Mueller Investigation pt5

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bogative said:
Mueller was authorized to prosecute any federal crimes arising from his investigation. He didn't find proof of any between Russia and the Trump campaign or he's going easy on the man who has dragged his name through the mud for nearly 2 years for some reason.
Click to expand...
I agree. The unseemly connections we know about, which are not in dispute, did not prove that there was a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Trump's continual taunts were not a factor one way or another. That's just Trump being Trump. Some people love that about him. Some don't.
 
johnny karate said:
Maddow isn’t a reporter. She’s an openly liberal political commentator. Her conclusions are not presented as findings of fact. They are presented as opinions.
Click to expand...

I don't watch Maddow, but most commentators mix facts and opinions, the former being essential in making the latter persuasive. If Maddow's statements of fact are misleading, then she deserves criticism.

But, as I said, I don't watch her. I tried just once. It was painfully slow and repetitive, chock full of teasers about what she would say rather than just saying it. Not the way I like to get my news or commentary. Others seem to enjoy her presentation.
 
alfaniner said:
I think it bears mentioning that no one, except for Barr and Mueller, has seen the full report and commented on it.
Click to expand...
That circle is bound to get wider which IMO will make the report harder to bury.

There's stuff in there Trump doesn't want people to see, and I doubt if it's because he's concerned about national security or about protecting people's reputations (other than his own).
 
BobTheCoward said:
Let's suppose Barr's summary is correct (which I reject).

Her reporting of what is on point actually pointed to a different conclusion then what the report finally made. Then her reporting promoted conclusions that were wrong. People would have had a better understanding of what was going on by not watching her show.
Click to expand...

Let's not suppose it's actually a "summary" of the report.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...8b7525a8d5f_story.html?utm_term=.ac3bf3f0aa0c

“My March 24 letter was not, and did not purport to be, an exhaustive recounting of the Special Counsel’s investigation or report,” Barr wrote. “As my letter [Sunday] made clear, my notification to Congress and the public provided, pending release of the report, a summary of its ‘principal conclusions’ — that is, its bottom line. The Special Counsel’s report is nearly 400 pages long (exclusive of tables and appendices) and sets forth the Special Counsel’s findings, his analysis, and the reasons for his conclusions. . . . I do not believe it would be in the public’s interest for me to attempt to summarize the full report or to release it in serial or piecemeal fashion.”
 
Last edited:
TheL8Elvis said:
Let's not suppose it's actually a "summary" of the report.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...8b7525a8d5f_story.html?utm_term=.ac3bf3f0aa0c

“My March 24 letter was not, and did not purport to be, an exhaustive recounting of the Special Counsel’s investigation or report,” Barr wrote. “As my letter [Sunday] made clear, my notification to Congress and the public provided, pending release of the report, a summary of its ‘principal conclusions’ — that is, its bottom line. The Special Counsel’s report is nearly 400 pages long (exclusive of tables and appendices) and sets forth the Special Counsel’s findings, his analysis, and the reasons for his conclusions. . . . I do not believe it would be in the public’s interest for me to attempt to summarize the full report or to release it in serial or piecemeal fashion.”
Click to expand...

Why are you fighting the hypothetical?
 
Safe-Keeper said:
That's a relief.

Edit: 29% in a country where he has an approval rating of roughly one third? Unsure how to interpret that. Do most of the trumpkins think he's innocent?

Another edit: 40%, even, according to your link and 5-38. Makes it even more interesting.
Click to expand...

It seems many trumpers are honest enough to admit that they don't trust Trump, but it apparently doesn't matter to them.
 
Bogative said:
I believe the investigations will continue and I believe it's possible there will be more indictments, arrests and possible jail time for some people. One thing I won't do is deny reality when the investigations conclude without confirming what I was hoping they would conclude going in.
Click to expand...

If you would stop using dishonest words like "exonerated" and "cleared" you wouldn't look so confirmation biased yourself.
 
magellan said:
Ok.
In Russiagate-world 40% is a majority.
Click to expand...

It's a majority of the people who expressed an opinion. If we must also consider those who didn't, we might argue about what distinction there is between "not cleared" and "not sure," but no, you don't get to claim "not sure" as "cleared."
 
WilliamSeger said:
It's a majority of the people who expressed an opinion. If we must also consider those who didn't, we might argue about what distinction there is between "not cleared" and "not sure," but no, you don't get to claim "not sure" as "cleared."
Click to expand...


It's always interesting to look at the URL of an article which is often the original headline before the spinmeisters touched it. In this case it is "poll-after-mueller-summary-americans-are-still-wait-see-mode" which is superior to both the current headline and the alternative one I made up.
 
phiwum said:
I don't watch Maddow, but most commentators mix facts and opinions, the former being essential in making the latter persuasive. If Maddow's statements of fact are misleading, then she deserves criticism.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

The next step is to find something misleading or inaccurate that she presented as fact.
 
Childlike Empress said:
It's always interesting to look at the URL of an article which is often the original headline before the spinmeisters touched it. In this case it is "poll-after-mueller-summary-americans-are-still-wait-see-mode" which is superior to both the current headline and the alternative one I made up.
Click to expand...


This is actually quite an interesting case to ponder. While the current headline and my made-up alternative are absolutely true based on the data, they are both clearly "biased". The original headline that "Americans are still in wait and see mode" is not absolutely true based on the data, but is more true in a common sense way, and it is "unbiased".
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
This is actually quite an interesting case to ponder. While the current headline and my made-up alternative are absolutely true based on the data, they are both clearly "biased". The original headline that "Americans are still in wait and see mode" is not absolutely true based on the data, but is more true in a common sense way, and it is "unbiased".
Click to expand...

Whatever floats your Russian cargo boat, but you can't spin the numbers as good news for Trump.
 
WilliamSeger said:
Whatever floats your Russian cargo boat, but you can't spin the numbers as good news for Trump.
Click to expand...


I did not try to spin the numbers in any way, I pointed out the spin in the headline of your article, and I pointed out that it was deliberate. Something you should be thankful for if you were interested in learning in skeptical 101 class I'm teaching here.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
I did not try to spin the numbers in any way, I pointed out the spin in the headline of your article, and I pointed out that it was deliberate. Something you should be thankful for if you were interested in learning in skeptical 101 class I'm teaching here.
Click to expand...

The headline is entirely accurate; it only looks like spin to you because you don't like the implication.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom