Mueller Investigation pt5

Status
Not open for further replies.
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
"You're not putting enough effort into your posts and I can't be arsed to find my own news sources, so find better links to post" is ruder.
Click to expand...

First of all now you're being downright dishonest in your representation of my request, and second, no, it's not. It's not rude to ask people who report news to give us substance. It's something that's often asked of posters who start threads without enough relevant context, but here it seems you felt attacked by my post and now you can't see straight.
 
Belz... said:
First of all now you're being downright dishonest in your representation of my request[...]
Click to expand...

No more dishonest than your representation of my reply, or of framing the following as a polite, friendly request:

Belz... said:
God, would it be possible to get our news here NOT from social media?
Click to expand...

It's not rude to ask people who report news to give us substance.
Click to expand...

I'm not a newsgathering service. Neither is anybody else who posts here. I'm a poster who is putting in this thread things they encounter while browsing around the internet. Sometimes that's tweets. Sometimes that's tweets with articles, documents, screenshots, or links embedded. Sometimes that's article or other primary sources. This isn't my job, and it's not a service I'm providing. I'm just posting what I encounter that I find relevant, and interesting, noteworthy, or sometimes funny. I post under the assumption that anybody reading my posts is an intelligent adult who has the ability to do further research on anything that they don't feel is covered sufficiently. In fact, my default assumption is that people posting here are people who already get their news from various sources, and that when what I'm posting is literally just "this story exists" that they have the ability to go to their news service of choice and see what the full story is. I'm not spending extra time searching around the internet to find additional sources, evaluating them for whether they have enough substance, and then posting the one I deep to be the best just to satisfy you.

If that's not good enough for you, then what do you expect me to say other than "tough titty"? Read my posts or don't. Follow the links I post or don't. Take responsibility for informing yourself or don't. Put me on ignore, if you feel that that would help. I honestly don't care.

There are plenty of people who have posted more in-depth coverage of things that I have posted, or who have posted alternative sources, or relevant sources (such as to specific, relevant laws), or who are informed enough to see the relevance to previous events and post links to articles about prior events that give additional context. So I know that these things are possible. If this thread is your only source of news then that seems like your problem, rather than a problem with everybody else posting in the thread.
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
No more dishonest than your representation of my reply
Click to expand...

You're doing it again! Since the beginning the only thing you've done is mirror my words back to me. Apparently you have not a single thing to say about what I actually requested.

When I asked others to provide more information for their news, you asked me to do it myself rather than address that. Then I said it wasn't an unreasonable request, and then you called something else a not-unreasonable request as well. And when I summarised your response as exactly what it was your only response was to try to do the same, clumsily, to me. And now you're doing it again by calling my posts dishonest because I've called yours so.

"You too!" isn't a very convincing argument. We're not in grade school.

Do you agree or don't you agree with my request to provide more information for the news posted here? It's a simple thing to answer that doesn't require you to act as if you're competing with me somehow.

I'm not a newsgathering service.
Click to expand...

No one's asking you to be. You really felt attacked by my comment, it's amazing. Chill out, man. It wasn't an assault.
 
Belz... said:
You're doing it again! Since the beginning the only thing you've done is mirror my words back to me. Apparently you have not a single thing to say about what I actually requested.



When I asked others to provide more information for their news, you asked me to do it myself rather than address that. Then I said it wasn't an unreasonable request, and then you called something else a not-unreasonable request as well. And when I summarised your response as exactly what it was your only response was to try to do the same, clumsily, to me. And now you're doing it again by calling my posts dishonest because I've called yours so.



"You too!" isn't a very convincing argument. We're not in grade school.



Do you agree or don't you agree with my request to provide more information for the news posted here? It's a simple thing to answer that doesn't require you to act as if you're competing with me somehow.







No one's asking you to be. You really felt attacked by my comment, it's amazing. Chill out, man. It wasn't an assault.
Click to expand...
Rather than participate in supplying more articles of the kind you prefer or some other helpful activity, you've chosen to throw a tantrum and hurl pointless pejoratives around.

This is some top notch gaslighting.
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
I can see three possible reasons for this

1 Barr is so steadfast in his opposition to the Mueller report being released, that Rosenstein feels he needs to stick around to add to the voices calling for its release.

2. Rosenstein wants to see what the report contains so that, in the event that Barr will not release the report, he (Rosenstein) will be in a better, more informed position to testify when he is inevitably brought before the House.

3. Barr is realising that the report is going to be serious and devastating to the President, and has asked Rosenstein to stay because he now knows he needs an experienced deputy who has been fully read-on on Mueller's investigation from the get-go.

Anyone willing to give odds on Stubby McBonespurs firing Rosenstein in the next few weeks?
Click to expand...
I have a hard time believing Mueller is just going to turn his report over to the Trump team, just like that.

Perhaps if he feels obligated to follow procedure he'll have already farmed out all the evidence to various FBI factions. There are other prosecutors besides the AG.
 
Last edited:
Delphic Oracle said:
Rather than participate in supplying more articles of the kind you prefer or some other helpful activity, you've chosen to throw a tantrum and hurl pointless pejoratives around.

This is some top notch gaslighting.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, how is that "gaslighting"? Bickering, sure. But huh?

Don't worry, when I bring up some news, I bring the link. It's strange that you think that, paired with a request, I should somehow provide an article. What the hell are you babbling about?

smartcooky said:
Will you two please wither take this to PM or a get a ******* room!
Click to expand...

Sorry for asking for more clarity in the information we get. I'll shut up now. I had no idea my simple request would be taken as a ******* crime against the forum.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
That was tl;dr but skimming it I was caught by the mention Broidy was selling influence with Trump for Broidy's personal gain. Makes one wonder how many people around Trump were making money off their connections without Trump knowing it.
Click to expand...
Just a bunch of grifters ripping off people as a group and also with private projects. And each other! Just look at Gates ripping off Manafort for example.

The Trump circus is truly a thing of wonder.
 
a_unique_person said:
Just a bunch of grifters ripping off people as a group and also with private projects. And each other! Just look at Gates ripping off Manafort for example.

The Trump circus is truly a thing of wonder.
Click to expand...


Frankly, I think the whole ******* lot of them are grifters; Manafort, Stone, Flynn, Gates, Cohen, Broidy, Pecker, Papadopoulos et al, all headed by the Grifter in Chief occupying the White House.
 
Belz... said:
It has nothing to do with standards, but rather with helping discussion by providing actual news rather than snippets. I'm not refering to Abramson but to other Twitter links hiherto provided.

Again, it doesn't sound unreasonable to me.
Click to expand...
I feel similarly. Rare is the day that I click on a Twitter link, and what I see is clear / satisfying.
 
Belz... said:
I'm sorry, how is that "gaslighting"? Bickering, sure. But huh?

Don't worry, when I bring up some news, I bring the link. It's strange that you think that, paired with a request, I should somehow provide an article. What the hell are you babbling about?



Sorry for asking for more clarity in the information we get. I'll shut up now. I had no idea my simple request would be taken as a ******* crime against the forum.
Click to expand...
Just for the record, I didn't think your request, neither the substance or the way it was posed was a significant issue or problem. :/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom