Mueller Investigation pt5

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aridas said:
If you can't figure out the difference between the right wing crap that was fundamentally unevidenced, irrational, and politically motivated and similar concerns that arose from a whole lot of actual evidence and valid reason for concern, sorry, but your opinion isn't worth respecting. Your concern trolling is noted, though.
Click to expand...


Yes, this. This needs to be repeated ad infinitum.

Trump and his enablers have been trying to dismiss the investigation as a witch hunt and conspiracy theory, while conveniently ignoring the fact that there was (and is) actual evidence that something was going on.

As I expected, the report makes it clear that Russia was definitely interested in colluding with Trump all along, and that Trump and his buddies played footsies with the Russians over this. The fact that they pulled back from the edge of committing an actual crime doesn't mean they weren't looking suspicious as hell at the time, particularly in light of their clear efforts to end the investigation after Trump took office. Wanting to find out the truth of what happened in light of evidence we had on hand (particularly when we also know Trump et al. lied about at least some of it) is perfectly reasonable, no matter how much Trump whines about "No Collusion!"
 
Giz said:
KDLarsen said:
I see amnesia is creepin in on Trump as well. From The Guardian's ongoing live coverage of the report:
Click to expand...

30 times? Don should try harder. In Comey’s recent testimony to Congress he used “I don’t recall” 245 times.
Click to expand...


They should have asked Donnie more questions. He wouldn't have had any problem running up his numbers.
 
Giz said:
It's true that a major issue is that:

- Russia has tried to weaken our democracy and spread division and distrust

The other issue is:

- The democratic party has multiplied the effectiveness of Putin’s low impact meddling a thousand fold by screaming collusion, illegitimate and treason without proof.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that’s true. Certainly, many people who loathe Trump have been doing that, but I haven’t seen the official Democratic Party do it. For example, the leading Democrat in the House of Representatives has been very down on the idea of impeachment.
 
Last edited:
MrFliop said:
Let's be honest about one thing.

None of the news pundits(on either the left or right) who are gonna be talking non stop about this for the next couple of days are gonna read any part of the actual report.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. A lot of people are reading the actual report.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
Your wrong. If Russia hadn't helped Trump that bitch Hillary would have stolen the election. Far from being bad, Russian 'meddling' saved us from the catastrophe of a Democrat becoming President. You know how bad that would have been, right?

Russia isn't our enemy, they are are our friends. The real enemy is liberals.

No collusion!

Face it liberals, you lost - again. Trump will remain president for the next 5 years (at least), and America is going to be screwed greater than ever!
Click to expand...
Trump will limp to the end of his 4 years. It only appears he would win an election as he acts confident. And that is a good strategy for him, people do not care for losers, left or right. But us lefties are way more pissed off, and the undecideds too, compared to how pissed off the right was at Obama. The polls tell that much.
 
Tero said:
Trump will limp to the end of his 4 years. It only appears he would win an election as he acts confident. And that is a good strategy for him, people do not care for losers, left or right. But us lefties are way more pissed off, and the undecideds too, compared to how pissed off the right was at Obama. The polls tell that much.
Click to expand...

You don't get to vote more than once just because you're angry.

I take that back: maybe Democrats do.
 
Ziggurat said:
Because that's all the post deserved.



No, actually, it doesn't mean that at all. One would have thought that the Trump critics in particular would be clinging hard to the fact that something not being in the report doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Click to expand...

OK then, I'd like to see what evidence you have to support your position. Evidently that evidence hasn't been found in the report.
 
Giz said:
It's true that a major issue is that:

- Russia has tried to weaken our democracy and spread division and distrust

The other issue is:

- The democratic party has multiplied the effectiveness of Putin’s low impact meddling a thousand fold by screaming collusion, illegitimate and treason without proof.

Is there any chance of introspection? Democrats realizing that they have being acting as Putin’s useful idiots?
Click to expand...

Yeah, it would be preferable (for Trump and his sycophants anyway) if the rest of us simply shoved our heads in the sand and pretended like nothing suspicious was going on.

That's generally the best approach to any problem.
 
Giz said:
It's true that a major issue is that:

- Russia has tried to weaken our democracy and spread division and distrust

The other issue is:

- The democratic party has multiplied the effectiveness of Putin’s low impact meddling a thousand fold by screaming collusion, illegitimate and treason without proof.

Is there any chance of introspection? Democrats realizing that they have being acting as Putin’s useful idiots?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call jumping from the campaign being receptive to meddling and actually meddling as some massive jump. As jumps go, receptive to engaging in the thing you are receptive to, isn't that extreme.
 
This section on page 18 should be worrisome about what was hidden from the investigation:

Mueller Report p.18 said:
Further, the Office learned that some of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct
we investigated-including
some associated with the Trump Campaign---deleted relevant
communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature
encryption or that do not provide for long-term retention of data or communications records. In
such cases , the Office was not able to corroborate witness statements through comparison to
contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about statements that appeared
inconsistent with other known facts.
Accordingly, while this report embodies factual and legal determinations that the Office
believes to be accurate and complete to the greatest extent possible, given these identified gaps,
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.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
Mueller was ultimately unable to subpoena Trump for an interview because he couldn't describe an alleged crime and he couldn't describe what necessary information he could obtain from Trump that he couldn't get by other means.
Click to expand...

...is not consistent with the report:

Ultimately, while we believed that we had the authority and legal justification to issue a grand jury subpoena to obtain the President's testimony, we chose not to do so. We made that decision in view of the substantial delay that such an investigative step would likely produce at a late stage in our investigation.
Click to expand...

This is not merely a matter of omission from the report, as you wish to characterize it; it conflicts with what the report actually says.

Again, I restate: Your characterization was wrong.
 
Paul2 said:
Even the several ones on MSNBC I just watched who were quoting from the report, giving page numbers?
Click to expand...

Not to mention that the report is now available online.

But see for yourself how much is redacted. (A lot) NPR has a visual of all the pages so you can easily see how much is redacted.

It's at the bottom of the page, scroll down.

Don't be fooled by section one, scroll down further. The majority of the important sections are redacted.
 
Cabbage said:
...is not consistent with the report:







This is not merely a matter of omission from the report, as you wish to characterize it; it conflicts with what the report actually says.



Again, I restate: Your characterization was wrong.
Click to expand...
My reaction on that one is like watching someone with a stack of chips and a strong hand just up and fold, stretch, yawn, and announce they are cashing out.
 
Isn't it the job of every country to screw with others in order to benefit them selves? It looks like some people think this hasn't gone on since the dawn of time.
 
Mueller really, really didn't want to indict Trump without going through congress, is the only explanation I have that fits.

I'm still following Abramson, who's still hip deep in the collusion section. Teal dear: it's all true. All of it. The Tower-for-sanctions quid pro quo, the pee tape, it's all 100% true. The narrow definition of conspiracy has to be because anything broader would have necessitated charges because otherwise... it's all there.
 
Wolrab said:
Isn't it the job of every country to screw with others in order to benefit them selves? It looks like some people think this hasn't gone on since the dawn of time.
Click to expand...

1. "Other countries not liking it when you screw with them" has been going on since the dawn of time as well.

2. "The head of state NOT being on the side of the foreign power" has also like always been a thing.

While exactly how the parts work in a post-internet "Mainly just shoving information out there" kind of way does change the landscape a little, it's not like there's ever been a point in history where a foreign party screwing with your elections was ever a thing a country was supposed to just passively accept.
 
Ziggurat said:
You don't get to vote more than once just because you're angry.

I take that back: maybe Democrats do.
Click to expand...

And yet..and yet...no evidence of this by Dems was found. What was found was that there was actual voting fraud going on by...wait for it.. a Republican hired by the campaign of GOP Senate candidate Mark Harris in NC.:blush:
 
Stacyhs said:
And yet..and yet...no evidence of this by Dems was found. What was found was that there was actual voting fraud going on by...wait for it.. a Republican hired by the campaign of GOP Senate candidate Mark Harris in NC.:blush:
Click to expand...


Shhhhh, people aren't supposed to talk about that.

Quick! Sweep it back under the rug before somebody sees!
 
MrFliop said:
Let's be honest about one thing.

None of the news pundits(on either the left or right) who are gonna be talking non stop about this for the next couple of days are gonna read any part of the actual report.
Click to expand...

Its hard to reconcile this "observation" with what I have been seeing for the past few hours; those very pundits of which you speak actully READING the report live, on television, and quoting large sections of the reports to the camera.

This report is damning for Trump. It supports much of what his detractors have been saying; it is a timeline of Trump's anger, frustration and toddler temper tantrums as he failed time after time after time to prevent or shut down the Special Council investigation. Its is documentary proof of the repeated lies told by Trump to the public, an the lies told to Congress, under oath, by Trump's minions.

The more I read of the report, the more I see sections of it that look like a Jaworksi-like "Roadmap for Impeachment"
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom