Reply to this topicStart new topic
Rumor Of Intended Firing Of Mueller, Special Counselor, By Trump... A Totally Contrived Scenario??

post Jun 15 2017, 06:09 AM
Post #1

Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 415
Joined: 6-July 12
Member No.: 6,923

Newslink: Can the president fire special counsel Robert Mueller?

Let’s back up just a little bit in time.

The Donald (aka “baby dictator;” aka Donald Trump) claimed total vindication due to then-Director of the FBI James Comey’s having allegedly advised The Donald that the The Donald was not under investigation.

Huh? Saying that a lack of an investigation equates to total vindication is pure and unadulterated Trumpesque B.S..

There are only two things that I can think of offhand that would declare total vindication of criminal accusations: 1.) a very proper, very comprehensive criminal investigation that would leave no stone unturned; or alternatively 2.) a very proper criminal trial with a high quality defense, a high quality judge, a high quality jury, and even, yes, a high quality prosecution.

If Donald Trump wants total vindication, then he needs a high quality criminal investigation... or the appearance of one (a contrived one).

So how can that be accomplished?

Well, for starters, you might have an interview with a prospective Special Counsel with the possibility of the appointment to a very plum governmental position like Director of the FBI being dropped as more, much more, than a heavy-handed hint...

... to a person like Robert Mueller.

What is a person like Robert Mueller like?

Well, as noted in a prior and recent posting on this message board, I pointed out that Mr. Mueller was previously head of the FBI at the time of 9/11, yet he did not resign despite the many many facts of irregularities regarding that case, most notably the fact that a proper criminal investigation into 9/11 was never conducted.

He did not resign even in light of the fact that the conducting of the National Commission on Terrorists Attacks Upon the United States (aka the “9/11 Commission”) did not even rise to the level of a piss-poor whitewash.

I noted in the prior posting about Robert Mueller that there was a significant criminal case regarding activities in a certain Parsippany, NJ hotel involving members of the Parsippany police department. This case apparently was totally quashed and swept under the rug by Mr. Mueller’s FBI with a FBI Special Agent slamming his phone in my face.

Probably more important than the Parsippany, NJ case was a prior case that likewise was totally quashed and swept under the rug by the FBI of Mr. Mueller’s predecessor. I’d assume that Statutes of Limitations generally would not apply by the time that Mr. Mueller assumed the role of Director of the FBI just a few short days before 9/11, and that Mr. Mueller could have reignited that very major criminal case, but did he? NO! HE DID NOT, nor did he resign over this matter.

That prior case to which I allude was the criminal case in which Vito DiTomasso was a very central figure as a governmental informant. Here are some of the activities in which his immediate family and his in-laws, the Solari family, were involved: massive credit card fraud and identity theft, bank fraud, bankruptcy fraud, perjury, obstruction of justice, narcotics, meth lab operation, toxic waste dumping, the destruction of a NYC municipal sewerage line, trafficking in fireworks, and other things like the death by toxic waste of three trees forward of the house at 1814 Bogart Avenue, Bronx, NY. The city, state, and federal law enforcement agencies were all aware of these things. Additionally, Joseph Solari was involved in some kind of shady commodities trading company in, of all places, Conakry, Guinea. Why do I say “shady?” It’s because everything that Joseph Solari was involved in was shady including the fact that he was trading in bauxite (aluminum in the raw), aluminum having been identified as the primary ingredient of thermite and nano-thermite, explosives that were implicated in the destruction of the WTC.

Regarding this case, a person in the FBI Office of Professional Conduct in Newark, NJ leaked to me that I should be patient because major criminal indictments would be coming down soon, and he dropped a bigtime hint that at least one of those indictments was intended for a bigtime politico. (Footnote: these historical tidbits were in the backdrop of the Senatorial race between Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani with blatant appearances of corrupt arrangements for Giuliani’s withdrawal from the race to insure an easy win by Hillary.)

Additional footnote: Rudy Giuliani for a time served as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Vito DiTomasso resided in the Bronx, part of the territory known as the Southern District of New York. What a coincidence! Giuliani at that time specialized in narcotics prosecutions. Vito DiTomasso engaged in narcotics activity. What a coincidence! Vito DiTomasso, no doubt, was a life-long government informant. Giuliani’s office dealt with government informants. What a coincidence! Now, what is the probability that Giuliani and Vito DiTomasso never crossed paths at the U.S. Attorney’s Office?

So, what did Robert Mueller do about any of these goings-on once he came on the scene as Director of the FBI in September, 2001? NOTHING that I know of. HE DID NOTHING!! Sometimes nothing can be characterized as “playing ball.”

Hmmm, wouldn’t it behoove Trump to have a “ball player” on his team... one who may have pledged an oath of loyalty to SATAN during a certain job interview just ONE day before he is assigned a highly visible role in the scheme of things BY SOMEONE ELSE WHO HAS ALREADY REVEALED HIMSELF AS A BALLPLAYER who has written a totally contrived letter indicating implausible reasons for the firing of the previous Director of the FBI?

So, there can be an appearance of a highly official, highly by-the-book, high comprehensive criminal investigation that leaves no stone unturned with the conclusion: “there’s nothing going on there.” Hmmm, just what the doctor ordered for The Donald. I myself have been blown off by a local law enforcement detective by the simple phrase: “There’s nothing going on there,” when I knew darn well that quite the opposite was, in fact, the case.

So let’s get back to the title of this post, “Rumor of intended firing of Mueller, Special Counselor, by Trump... a totally contrived scenario??”

The spreading of this rumor may serve the purpose of showing that the President and the Special Counsel, Mueller are adversaries... to show that they are not on the same page (at least for now)... to show that they are totally independent of each other (when they ARE NOT)... all for appearances sake... to make the appearance that Mueller’s investigation is on the up-and-up when the final determination may very well be “there was nothing going on here.”

BOTTOMLINE: don’t be surprised if Mueller, not Christopher Wray, is your next Director of the FBI with that job being held open for upwards of five months or so as was the case when Reagan had to fill that job.

(Footnote: its been a week since Christopher Wray was announced as The Donald’s pick for the Director of the FBI job, yet I have heard nothing from Mr. Wray indicating interest or disinterest in the job, nothing about official nominating paperwork being submitted to Congress, nothing about the scheduling of a confirmation hearing. Can anyone add any elucidation to this?)

This post has been edited by paulmichael: Jun 15 2017, 06:10 AM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Jun 17 2017, 12:08 PM
Post #2

Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 415
Joined: 6-July 12
Member No.: 6,923

More time has passed, and there is still no status update in the news regarding the supposed intention to officially nominate Christopher Wray to be Director of the F.B.I.

Meanwhile, there has been speculation in the news that President Donald Trump is (or will be) throwing Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein "under the bus."

Yet Rod Rosenstein has proven himself to be a flying monkey of Donald Trump on at least two occasions, the first one being when Rod Rosenstein issued a memo (supposedly upon request by Trump) to Trump calling for the firing of Director Comey of the F.B.I. due to Comey's alleged mishandling of the Clinton email scandal, this directly contradicting the lauding of Comey for that handling by Attorney General Jeff Session and by Trump himself just a few months prior.

More recently, Rod Rosenstein issued the following statement of admonishment which has been termed "unusual," "strange," "weird," and even "bizarre" by various news people and which seems to cover for the fact that Donald Trump was under criminal investigation.

Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous ‘officials,’ particularly when they do not identify the country — let alone the branch of agency of government — with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated. Americans should be skeptical about anonymous allegations.

Now, do the American people really need to be told this? You tell me: how many stories in the mainstream media (“The National Enquirer” excluded) that were based on unnamed sources had to be retracted or corrected with a mea culpa? Not many that I know of. Why are we being treated like dolts by a flying monkey of a guy who has been characterized by a prominent newsman for having run his entire life on the basis of “bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!”

Yet the Donald basically blasted Rod Rosenstein in a recent tweet about Rosenstein’s being the guy who called on Trump to fire Comey, yet who now is calling for Trump to be investigated for that firing.

Madonna once said that nothing is what it appears to be.

Is Trump trying to put on the theatrics of a four-year-old toddler who thinks that dad (us guys) is a doofus and push-over?

Is Trump trying to create the illusion of an adversarial relationship with Rod Rosenstein when nothing can be farther from the truth as may very well be the case with Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller. (See the original post above.)

Don't be surprised if there is an appearance of a duly executed investigation with the conclusion of there being "nothing here, folks, move along, move along," and with Robert Mueller being appointed the next Director of the F.B.I., not Christopher Wray who may be being used as nothing more than a placeholder.

P.S. It is my take on this Cuba thing that it was nothing more than a contrived event to look like official business so that a certain narcissist/cheater-in-chief could utilize a government owned 747 for a trip to Florida for a long weekend at resorts and golf courses (as usual) at government expense ($3,000,000+, as usual).
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Jun 20 2017, 04:00 PM
Post #3

Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 415
Joined: 6-July 12
Member No.: 6,923

Well, two more business days have come and gone with no news of a formal nomination. I have come upon the following news article that explicitly states that the paperwork for the formal nomination of Mr. Christopher Wray has not yet been completed and submitted to Congress as of last Thursday: Trump FBI Pick Chris Wray Worked on Russia Case but Deleted it From His Company Bio

To date, Trump has not formally nominated Wray. To do so, the formal nominee must be sent to the U.S. Senate, but the White House has yet to do so, Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders confirmed Thursday during a press briefing.

“There's a pretty lengthy paperwork process, I know, that goes with selecting that individual,” Sanders said. “And so I believe they’re in the middle of that process. And as soon as it’s completed, it will be sent over.”

Note well: Ms. Huckabee Sanders said: “And so I believe...” This is a non-committal statement totally lacking definitiveness. Don’t you think that the preparation of such paperwork is a highly significant White House project, and, as such, don’t you think that Ms. Sanders should definitely be in-the-know about it... but she merely “believes?”

According to ABC News, over 1,200 federal appointments require Senate confirmation. If the paperwork for each of these nominations is a “pretty lengthy process” on the part of the White House, then that paperwork times 1,200+ would be pretty crushing. Just how many fill-in-the-blanks are there for the White House to fill in on each nomination form? Not many, probably, and I’d venture a guess that most of the burden of paperwork is placed on the backs of the nominees who have a lot of disclosure forms with which to deal. I think that we are being fed a crock of hooey by Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

Anyway, I have yet to hear any report that Mr. Wray is interested or disinterested in taking the job. I think that Christopher Wray is a placeholder for Robert Mueller.

While I have your attention, here is another interesting article from Rolling Stone Magazine that raises very pertinent questions and issues about the Wray matter: Trump's FBI Pick Christopher Wray Shouldn't Get a Hearing

How could we possibly trust that anyone Trump chooses to head the FBI hasn't offered him some kind of assurance? Or that Trump hasn't made it clear to him he too will be fired if the FBI continues its investigations?

... and...

Trump could agree to appoint, with no input, a nominee for FBI director selected by an independent, bipartisan commission. (Better yet, Trump could resign.)

Even if there is an independent bipartisan commission, the candidate put forth as the next Director of the FBI should not be Christopher Wray for the reasons specified in the Rolling Stones article, nor should it be Robert Mueller for the reasons already outlined above. (Remember, Robert Mueller had a personal interview with The Donald just the day before Mr. Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel by Trump’s flying monkey Rod Rosenstein... that is, the Special Counsel to investigate Trump!!)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Jun 23 2017, 03:45 PM
Post #4

Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 415
Joined: 6-July 12
Member No.: 6,923

Well, three more business days have come and gone, and I have seen nothing in the news that Christopher Wray has been formally nominated before Congress as the next Director of the F.B.I.

I did come across a news article dated today that termed Mr. Wray not as a “nominee,” not as the “prospective Director of the F.B.I,” but as a “prospective nominee.”

More significant for those of you are interested is another article that came out today at dailybeast.com: Why Hasn’t Trump Actually Nominated an FBI Director? (mostly speculation, however).

In the meantime, I researched the nomination process on the Net, and I learned that while there are several forms with titles and form numbers for the nominee to fill out, it seems that there is no form for the White House to fill out in order to submit a nomination formally to Congress. My impression is that all that the White House need do is to just compose a one line note on fancy White House stationary naming a nominee with that little note being sent off to Congress.

The holdup of the time consuming process of Mr. Wray’s paperwork to which Ms. Huckabee-Sanders alluded last week may be due to the White House’s very careful reviewing of Mr. Wray’s paperwork to insure that it meets the same high standards to which the paperwork of Jarod Kushner, Jeff Sessions, and Mike Flynn rose. Hey, after all, those guys aren’t sitting in a prison cell for felonies... (just yet).

Now, getting back to Trump and Robert Mueller...

On last night’s MSNBC show, “The Last Word” with Lawrence O’Donnell, the following was the dialogue among Mr. O’Donnell and two guest commentators:

Joy Reid, host of MSNBC’s “AM Joy:” “Firing him [James Comey] was a huge mistake, and he’s [Trump] is going to have to live with it.”

Lawrence O’Donnell: “Tim, will he [Trump] live with it? Will he [Trump] not try to fire the Special Prosecutor? Will he live with what he now has?”

Timothy O/Brien, author of “Trump Nation:” “We’ve been down this road before, you and I, talking about this. I don’t think he’d hesitate for a second to fire Mueller if he feels threatened.”

Ahhhh, “fire Mueller, if he [Trump] feels threatened.”

While this statement is an expression of an opinion, it ratifies my sense that something may have been agreed upon between Mueller and Trump during their meeting the day before Mueller was appointed Special Counsel by Trump flying monkey, Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General.

Trump does not appear to be threatened by Mueller. Mueller is not toast. To the contrary, Trump just issued what may be considered an uncharacteristic statement about Mueller under the circumstances.

What did the normally vindictively impulsive and impetuous Donald Trump, who normally lashes out with invectives, pejoratives and even lawsuits against his adversaries, say about Mueller? He lukewarmly said that Mueller’s being a friend of James Comey was “bothersome.”


Where are the ad hominems like “crooked Hillary,” “lying Ted,” “overrated Meryl Streep,” etc., etc.????

Trump is not threatened by Robert Mueller.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Jul 15 2017, 08:26 PM
Post #5

Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 870
Joined: 23-December 06
Member No.: 360

Methinks Trump is caving to the globalist sith lords who are going to either own or remove him over time . A JFK Trump is not however his presenc is hope.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 12th December 2017 - 04:47 PM