Mueller Investigation pt 6

[smartcooky]

I must say IsThisTheLife it is truly lucky for all of us that you just amazingly appeared, with full knowledge of this board and all its posters history already available to you, to fill in the blank left the by the flouncing and banning of so many unjustly persecuted conservative posters.

It truly is a miracle.

I was thinking the same thing about tanabear!

 

[Cain]

We normalize Trump's crimes and other transgressions at our own peril.

A case can be made that Trump's crimes are unusually serious and merit removal, but that's not exactly what you argued ("The whole argument for impeachment is that the POTUS has acted outside the bounds of the Constitution").

Not mutually exclusive.

If Trump were removed from office by Congress, then he cannot be removed from office by the people. Of course, there's virtually no chance the Republican controlled Senate would ever vote to convict. You couldn't get a majority, let alone two-thirds. The main problem with a failure to convict is -- of course -- that it probably improves Trump's chances of winning re-election, which is why Pelosi doesn't want to pull the trigger on impeachment.

Comey said all of this almost a year ago (around the time I was saying it). He said don't expect Mueller to save you from the Orange Menace.

 

[smartcooky]

Best-case scenario is that Pelosi is biding her time and waiting for the correct moment to strike. That correct moment could depend on a lot of things.

It appears that many pro-impeachment folk don't realize that not impeaching today does not preclude impeaching tomorrow, especially if one actually does intend to (eventually) impeach. Admittedly, we don't know that of Pelosi, but it's possible; she doesn't appear to be one to play checkers when the 3-D chessboard is available.

Begin the Impeachment Inquiry three to four months out from election day, and keep it going almost up to the elections, so that.

a. the inquiry, including all the "Live on primetime TV" testimony against Trump is all going on during the campaigning, and is fresh in the minds of the electorate when they are getting ready to vote, and

b. the inquiry is ongoing and has not been completed by the time of the election, so that Trump can't use the "they tried to impeach me and failed" meme in his campaigning

c. if something really ******-up happens, like Trump gets re-elected but both houses end up with Dems, they are ready to turf him out almost straight away.

 

[tanabear]

Are you actually unfamiliar with the wealth of disinformation that was spread leading up to the 2016 election? If so, a Google search will enlighten you more quickly and thoroughly than another poster can.

So can you provide an example? What was the disinformation that Russia was spreading and how many Americans believed it?

An example of a false belief is that 46.09 percent of voters believed the Trump would be a competent president.

This is an opinion. I believe Soros and others believed the economy would crash if Trump was elected. That didn't happen and unemployment rates are low and the economy is growing.

But I asked about a disinformation campaign from Russia. What was this disinformation?

So you understand why it's irrelevant but you want an example anyway?
Read the Mueller report. Look up various opinions of intelligence communities around the world. Stop acting like a fool and asking people to prove to you that water is wet.

Maybe I have read the Mueller report. But I am asking about a disinformation campaign from Russia. What was the disinformation and what percentage of Americans believed it.

Probably a Sysiphean task because it appears you've already bought into the memes the Russkies have been pushing and amplifying. Anything one might point to you would claim is honest home-grown bilge, not imported.

So was the disinformation that the Ruskies were pushing?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

A case can be made that Trump's crimes are unusually serious and merit removal, but that's not exactly what you argued ("The whole argument for impeachment is that the POTUS has acted outside the bounds of the Constitution").

If Trump were removed from office by Congress, then he cannot be removed from office by the people. Of course, there's virtually no chance the Republican controlled Senate would ever vote to convict. You couldn't get a majority, let alone two-thirds. The main problem with a failure to convict is -- of course -- that it probably improves Trump's chances of winning re-election, which is why Pelosi doesn't want to pull the trigger on impeachment.

Comey said all of this almost a year ago (around the time I was saying it). He said don't expect Mueller to save you from the Orange Menace.

You are making the same mistake Pelosi has been making (I have hope she'll change). That is, assuming the impeachment and conviction have to both occur.

Expose Trump via impeachment, and trigger him to become absurdly preoccupied with it (because he will be) all during the campaign. People in the case of Clinton thought the impeachment was petty, there was voter backlash.

Impeaching Trump is far from petty, especially if it is done right showing him so dangerously close to being a dictator that his staff had to disobey his orders to keep him from shutting Mueller down.

And while the House is at it, they can expose the Russian attack on our election that Trump and sadly much of the press is ignoring.

There will be an additional bonus, the press will be just as occupied with the impeachment and Trump's replies there will be much less time for Trump TV showing 100% of his rallies live.

 

[tanabear]

Out of those 44 percent, exactly how many came to the erroneous belief due to one or more disinformation campaigns? Please list specific individuals who came to this erroneous belief and the exact piece or pieces of disinformation that they used to come to their belief.

Polling data show that right after Sept. 11, 2001, when Americans were asked open-ended questions about who was behind the attacks, only 3 percent mentioned Iraq or Hussein. But by January of this year, attitudes had been transformed. In a Knight Ridder poll, 44 percent of Americans reported that either "most" or "some" of the Sept. 11 hijackers were Iraqi citizens. The answer is zero.

In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11.

In Selma, Ala., firefighter Thomas Wilson supports going to war with Iraq, and brings up Sept. 11 himself, saying we don't know who's already here in the US waiting to attack. When asked what that has to do with Iraq, he replies: "They're all in it together - all of them hate this country." The reason: "prosperity."

- https://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html

Your turn...

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Begin the Impeachment Inquiry three to four months out from election day, and keep it going almost up to the elections, so that.

a. the inquiry, including all the "Live on primetime TV" testimony against Trump is all going on during the campaigning, and is fresh in the minds of the electorate when they are getting ready to vote, and

b. the inquiry is ongoing and has not been completed by the time of the election, so that Trump can't use the "they tried to impeach me and failed" meme in his campaigning

c. if something really ******-up happens, like Trump gets re-elected but both houses end up with Dems, they are ready to turf him out almost straight away.

Yes except I don't agree with waiting to start. Starting too early will cause voter attention burnout. But the House can keep that interest up depending on who they call to testify publicly. There are more than a few months of testimony that will certainly go over better than 11 Benghazi hearings.

In addition, some voters make up their minds early and don't sway.

And Trump fighting subpoenas to testify will force the SCOTUS or lower down judges to rule against the Constitution (balance of powers) or rule against Trump.

 

[Minoosh]

Trump Tweets

... And now Russia has disappeared because I had nothing to do with Russia helping me to get elected. It was a crime that didn’t exist.

Did Trump just admit Russia helped him get elected?

ETA: Ninja'd by Matthew Best

 

[Minoosh]

How is that a conflict of interest?

Because Trump can't imagine anyone reacting to rejection with something other than a thirst for vengeance.

If that tale of rejection is even true.

ETA: And of course that points the finger right at Rob Rosenstein.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

So can you provide an example? What was the disinformation that Russia was spreading and how many Americans believed it?

This is an opinion. I believe Soros and others believed the economy would crash if Trump was elected.

Do you have a quote from Soros saying that?

But I asked about a disinformation campaign from Russia. What was this disinformation?

Maybe I have read the Mueller report. But I am asking about a disinformation campaign from Russia. What was the disinformation and what percentage of Americans believed it.

So was the disinformation that the Ruskies were pushing?

Have you ever asked yourself why candidates spend billions on their campaigns? Are they influencing voters or wasting their money?

It's not hard to find one or more sources that explain the Russian campaign. You've already ignored the influence of leaking the DNC and Podesta's emails. And you keep asking this question which is easily discovered online if you were actually interested. You're just avoiding the truth.


Here, I'll get you started:

538 Nate Silver: How Much Did Russian Interference Affect The 2016 Election?

FactCheck: In His Own Words: Trump on Russian Meddling


Keep in mind Clinton lost because of multiple reasons, the Russian interference was only one.

 

[smartcooky]

Did Trump just admit Russia helped him get elected?

That's how I read it

Russia helped me to get elected, but I had nothing to do with it.

 

[Minoosh]

So can you provide an example? What was the disinformation that Russia was spreading and how many Americans believed it?

From the Dallas Observer:
Russian Trolls Successfully Peddled Texas Pride in 2016, Senate Reports Say

People troll anonymously for different reasons. It would be hard to separate the Russian trolls from any other. But it's been established that one thing Russians did is try to rile up general discord. I heard a caller to conservative talk radio say that a boy in an ambulance had died because the ambulance was stuck in traffic during a Black Lives Matter protest. Asked where she got this story she said, "It's right there on my Facebook," whatever that means. The host said something diplomatic and cut her off. He did not suggest the story was fake but I think he suspected that.

In an election that close it's easy to find multiple causes. It's like saying a basketball game was lost by a missed free throw in overtime. Though technically it might be true, every error that led up to the missed free throw is also the cause. I'm pretty sure you know this. Also as you can see in a tweet above, Trump seems to admit that Russia helped him win. It could just be clumsy wording, as is he is not very articulate. But I think he accidentally told the truth.

 

[theprestige]

That's how I read it

Russia helped me to get elected, but I had nothing to do with it.

Trump also had nothing to do with Hillary helping him get elected, and Comey helping him get elected. To the extent that Bernie helped him get elected, he had nothing to do with that, either... Or did he?

 

[Minoosh]

Polling data show that right after Sept. 11, 2001, when Americans were asked open-ended questions about who was behind the attacks, only 3 percent mentioned Iraq or Hussein. But by January of this year, attitudes had been transformed. In a Knight Ridder poll, 44 percent of Americans reported that either "most" or "some" of the Sept. 11 hijackers were Iraqi citizens. The answer is zero.

In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11.

Are you counting George W. Bush as a member of the media?

In Selma, Ala., firefighter Thomas Wilson supports going to war with Iraq, and brings up Sept. 11 himself, saying we don't know who's already here in the US waiting to attack. When asked what that has to do with Iraq, he replies: "They're all in it together - all of them hate this country." The reason: "prosperity."

How much Fox News did he watch?

 

[Paul2]

We realize this. But as Mueller's investigation has ended, it's not likely that there will be any more bombshells between now and Nov. 2020.

Understood. Perhaps Pelosi is waiting on political considerations or timing. Just a perhaps.

 

[Paul2]

So can you provide an example? What was the disinformation that Russia was spreading and how many Americans believed it?

Doesn't matter how many Americans believed it, because you have to establish the principle that no foreign interference is ever allowed in order to account for the case in which foreign interference might be influential.

Agreed?

 

[smartcooky]

Here, I'll get you started:

538 Nate Silver: How Much Did Russian Interference Affect The 2016 Election?

FactCheck: In His Own Words: Trump on Russian Meddling


Keep in mind Clinton lost because of multiple reasons, the Russian interference was only one.

Interesting that they estimate the swing towards Trump attributable to the Russian Troll Farm was 0.8%, and they said that isn't much.

Well, overall, that might not be much, but the Russians concentrated their efforts in the swing states. Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida, Wisconsin and Minnesota. Its no coincidence that the polling data Paul Manafort shared with Konstantin Kilimnik were from these very states, and that Trump won three of those states (Wisconsin, Michigan and Florida) with a combined margin of 107,000 voters. That is 0.09 percent of all votes cast in the election, and these wins gave Trump the election by 306 EC votes to 232.

If you remove the 0.8% swing attributable Russian interference, then Clinton could have won those three states, in which case, a whole bunch of EC votes flip to Clinton, and she wins the election by 278 EC votes to 260.

That is how close the 2016 election was.

 

[Paul2]

But I asked about a disinformation campaign from Russia. What was this disinformation?

Here is a single example based on about minute of scanning Mueller's report:

"By early 2015, the IRA began to create larger social media groups or public social media pages that claimed (falsely) to be affiliate with U.S. political and grassroots organizations. . . . More commonly, the IRA created accounts in the names of fictitious U.S. organizations and grassroots groups and used these accounts to pose as anti-immigration groups, Tea Party activities, Black Lives Matter protestors, and other U.S. social and political activists." Vol. 1, page 80.

 

[Bob001]

I note, if it hasn't been noted before, that Mueller's own summaries of his report and the full report itself are accessible online.

Summaries:
https://www.scribd.com/document/408445511/Mueller-Report-Summaries#from_embed

Full:
https://www.scribd.com/document/406726651/Redacted-Mueller-Report

 

[The Shrike]

Here is a single example based on about minute of scanning Mueller's report:

"By early 2015, the IRA began to create larger social media g... Vol. 1, page 80.

Wait, are you suggesting that reading Mueller's report would provide answers allegedly sought by the trollspeople in this thread?