• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Michael Caputo says 'it's clear' Mueller investigators focused on Russia collusion

upsideguy

Pragmatic Idealist
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
23,743
Reaction score
19,392
Location
Rocky Mtn. High
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
After being interviewed by special counsel investigators on Wednesday, former aide to Donald Trump's presidential campaign Michael Caputo told CNN that Robert Mueller's team is "focused on Russia collusion."

"It's clear they are still really focused on Russia collusion," Caputo said, adding, "They know more about the Trump campaign than anyone who ever worked there."


Caputo, who advised the Trump campaign on communications in 2016, has long insisted he has no information about collusion between Trump's team and Russia. He spoke with Senate intelligence investigators on Tuesday for their Russia probe and outlined the differences between Congress' inquiries and the special counsel's.

"The Senate and the House are net fishing," Caputo said. "The special counsel is spearfishing. They know what they are aiming at and are deadly accurate."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/02/politics/michael-caputo-mueller-investigator/index.html

Pause should be taken by those that have posted on this board that Mueller's got "nothing" or that this is a "hoax", as this should well illustrate that this is a serious investigation with serious people looking into a dark, but serious matter of American history.

I particularly liked the last quote, "The special counsel is spearfishing. They know what they are aiming at and are deadly accurate." which suggests, to run with that metaphor, that what has been casually scoffed as a "fishing expedition", should end with the landing of the correct fish. These people know what they are doing.

Though I think most of us have grown weary of all of this, we should be in agreement that we want it done correctly and thoroughly with a comprehensive conclusion and any wrong doing prosecuted so that people learn to run clean campaigns, free of even the appearance of outside influence.

Even if Trump is not guilty of conspiracy, I think its hard to argue against the notion that the campaign was run foolishly in that he surrounded himself with persons that created, at least, the appearance of impropriety.
 
Last edited:
Pause should be taken by those that have posted on this board that Mueller's got "nothing" or that this is a "hoax", as this should well illustrate that this is a serious investigation with serious people looking into a dark, but serious matter of American history.

I particularly liked the last quote, "The special counsel is spearfishing. They know what they are aiming at and are deadly accurate." which suggests, to run with that metaphor, that what has been casually scoffed as a "fishing expedition", should end with the landing of the correct fish. These people know what they are doing.

Though I think most of us have grown weary of all of this, we should be in agreement that we want it done correctly and thoroughly with a comprehensive conclusion and any wrong doing prosecuted so that people learn to run clean campaigns, free of even the appearance of outside influence.

Even if Trump is not guilty of conspiracy, I think its hard to argue against the notion that the campaign was run foolishly in that he surrounded himself with persons that created, at least, the appearance of impropriety.

This is certainly a serious look for Dirt on Trump, because this SOB has to be run out of town on a rail.

But this job is taking far too long.
 
Fun fact: Trump's lawyer Jay Sekulow compiled the list of Mueller's questions and leaked them to the press. :prof

In the wake of the testy March 5 meeting, Mueller’s team agreed to provide the president’s lawyers with more specific information about the subjects that prosecutors wished to discuss with the president. With those details in hand, Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow compiled a list of 49 questions that the team believed the president would be asked, according to three of the four people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk publicly. The New York Times first reported the existence of the list.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5b3dfeb02ca6
 
49 questions is either fishing or a perjury trap, or both.
 
49 questions is either fishing or a perjury trap, or both.

Surprising coming from you! What is a good round number of appropriate questions for the guy in the center of this investigation? 3?

Did you collude with the Russians?
Did you hear/know of/witness any collusion?
Are you otherwise guilty of any felonies we should know about?

;)
 
Pause should be taken by those that have posted on this board that Mueller's got "nothing" or that this is a "hoax", as this should well illustrate that this is a serious investigation with serious people looking into a dark, but serious matter of American history.

I particularly liked the last quote, "The special counsel is spearfishing. They know what they are aiming at and are deadly accurate." which suggests, to run with that metaphor, that what has been casually scoffed as a "fishing expedition", should end with the landing of the correct fish. These people know what they are doing.

Though I think most of us have grown weary of all of this, we should be in agreement that we want it done correctly and thoroughly with a comprehensive conclusion and any wrong doing prosecuted so that people learn to run clean campaigns, free of even the appearance of outside influence.

Even if Trump is not guilty of conspiracy, I think its hard to argue against the notion that the campaign was run foolishly in that he surrounded himself with persons that created, at least, the appearance of impropriety.

That's been a pretty common theme coming from people going in front of Mueller's team. Basically the picture of them is they're well prepared, competent, and deadly serious about the job they're doing. Really everyone should like to hear reports like that IMO.
 
Surprising coming from you! What is a good round number of appropriate questions for the guy in the center of this investigation? 3?

Did you collude with the Russians?
Did you hear/know of/witness any collusion?
Are you otherwise guilty of any felonies we should know about?

;)

The obvious answer is "Something far less than this".

Surprising to find you having this degree of difficulty with English.
 
This is certainly a serious look for Dirt on Trump, because this SOB has to be run out of town on a rail.

But this job is taking far too long.

Patience is bitter, but its fruit is "tweet".
 
The obvious answer is "Something far less than this".

Surprising to find you having this degree of difficulty with English.

My English is fine, what's kind of funny is that you think something like 50 questions to a person in the middle of this investigation is too much. I'd guess the average grunt like the guy in the OP answered FAR more than that, and knows 1/1,000th of what Trump might know. Given a free hand, I'm sure the investigators could question Trump for several hours and never once ask an irrelevant or off-topic question.
 
Pause should be taken by those that have posted on this board that Mueller's got "nothing" or that this is a "hoax", as this should well illustrate that this is a serious investigation with serious people looking into a dark, but serious matter of American history.

I particularly liked the last quote, "The special counsel is spearfishing. They know what they are aiming at and are deadly accurate." which suggests, to run with that metaphor, that what has been casually scoffed as a "fishing expedition", should end with the landing of the correct fish. These people know what they are doing.

That the hired help is taking their jobs seriously is irrelevant to those points. What he closes with makes it clear that the points you mention above are not based in wishful thinking.


"I am very confident that there was no Russian collusion. I am very confident that the President is in the clear here. I think in the end they're going to find the holes they're digging to be empty. But they are digging and they are going to continuing to dig."

video @ 15:34


 
This is certainly a serious look for Dirt on Trump, because this SOB has to be run out of town on a rail.

But this job is taking far too long.

Watergate took 2 years. Muller will take as much time as he needs to do the job. That's what you want, no? Or would you prefer it done half-assed just because it's running past your self-imposed biased timeline. Jeepers.
 
Watergate took 2 years. Muller will take as much time as he needs to do the job. That's what you want, no? Or would you prefer it done half-assed just because it's running past your self-imposed biased timeline. Jeepers.

Mueller has nothing after over a year. Nothing. We know this because it would've been leaked otherwise. Put up or shut up. Fishing trips via the open ended twenty question variety is more a KGB tactic than any American prosecution tactic that I know of. Then again, I've heard of Mueller pulling this kind of crap before.
 
Mueller has nothing after over a year. Nothing. We know this because it would've been leaked otherwise. Put up or shut up. Fishing trips via the open ended twenty question variety is more a KGB tactic than any American prosecution tactic that I know of. Then again, I've heard of Mueller pulling this kind of crap before.

Nothing? How many indictments so far? Don't let your love of Trump brainwash you.
 
Pause should be taken by those that have posted on this board that Mueller's got "nothing" or that this is a "hoax", as this should well illustrate that this is a serious investigation with serious people looking into a dark, but serious matter of American history.

I particularly liked the last quote, "The special counsel is spearfishing. They know what they are aiming at and are deadly accurate." which suggests, to run with that metaphor, that what has been casually scoffed as a "fishing expedition", should end with the landing of the correct fish. These people know what they are doing.

Though I think most of us have grown weary of all of this, we should be in agreement that we want it done correctly and thoroughly with a comprehensive conclusion and any wrong doing prosecuted so that people learn to run clean campaigns, free of even the appearance of outside influence.

Even if Trump is not guilty of conspiracy, I think its hard to argue against the notion that the campaign was run foolishly in that he surrounded himself with persons that created, at least, the appearance of impropriety.

It's a witch hunt, becaise there's thing as a crime called "collusion". Mueller can't just dream up a crime and charge someone.
 
Nothing? How many indictments so far? Don't let your love of Trump brainwash you.

How many indictments that are in any way connected to the campaign, or the election? Exactly zero.

This witch hunt is designed to do one thing: send a message to anyone who isn't a part of the permanent political class to never do this again.
 
Nothing? How many indictments so far? Don't let your love of Trump brainwash you.

He has a number of indictments for unrelated issues, as well as a dozen for Russians concerning posting false stories on the internet, with a few identity theft charges thrown in. No charges against anyone for Russian 'hacking', no charges against any American for cooperating with them, and no indication that the Trump campaign was involved in this.

Two years of investigation by the FBI and special council with laser focus hasn't resulted in any indictments for their original concern.
 
Watergate took 2 years. Muller will take as much time as he needs to do the job. That's what you want, no? Or would you prefer it done half-assed just because it's running past your self-imposed biased timeline. Jeepers.

If the claim is that the President is not legit then that claim must be adjudicated in weeks, not many months or anything close to a year, full stop. If this can not be done then no charge should be made.
 
The obvious answer is "Something far less than this".

Surprising to find you having this degree of difficulty with English.

Oh this is priceless. You of all people questioning someone else as to their grasp of the English language? Comedy gold. :lamo
 
It's a witch hunt, becaise there's thing as a crime called "collusion". Mueller can't just dream up a crime and charge someone.

I think you mean "there's no such crime as collusion".... true, collusion is not a crime, but "collusion" in the participation of a crime is called "conspiracy", that would be the charge. I know over there at Fox News they keep trying to mislead you with this "collusion is not a crime" nonsense, but as is typical with Fox News, they are running a rally over there rather than properly informing their viewers. Otherwise you would realize collusion would result in a conspiracy charge.

If this were a "witchhunt" as you characterize, then our buddy Michael Caputo would not have made the statement ""The Senate and the House are net fishing," Caputo said. "The special counsel is spearfishing. They know what they are aiming at and are deadly accurate.".... you see, you "witch hunt" with a "net"; you "investigate" with a spear.
 
I think you mean "there's no such crime as collusion".... true, collusion is not a crime, but "collusion" in the participation of a crime is called "conspiracy", that would be the charge. I know over there at Fox News they keep trying to mislead you with this "collusion is not a crime" nonsense, but as is typical with Fox News, they are running a rally over there rather than properly informing their viewers. Otherwise you would realize collusion would result in a conspiracy charge.

If this were a "witchhunt" as you characterize, then our buddy Michael Caputo would not have made the statement ""The Senate and the House are net fishing," Caputo said. "The special counsel is spearfishing. They know what they are aiming at and are deadly accurate.".... you see, you "witch hunt" with a "net"; you "investigate" with a spear.

You notice he made a fishing comparison. Do you know the difference between net fishing and spearfishing? One catches, one kills.

It's a witch hunt. The political class is sending a clear message to any other outsiders who dare to get involved in national politics.

President Trump promised to drain the swamp and the swamp is fighting back. You all should be embarressed for supporting this and I guarantee you'll regret it one day.
 
Surprising coming from you! What is a good round number of appropriate questions for the guy in the center of this investigation? 3?

Did you collude with the Russians?
Did you hear/know of/witness any collusion?
Are you otherwise guilty of any felonies we should know about?

;)

he is going to ask to have to ask them to an empty chair....Trump wont be sitting there

so the only question now....does Mueller have enough without his testimony

I guess we will soon find out....
 
Mueller has nothing after over a year. Nothing. We know this because it would've been leaked otherwise. Put up or shut up. Fishing trips via the open ended twenty question variety is more a KGB tactic than any American prosecution tactic that I know of. Then again, I've heard of Mueller pulling this kind of crap before.

OR everything is revealed when the investigation is complete. What a novel concept, eh?
 
he is going to ask to have to ask them to an empty chair....Trump wont be sitting there

so the only question now....does Mueller have enough without his testimony

I guess we will soon find out....

Read a good analysis at lawfareblog.com on the issue. https://www.lawfareblog.com/game-theory-trump-subpoena

Short version, if he needs the testimony, Mueller is likely to push a subpoena because the feeling is the risk of loss for Trump is worse than the downside for Mueller. If he doesn't need it, he'll let it go, or get what he can with a few written questions.

And if there's a sit-down, better for Trump's lawyers to negotiate good terms, allow his lawyer to be present, etc. than risk a subpoena that if Trump loses has him going to grand jury all alone with disaster written all over it.
 
If the claim is that the President is not legit then that claim must be adjudicated in weeks, not many months or anything close to a year, full stop. If this can not be done then no charge should be made.

Investigations do not reveal their truths by waving a magic wand. You want the truth, don't you?
 
Back
Top Bottom