fasthorses05 said:

---

I could come up with a few of my own charges on that guy!

---

Remember Team Mueller sat on a sealed indictment on Nader for over a year. Once they had no further use for him, they dropped him into the grease. I would have argued they should have dropped into the grease when the indictment came down but that would have affected the credibility of a sizable player in the Mueller Report.

Aannnddd, Mueller is still a POS.

---

I haven't paid super close attention to Nader specifically. Are you saying they sat on a child sex traffic indictment for a year in order to serve the purposes of the Russian influence investigation?

If so, I cant believe I missed that. Oh, and these people really suck at humanity.

---

When Nader was arrested for child porn last month or so, when the indictment was unsealed it had a March 2018 date on it. So yeah, Team Mueller sat on it.

He has now been charged with child sex trafficking in a new indictment.

Until I saw your post, I didn't think too much about the hidden indictment against Nader, since this kind of thing happens all of the time. However, with your post, and then Hawg's, I read this as Nader being able to inflict his particular brand of hell on other underagers from March, '18 through last month.

Is that correct?

If so, I really hope someone cuts up Weissman and Mueller with razor blades, and soothes the wounds with rubbing alcohol. DAMN!

MooreTrucker said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Don't think Wildcat is a lib troll.

---

No, he's a lawyer troll.

---

Aren't all non-lawyers, lawyer trolls? I am an engineer, and a lawyer troll.

With that said, the lawyers on this thread make fantastic contributions.

fasthorses05 said:

---

Until I saw your post, I didn't think too much about the hidden indictment against Nader, since this kind of thing happens all of the time. However, with your post, and then Hawg's, I read this as Nader being able to inflict his particular brand of hell on other underagers from March, '18 through last month.

Is that correct?

If so, I really hope someone cuts up Weissman and Mueller with razor blades, and soothes the wounds with rubbing alcohol. DAMN!

---

To be clear, I have not read the new indictment. The sex trafficking could be from years prior to 2018 since there is no Statute of Limitations on that crime. That is not to say there weren't any other victims while Team Mueller sat on this, just that this indictment alone doesn't prove there were.

That caveat having been said, one thing I recall from Judge Berman's bail opinion was the recitation of the extremely high recidivism rates with child sex crimes. Simply put, if they did it once there is close to a 90% probability they will do it again.

But agree is was more important to Team Mueller to protect a child sex pervert to bolster their narrative in their report than it was to protect children.

Aaaannnddd, Mueller is still a POS.

My apologies. Guess I shouldn't post when I have a splitting headache.

Again, haven't read the indictment yet but according to a WaPo reporter tweet (the infamous Devlin Barrett), the trafficking occurred in 2000.

aggiehawg said:

---

policywonk98 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

fasthorses05 said:

---

I could come up with a few of my own charges on that guy!

---

Remember Team Mueller sat on a sealed indictment on Nader for over a year. Once they had no further use for him, they dropped him into the grease. I would have argued they should have dropped into the grease when the indictment came down but that would have affected the credibility of a sizable player in the Mueller Report.

Aannnddd, Mueller is still a POS.

---

I haven't paid super close attention to Nader specifically. Are you saying they sat on a child sex traffic indictment for a year in order to serve the purposes of the Russian influence investigation?

If so, I cant believe I missed that. Oh, and these people really suck at humanity.

---

When Nader was arrested for child porn last month or so, when the indictment was unsealed it had a March 2018 date on it. So yeah, Team Mueller sat on it.

He has now been charged with child sex trafficking in a new indictment.

---

I wonder if he trafficked or molested more kids While Mueller sat on it

Read this.

Remains unclear if there were other victims in the interim. Not that Team Mueller would GAS if there were.

Outrageous conduct by prosecutors, IMO. Hope the House Republicans hammer him over this.

K188Ag said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Don't think Wildcat is a lib troll.

---

No, he's a lawyer troll.

---

Aren't all non-lawyers, lawyer trolls? I am an engineer, and a lawyer troll.

With that said, the lawyers on this thread make fantastic contributions.

---

Not always. Until recently, I had not been a lawyer troll.

And by recently, I mean when my son passed the bar.

And yes, the lawyers on here are outstanding and their work is much appreciated.

Moore, that's hilarious.

Perspective is a hell of a thing!!

Wildcat said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Word on the street is that mueller is rehearsing with the dems so he can give them a few sound bites to run with.

---

How can that be? Isn't he a Republican? Cause I've heard that over and over again.

---

No. Not since assembling a team of all dems.

will25u said:

---

---

The words on the page are nonsense

The Hope Hicks stuff doesn't look all that great, at this point.

will25u said:

---

---

So they plan to lie and embellish for some sound bites. Hope the Republicans destroy them and Mueller.

aggiehawg said:

---

The Hope Hicks stuff doesn't look all that great, at this point.

---

I wish she had told them to pound sand, she was done testifying.

The Jackson Lee stuff doesn't bother me because SJL focused on "were you present" and nothing seems to show she was present. They wouldn't need to call/text/email if she were "present".

The other things certainly don't look good for her, but the letter is a shameless political hack's interpretation of the evidence.

will25u said:

---

---

Trying to keep his miserable ass out of prison, or get an early release.