Author Topic: The Meuller Report  (Read 160554 times)

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #50 on: March 27, 2019, 04:43:51 PM »
Fascinating.  As far as I can tell, we still don't know what they claim justified the special counsel investigation.  Now that it's over, we need to see what justified it in the first place.  If it's nothing but the Dossier some people need to go to jail.  I'd also like to see Shiff go under oath on some of the statements he made.  He's made some serious claims from a position of being a serious intelligence insider that seem to be complete bunk.

So what actually happened here?  If I had my guess, all that happened is that a non-recused Attorney General that Mueller and Co. knew they couldn't intimidate got appointed.  I think its extremely likely, given the report, that Mueller has known for some time that there was no collusoin, and if that's the case, keeping the investigation ongoing to investigate a dubious obstruction premise is nothing but a politically driven abuse of power.  Having to explain to Barr that you've known there was no collusion for x amount of time but haven't closed the investigation was going to risk serious consequences.

I have been saying for over year that Mueller had to know if he had red meat, and keeping the investigation underwraps at that point was hurting the country.  Either he was allowing a Russian asset to stay in power, or delegitimizing a legitimate President.  With this report it looks like it was clearly the latter.  He knew he had nothing and kept going.

The obstruction claim is pure bunk.  Even the phrasing was written solely to throw meet to the Dems.  "Not exonerate" is not a real standard, you either have the facts to allege the elements of the crime or obstruction of justice didn't happen.  You can't allege that someone made you uncomfortable in a non-criminal way.  Barr flat out cleared him.

Keep in mind, the "obstruction" was largely comprised of Trump accurately and publicaly calling an  investigation into a fake crime a with hunt.  Believing this is obstruction is tantamount to claiming that defending yourself is a crime.

Media reaction is actually appalling at this point.  No mea culpa.  Doubling down and nonsense instead.

scifibum

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #51 on: March 27, 2019, 04:51:14 PM »
Seriati, you're acting like you know what's in the report. All you have is Barr's narrowly focused letter. Why don't you wait and see what else is in there.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #52 on: March 27, 2019, 04:51:48 PM »
You cannot be serious with that. If you say things like that, expect to be ridiculed and laughed at. That is the ultimate in fake news to put that out as a true fact.

"Russia, please if you can, get us Hillary Clinton’s emails, please, Russia, please, please get us the emails."

Direct quote, an absolute undeniable fact. Just because he said "JUST KIDDING" doesn't mean he didn't say it, that he didn't think it, and that he thought Russian hacking was a matter to make light of. There is absolutely nothing fake about it.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #53 on: March 27, 2019, 04:53:49 PM »
Seriati, you're acting like you know what's in the report. All you have is Barr's narrowly focused letter. Why don't you wait and see what else is in there.

Are you really going to make out that Barr lied about what's in the report? That he covered up relevant information that would blow this whole thing open and get Trump?

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #54 on: March 27, 2019, 04:55:38 PM »
You cannot be serious with that. If you say things like that, expect to be ridiculed and laughed at. That is the ultimate in fake news to put that out as a true fact.

"Russia, please if you can, get us Hillary Clinton’s emails, please, Russia, please, please get us the emails."

Direct quote, an absolute undeniable fact. Just because he said "JUST KIDDING" doesn't mean he didn't say it, that he didn't think it, and that he thought Russian hacking was a matter to make light of. There is absolutely nothing fake about it.

Oh. My. God. You are serious. HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA. Wow! Just ... wow. Really. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I'll never take anything you say seriously again. Oh man, amazing.  HAHAHA

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #55 on: March 27, 2019, 04:58:57 PM »
What I will be most interested in seeing, when the full report is released (assuming Trump doesn't change his mind again), is why the Trump Administration behaved like it did.

Your confused at how they reacting to being illegally spied on for political purposes?  Having intentional and malicious security breaches by members of the bureacracy?  Not having any real control over the administration of justice (a primary function of the executive) because an internal cabal was looking to use anything they could to generate a charge?

And oh yeah, having the entire media and DNC sell a lie about them being agents of a foreign power?

Quote
Specifically:

* Why did Trump Jr. meet with the Russians at Trump Tower, along with Maniford and Kushner?  What did he really expect to get from the Russians?  What did Maniford and Kushner expect?

Trump Jr. said from the start he thought he was getting dirt on the Clinton campaign.  I've pointed this out to you at least 4 times. 

Quote
* Why did Donald and Jr. lie about what the Trump Tower meeting was really about?  If anyone who thinks they were only expecting to discuss Russian adoptions, I have a nice new bridge to sell you. :)

Are you intentionally lieing, or do you keep forgetting?  Trump Jr. said he thought the meeting was to get dirt, but all they wanted to talk about was the Magnitsky Act.  That's literally the opposite of what you erroneously believe. 

In other words, he didn't lie.

Quote
* Why did Kushner attempt to get a secret phone line through the Russian embassy?

Same reason Hillary did?  Assuming it's even true.

Quote
* Why did Trump refuse to allow any American translator listen to his official conversations with Vladimir Putin?

Leaks.  Leaks.  Leaks.  And oh yeah, big ole lies based on pseudo leaks.

Quote
* Why did Maniford share poll data with a man linked to Russian intelligence?  I can't think of a good reason unless it was to help the campaign.

Have you responded to a single point I raised on this?  No. No and No again.

Quote
* Why did Mueller categorically state that "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities," but only stated that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime [regarding obstruction of justice], it also does not exonerate him?"  Why was he so conclusive about one issue, but not the other?  What instances did Mueller considered it possible that Trump obstructed justice? And why did Trump act like he did in those instances?

Because there's literally no real evidence of collusion, which just underscores how silly your prior lines of questions are.

Obstruction, 3 likely reasons, 1. he was running a political witch hunt and that's all he could throw to his allies the DNC and Never Trumpers; 2. he was pissed as a prosecutor with all the things Trump said and he had no obligation to make Trump's life easier; 3. he honestly found Trump's behavior repugnant and was looking for anything he could charge but couldn't bring himself to actually make the charge.

Quote
I am glad that this investigation was done, and that we will have some answers about the Trump Administration's behavior.  But it has yet to clarify the suspicious behaviors that started the investigation.  Hopefully, the full report will provide satisfactory answers.

Yes, I'd like to see clarity on the "suspicious behaviors" that started the investigation.  1.  How did a FISA warrant get issued on Carter Page requiring verified evidence he's a Russian agent, yet he not get charged.  2.  How did the DNC get away with hiring a British Spy to collect Russian intell and internet accounts into a report that triggered a federal investigation of an opposition political party.  3.  How did the bureacracy manage to leak left and right things to trigger an investigation, including illegally unmasking and leaking the names of Americans in intell transcritpts.  4.  How did the head of the FBI manage to get away with attempting to blackmail an American president, leaking classified information, and triggering a special counsel without legitimate evidence.  5.  How are the DNC and the Media getting away with coordinating a message of constant lies?

I mean honestly, you guys have been calling Trump a liar since he claimed that the Obama admin had his campaign wiretapped - which turned out to be true, in Trump tower - which turned out to be true.  That he was lieing about Russian collusion - which again turned out to be true.

Now, several of you said you'd accept the conclusions of the Mueller report.  Are you there?  Do you accept that the story of Russian collusion was a lie?

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #56 on: March 27, 2019, 05:03:30 PM »
I'll never take anything you say seriously again.

That will be a big change, since there's little evidence you take anything seriously.

I don't know why you can't see the problem with him giggling and joking around about a foreign power attempting to destabilize our country. Imagine if Obama had made a sarcastic joke about Benghazi.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #57 on: March 27, 2019, 05:05:44 PM »
Seriati, you're acting like you know what's in the report. All you have is Barr's narrowly focused letter. Why don't you wait and see what else is in there.

I will have a blast reading the report, but you're buying into a media narrative on this.  Barr is highly competent, he didn't say anything that Mueller didn't conclude on that point.  There will be ambiguities, there can't not be in a report of that size.  If you want to buy into conspiracies you'll have your meat, but there's no chance he gave you a false conclusion.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #58 on: March 27, 2019, 05:07:39 PM »
Quote
See, nobody can tell if you're kidding. There are people seriously floating just this. It's so insane but it's taken seriously.

I was kidding. Should have guessed people were floating that conspiracy around
Still what would have happened if the evidence concluded that Trump colluded and was a traitor? I can only imagine chaos 

It is a better outcome that collusion was ruled out. I only wish the obstruction shadow was equally ruled out as I feel keeping the idea alive actually works in Trump favor



rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #59 on: March 27, 2019, 05:17:10 PM »
Quote
Seriati, you're acting like you know what's in the report. All you have is Barr's narrowly focused letter. Why don't you wait and see what else is in there.

Quote
I will have a blast reading the report, but you're buying into a media narrative on this.  Barr is highly competent,

The statement "Barr's narrowly focused letter" does not necessarily imply one is saying that Barr is incompetent - only that the letter was a summary and as such lacked details.
I don't know what the 'media' narrative on this is. I suspect your using the wide brush of speculative 'news' media to paint your argument of why we don't need any more details

There are actually real people that didn't buy into speculation and waited for Meuller's report, accepting its findings yet still curious as to the details.
It should be ok to ask for details but in this environment that scares the crap out of people and perhaps understandably. Still we should be able to talk about it

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #60 on: March 27, 2019, 05:22:21 PM »
I'll never take anything you say seriously again.

That will be a big change, since there's little evidence you take anything seriously.

I don't know why you can't see the problem with him giggling and joking around about a foreign power attempting to destabilize our country. Imagine if Obama had made a sarcastic joke about Benghazi.
Quote
On the opening day of his foundation’s summit in Chicago, former president Barack Obama added managed to troll the current president without mentioning him by name.

“The reason I’m so excited to see you all here today in part is because this is where I started,” Obama said Tuesday. “This isn’t where I was born. I was born in Kenya 

So there you have it, proof that Obama was born in Kenya. He admitted it! Ermagerd! You must be convinced that Obama was not a US citizen, right? Oh my God, please tell me you are now convinced the birth certificate truthers are correct.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #61 on: March 27, 2019, 05:30:34 PM »
So there you have it, proof that Obama was born in Kenya. He admitted it! Ermagerd! You must be convinced that Obama was not a US citizen, right? Oh my God, please tell me you are now convinced the birth certificate truthers are correct.

Again you fail the analogy portion of the SAT. Obama being born in Kenya was always a subject for ridicule. It didn't involve a foreign power trying to generate civil unrest. I also never said that Trump's statement proved anything at all, just that it looked bad - especially in the context of him taking Putin's word over the reports from American intelligence agencies.

"I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today,"

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #62 on: March 27, 2019, 05:37:04 PM »
I love how you keep digging that hole. Just awesome.

Quote
President Obama said that if his material worked well, he would recycle it for use at Goldman Sachs - Mrs Clinton was famously paid $675,000 for a series of speeches at the financial giant.

He also said the presidency had aged him, making him "grey, grizzled and counting down my days to my death panel" - opponents had said his health reforms would see "death panels" introduced to ration healthcare.

Obama just admitted to death panels being a part of Obamacare! They exist! And ... is that admission of bribery?  :o
« Last Edit: March 27, 2019, 05:40:01 PM by Crunch »

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #63 on: March 27, 2019, 05:41:36 PM »
You cannot be serious with that. If you say things like that, expect to be ridiculed and laughed at. That is the ultimate in fake news to put that out as a true fact.

"Russia, please if you can, get us Hillary Clinton’s emails, please, Russia, please, please get us the emails."

Direct quote, an absolute undeniable fact. Just because he said "JUST KIDDING" doesn't mean he didn't say it, that he didn't think it, and that he thought Russian hacking was a matter to make light of. There is absolutely nothing fake about it.

I'm pretty sure we covered this multiple times already, and I did so in some detail very recently at that.

And the quote, in context, isn't anywhere close to what you portray.

And on an additional review, I take additonal notice that even The Atlantic, left-leaning media organization that it is, had enough integrity to mention "The DNC had recently announced the Russian intrusion, and Trump speculated that if Russia broke into the DNC, it would have accessed Clinton’s emails, too."
 
So again, even The Atlantic in this case acknowledge that he's referencing release of information they(Russia) would have already had. Rather than him making "an ask for Russia to hack the DNC and pursue it further."

And again, you're leaving out the "You'll be rewarded by our press" part as well. He isn't offering quid pro-quo from himself in that statement.
 
Back to context of his comments. We know Trump speaks off the cuff, rambles, and says outrageous things.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/russia-hacking-trump-mueller/565157/

Quote
On July 27, 2016, at a Trump press conference in Florida, the candidate referred to 33,000 emails that an aide to Hillary Clinton had deleted from the former secretary of state’s personal email server. The DNC had recently announced the Russian intrusion, and Trump speculated that if Russia broke into the DNC, it would have accessed Clinton’s emails, too.

“By the way, if they hacked, they probably have her 33,000 emails,” Trump said. “I hope they do. They probably have her 33,000 emails that she lost and deleted. Because you’d see some beauties there.”

That was perhaps irresponsible speculation, but it wasn’t crazy. There were widespread questions about Clinton’s information security, and whether she might have compromised government secrets. But a few minutes later Trump said something much stranger.

“I will tell you this: Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he said. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

The president was encouraging a foreign adversary to illegally hack into messages by a former secretary of state that might contain sensitive information, then release them publicly.

And hey, The Atlantic being the somewhat leftist partisan entity it is, seems to be in the tank right there with you on "Trump told them to hack Hillary's stuff" except the context they themselves give doesn't provide that.

Unless you operate on the belief that the Clinton's still had the emails.

But if you think the e-mails are truly deleted, and suspect that the server in question had previously been compromised by the Russians, such as with a comment like:

Quote
On July 27, 2016, at a Trump press conference in Florida, the candidate referred to 33,000 emails that an aide to Hillary Clinton had deleted from the former secretary of state’s personal email server. The DNC had recently announced the Russian intrusion, and Trump speculated that if Russia broke into the DNC, it would have accessed Clinton’s emails, too.

“By the way, if they hacked, they probably have her 33,000 emails,” Trump said. “I hope they do. They probably have her 33,000 emails that she lost and deleted. Because you’d see some beauties there.”

Which oddly enough seems to have been exactly what Trump said in the lead-up to that other comment.

In which case:

Quote
“I will tell you this: Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he said. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Which brings up another question here that I just noticed. Did you notice the "rewarded mightily by our press" portion of his quote? Every time I hear the MSM play back that sound bite, it mysteriously stops afters "Rewarded mightily" almost as if they want it to seem that Trump was promising a reward from him, not the Press Corps.

But back on topic, "I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing" in the context of a speech where he previously said "They probably have her 33,000 emails that she lost and deleted." Would make a reasonable person, as opposed to a partisan, conclude that Trump was essentially saying "Hey, I think the Russians had hacked that server, I think they still have the information, they just may not be fully aware of what they have. So if they'd go over the information they already have, and release these e-mails that we can't seem to find here in the United States, that'd be great."

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #64 on: March 27, 2019, 05:41:58 PM »
I'm delighted to meet someone as obtuse as you are. You're like an exhibit at Ripley's Believe It Or Not!

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #65 on: March 27, 2019, 06:04:18 PM »
Quote
So again, even The Atlantic in this case acknowledge that he's referencing release of information they(Russia) would have already had. Rather than him making "an ask for Russia to hack the DNC and pursue it further."

And again, you're leaving out the "You'll be rewarded by our press" part as well. He isn't offering quid pro-quo from himself in that statement.

Yeah, of course. It's absurd to think that he's using a public speech to collude with Russians. The point is that he just didn't think it was a big deal, he thought it was funny that a major political party was hacked by agents of a foreign nation. This on top of initially denying that Russia had anything to do with the DNC hack in the first place. Then blamed the DNC for being a victim of foreign agents.

It would be like Nancy Pelosi cracking a joke about human trafficking.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #66 on: March 27, 2019, 06:08:57 PM »
Yeah, of course. It's absurd to think that he's using a public speech to collude with Russians. The point is that he just didn't think it was a big deal, he thought it was funny that a major political party was hacked by agents of a foreign nation. This on top of initially denying that Russia had anything to do with the DNC hack in the first place. Then blamed the DNC for being a victim of foreign agents.

Are you quite sure of that? At the time I had taken it as his point that he was making fun of the claim that they had been hacked by Russia. When those events occurred I did not personally believe Russia was behind it, and that the DNC was trying to throw smoke on an internal security breach by blaming Russia (as had been the policy of the White House for the few years before that). Whether or not I happened to be correct about that, have you considered that Trump was making the same type of assumption, and rather than mocking a Russian hack was mocking the DNC claim that they were hacked?

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #67 on: March 27, 2019, 06:32:54 PM »
Quote
have you considered that Trump was making the same type of assumption, and rather than mocking a Russian hack was mocking the DNC claim that they were hacked?

I can see that as a potentially valid point of view, but that's not how I take it. I have to concede that Trump may have thought such things and his delivery was so garbled that he didn't make the DNC the obvious punchline. He's usually not very subtle about "fake news" so I guess if elsewhere in the speech he was mocking the DNC about crying wolf on Russian hacking. Of course this brings back the problem of not taking Russian hacking as a serious threat. It's part of his routine that he conjures up all kinds of other parties to take the blame instead of Russia - including 400-pound hackers and China.

Possibilities about his mindset at that time, from what I see.

1. Trump believes that Russians have been hacking and is actively trying to shield them from blame.
2. Trump believes that Russians have been hacking, but doesn't think it is a big deal.
3. Trump doesn't believe that Russians have been hacking, and is mocking it

All 3 have troubling implications about his relationship with the Russian government.

1. Collusion - full bore
2. An historic acceptance, considering his normally belligerent stance with foreign nations
3. Takes Russia's excuses over intelligence reports, implying he trusts them a great deal

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #68 on: March 27, 2019, 06:35:02 PM »
What I will be most interested in seeing, when the full report is released (assuming Trump doesn't change his mind again), is why the Trump Administration behaved like it did.

Your confused at how they reacting to being illegally spied on for political purposes?  Having intentional and malicious security breaches by members of the bureacracy?  Not having any real control over the administration of justice (a primary function of the executive) because an internal cabal was looking to use anything they could to generate a charge?

And oh yeah, having the entire media and DNC sell a lie about them being agents of a foreign power?

Notice the word "specifically."  What you just wrote has little, if anything, to do with what I was specifically looking for.

I will note that most of the security breaches were committed by Trump appointees in his own White House.  But then, they were "only the best" leakers and security breachers, weren't they? :)

Quote
Quote
Specifically:

* Why did Trump Jr. meet with the Russians at Trump Tower, along with Maniford and Kushner?  What did he really expect to get from the Russians?  What did Maniford and Kushner expect?

Trump Jr. said from the start he thought he was getting dirt on the Clinton campaign.  I've pointed this out to you at least 4 times.

Oddly enough, I don't recall this.  Could you point to your source, so I can see the time line of when he said he thought he was getting dirt on Clinton?  As I recall, he only admitted it after his e-mail leaked, and it was obvious they didn't meet to talk about adoptions, i.e. when Junior couldn't lie anymore.

Quote
Quote
* Why did Donald and Jr. lie about what the Trump Tower meeting was really about?  If anyone who thinks they were only expecting to discuss Russian adoptions, I have a nice new bridge to sell you. :)

Are you intentionally lying, or do you keep forgetting?  Trump Jr. said he thought the meeting was to get dirt, but all they wanted to talk about was the Magnitsky Act.  That's literally the opposite of what you erroneously believe. 

In other words, he didn't lie.

Except I don't believe they only talked about Magnitsky Act.  Russia had dirt on Clinton.  The other Russian players who were at the meeting were not there to talk about the Magnitsky Act.  Do you really think they would waste their time just talking about adoptions?  ;D

Why do you think they only talked about the Magnitsky Act?  How do you know what they talked about?  What's your source?

I'd like to see what Mueller came up with.

Quote
Quote
* Why did Kushner attempt to get a secret phone line through the Russian embassy?

Same reason Hillary did?  Assuming it's even true.

Hillary tried to get a secret line with the Russians?  Why wasn't that front-page news for the Right Wing Press?  What's your source?

Or are you referring to Hillary's improper use of non-government cell phone lines, like Kushner is now accused of doing?  (BTW, does this mean Republicans will now be chanting "Lock Him Up?"  Or do they only want to lock up Democrats? ;) )

Quote
Quote
* Why did Trump refuse to allow any American translator listen to his official conversations with Vladimir Putin?

Leaks.  Leaks.  Leaks.  And oh yeah, big ole lies based on pseudo leaks.

You're telling me Trump couldn't find a single translator he could trust?  That you believe he is that incompetent?  And you voted for this clown.  ;D

Quote
Quote
* Why did Maniford share poll data with a man linked to Russian intelligence?  I can't think of a good reason unless it was to help the campaign.

Have you responded to a single point I raised on this?  No. No and No again.

And which of your points wasn't speculation on your part?  I'd like to hear the opinion of a professional investigator before I stop wondering.

Quote
Quote
* Why did Mueller categorically state that "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities," but only stated that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime [regarding obstruction of justice], it also does not exonerate him?"  Why was he so conclusive about one issue, but not the other?  What instances did Mueller considered it possible that Trump obstructed justice? And why did Trump act like he did in those instances?

Because there's literally no real evidence of collusion, which just underscores how silly your prior lines of questions are.

Obstruction, 3 likely reasons, 1. he was running a political witch hunt and that's all he could throw to his allies the DNC and Never Trumpers; 2. he was pissed as a prosecutor with all the things Trump said and he had no obligation to make Trump's life easier; 3. he honestly found Trump's behavior repugnant and was looking for anything he could charge but couldn't bring himself to actually make the charge.

Just because you believe they are "likely reasons" doesn't make them true.  I'd rather see Mueller's reasoning than to speculate based on nothing.

And you ignore the most "likely reason:"  that Mueller did find evidence of obstruction of justice, but felt it was not sufficient for him to make any charges and left it up to the Attorney General.

Quote
Quote
I am glad that this investigation was done, and that we will have some answers about the Trump Administration's behavior.  But it has yet to clarify the suspicious behaviors that started the investigation.  Hopefully, the full report will provide satisfactory answers.

Yes, I'd like to see clarity on the "suspicious behaviors" that started the investigation.  1.  How did a FISA warrant get issued on Carter Page requiring verified evidence he's a Russian agent, yet he not get charged.  2.  How did the DNC get away with hiring a British Spy to collect Russian intell and internet accounts into a report that triggered a federal investigation of an opposition political party.  3.  How did the bureacracy manage to leak left and right things to trigger an investigation, including illegally unmasking and leaking the names of Americans in intell transcritpts.  4.  How did the head of the FBI manage to get away with attempting to blackmail an American president, leaking classified information, and triggering a special counsel without legitimate evidence.  5.  How are the DNC and the Media getting away with coordinating a message of constant lies?

I mean honestly, you guys have been calling Trump a liar since he claimed that the Obama admin had his campaign wiretapped - which turned out to be true, in Trump tower - which turned out to be true.  That he was lieing about Russian collusion - which again turned out to be true.

Now, several of you said you'd accept the conclusions of the Mueller report.  Are you there?  Do you accept that the story of Russian collusion was a lie?

I certainly accept that there is not sufficient evidence to accuse Trump or his Administration of colluding with the Russians.  I would still like to see the evidence of why these suspicious behaviors were innocent and innocuous events.

Hopefully some of your questions will be answered, too, although I doubt Mueller investigated the reasons for his investigation.

I am also happy about the outcome.  This is precisely what you would expect from an unbiased investigation.  The facts were considered, and the conclusions were based on the facts, and not politics.  Trump should have had more faith in the system, instead of calling it a "witch hunt" from the beginning.  That only made him look guilty and afraid of the results.  I'd rather have a system that verifies the integrity of our leaders than one where just investigating suspicious behavior makes one a "traitor" to our country.  (And you know what we do with traitors...)  Let us hope we never reach a point where the latter becomes true.   :(

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #69 on: March 27, 2019, 06:50:52 PM »
Possibilities about his mindset at that time, from what I see.

1. Trump believes that Russians have been hacking and is actively trying to shield them from blame.
2. Trump believes that Russians have been hacking, but doesn't think it is a big deal.
3. Trump doesn't believe that Russians have been hacking, and is mocking it

All 3 have troubling implications about his relationship with the Russian government.

1. Collusion - full bore
2. An historic acceptance, considering his normally belligerent stance with foreign nations
3. Takes Russia's excuses over intelligence reports, implying he trusts them a great deal

Maybe those are possibilities, but I find it hard to believe you don't see any other possibilities. None of the above have anything to do with sticking it to the DNC, which is overwhelmingly the likeliest motive for his statements. That you should put his "relationship with the Russian government" as the headline conclusions to draw seems to me already going off on a tangent. And even among the possibilities on that topic, which I think is the wrong topic to focus on in context of his statement, you have not by any means exhausted the likeliest scenarios. But that's sort of what the fake news does (not accusing you of this personally): create a falsely narrow set of explanations, to leave the people to "decide for themselves" which it is, when in fact the more obvious and logical choices have conveniently been excluded because they don't follow a desired narrative. You are literally telling me you can't come up with a single scenario where Trump said what he said and also wasn't guilty of either helping or underestimating Russia?

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #70 on: March 27, 2019, 07:12:02 PM »
So even if he is trolling the DNC and delighting his base, by definition he falls into the #2 or #3 categories. I'm happy to let you frame the alternative. Now, you can try to say that it isn't that big of a deal, but this is a man who thinks everything needs to be blown up or exaggerated. Only in this case does he minimize it?

He is, in this instance, giving Russia a free pass on their activities. I accept that he wasn't getting a quid pro quo for it, based on the reports. But I think one could be forgiven for being suspicious of his motives.

Fundamentally, he either does or doesn't believe the Russians hacked. If he does believe it, then there's a question of how seriously he takes it. You can't condemn their actions and then cast doubt on whether they were even involved.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #71 on: March 27, 2019, 10:20:22 PM »
So even if he is trolling the DNC and delighting his base, by definition he falls into the #2 or #3 categories. I'm happy to let you frame the alternative.

What about this - Trump makes a joke at the DNC's expense, delighting his fans, and when going to work in private takes the matter very seriously? I would think it would be obvious that "politics" has little to do with policy. You tell the people what establishes the position you want from them; and behind closed doors you do what you need to. I don't see how the two should be assumed to me even linked, no less identical.

Basically however he jokes about it in public would seem to have little to do with whether he's taking it seriously or not in his practical preparations. God forbid every time someone tells a joke in bad taste it should be taken as proof that they don't care about the subject for real. In Trump's case it's anyone's guess what he actually cares about for real, but his public 'hilarity' is surely no sign of it either way.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #72 on: March 28, 2019, 11:10:37 AM »
Quote
What about this - Trump makes a joke at the DNC's expense, delighting his fans, and when going to work in private takes the matter very seriously? I would think it would be obvious that "politics" has little to do with policy. You tell the people what establishes the position you want from them; and behind closed doors you do what you need to. I don't see how the two should be assumed to me even linked, no less identical.

I don't buy the idea that Trump has a public and private persona, that his theatrics are all just an act.

Quote
God forbid every time someone tells a joke in bad taste it should be taken as proof that they don't care about the subject for real.

A regular person (someone) can do that. A President can't. Economies, armies, and security turn on a simple choice of words in an ad hoc discussion. When it does happen, it would normally be followed up pre-emptively with a clarification making it clear how important the subject is and a vow to deal with the subject.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #73 on: March 28, 2019, 11:49:30 AM »
Quote
A regular person (someone) can do that. A President can't. Economies, armies, and security turn on a simple choice of words in an ad hoc discussion. When it does happen, it would normally be followed up pre-emptively with a clarification making it clear how important the subject is and a vow to deal with the subject.

That is what we expect from a President however Trump is changing the 'rules'. Eventually it may work against him and America and the 'rules' will be reapplied but for now he's the winner

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #74 on: March 28, 2019, 11:54:27 AM »
I don't buy the idea that Trump has a public and private persona, that his theatrics are all just an act.

*Everyone* has a private persona and a public persona, to some extent. You don't behave the exact same way in private, or by yourself, that you do when in public, nor as you would when in the presence of Queen Elizabeth. How these things shift can be subconscious, often conscious, and it doesn't mean you have a crafty Machiavellian scheme of how to trick the people with your public image. That said, the latter isn't even that difficult to do; it's literally what all famous actors do. And like Doc Brown said in Back to the Future II, Presidents these days are all by necessity actors. It is yet another false dilemma to paint the options as being "Trump privately thinks exactly what he says in public, including jokes" or "Trump has deviously sculpted a false public image, the truth of which he jealously guards using guile and skill." That's not how people work.

Quote
Quote
God forbid every time someone tells a joke in bad taste it should be taken as proof that they don't care about the subject for real.

A regular person (someone) can do that. A President can't. Economies, armies, and security turn on a simple choice of words in an ad hoc discussion. When it does happen, it would normally be followed up pre-emptively with a clarification making it clear how important the subject is and a vow to deal with the subject.

I think you're falling right into Crunch's arms with this kind of argument, because then his silly counterexamples of Obama joking become actually relevant (and they shouldn't be). What you're literally saying is that a President cannot joke or be tongue-in-cheek on matters of security, because the literal-minded media will go crazy misinterpreting it. Well you don't have to worry about that - they will go crazy misinterpreting it no matter whether he jokes or not.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #75 on: March 28, 2019, 12:08:06 PM »
"What you're literally saying is that a President cannot joke or be tongue-in-cheek on matters of security, because the literal-minded media will go crazy misinterpreting it."

A president or CEO can't joke about matters that they want people to take seriously. Whether it was Reagan joking about pre-emptively attacking Russia, GWB joking about not finding WMD, or other examples - bad idea.

Obama speechwriter David Litt on the jokes the president can and can’t tell

Quote
How do you write a joke for the president of the United States? How do you come up with something that will seem perfectly cutting but not too cruel, silly but not stupid?

There’s two different questions there. One is, what can you not do because it’s inappropriate? The other is, what can you not do because it’s just not funny if a president does it? The most important thing about the president telling any joke is that it’s the president telling a joke.

To try to answer your question a little more succinctly, I think that the No. 1 topic that we would not joke about was national security. That was important to us, because one of the things about writing jokes for a president is if you have the joke and it’s totally in good taste, but then a week later, something happens — there’s a tragedy, there’s a shooting, there’s a terrorist attack — the joke can become retroactively in bad taste. That was an important thing for us. We didn’t want anything to end up in a campaign ad, and we also didn’t want to do anything that was insensitive and diminished the office.

It is clear that Trump writes his own jokes, and that these considerations never occur to him. I get what you're saying about having different faces - I certainly don't expose my colleagues to the persona I display at the pub. But my impression with Trump is that he is largely transparent. For proof, we have some of his private conversations with world leaders leaked to us. He also embraces the idea of being real, usually speaking off the cuff and deliberately ignoring any "PC" rules that might edit what he has to say.

If there is a nuance, I'd say Trump says what Trump wants to say with very little modification. He's not Nixon, who had such a wide variation between public and private. And we have that insight largely because he recorded himself.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #76 on: March 28, 2019, 12:34:19 PM »
Quote
A president or CEO can't joke about matters that they want people to take seriously
A President should be allowed to joke about whatever however most 'good' leaders are careful as the game has always been that the words they use matter. Trump knows it doesn't matter.

Trump is deliberately obtuse and always has been because it works for him as it wears down his opponents. 
Trump is difficult to parse because his rhetoric style seems to always require parsing. Did he really mean what he just said? Wait he just contradicted himself, or did he? What he just said isn't true but its also true....  It is funny (sad) how Democrats fall all over themselves trying to parse Trump.

I wonder what might happen if the Democrats just focused on policy coming out of the white house and stopped engaging with the rhetoric.




Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #77 on: March 28, 2019, 12:53:15 PM »
A president or CEO can't joke about matters that they want people to take seriously. Whether it was Reagan joking about pre-emptively attacking Russia, GWB joking about not finding WMD, or other examples - bad idea.

I underlined the important part here: because in fact they can do just that. And Trump does. I think what you mean to say is that it's typically understood that they shouldn't do so, and while that is debatable it would certainly seem to be the case that Trump deliberately flouts this. If there's one thing deliberate he does, it's to tell the jokes no one else will, for better or worse. But the fact that Trump doesn't give a crap what his detractors think of his jokes, doesn't then give license for media to interpret them as "Well, since no one jokes about that stuff, we will choose to editorialize about it as if he was being completely serious!" Uh-huh.


Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #78 on: March 28, 2019, 01:31:41 PM »
Here's a succinct summary from David Brin's blog today (in the comments section):

Quote
Dig this. The only thing Mueller dismissed was Trump direct collusion DURING 2016 with Russian meddling DURING THE 2016 ELECTION.

Not a single other thing was absolved. Indeed, close to 150 charges have been filed against scores of people who were/are varying degrees of Trump/GOP factotums.

So I look forward to the report.  I look forward to things that came up but weren't investigated.  I look forward to Mueller explaining exactly what he meant by what he wrote in the report, and parts that he may have omitted because he felt they were not appropriate to the parameters of the investigation.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #79 on: March 28, 2019, 02:13:37 PM »
I hope you guys keep flogging this all the way through 2020. It's a winner of a foundation for winning the election.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #80 on: March 28, 2019, 02:53:02 PM »
Quote
I underlined the important part here: because in fact they can do just that. And Trump does. I think what you mean to say is that it's typically understood that they shouldn't do so.

More specifically:

A president or CEO can't joke about serious matters and expect not to be criticized for it. Crying that the press is being unfair when they take your quip seriously is ridiculous.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #81 on: March 28, 2019, 03:03:16 PM »
A president or CEO can't joke about serious matters and expect not to be criticized for it. Crying that the press is being unfair when they take your quip seriously is ridiculous.

Not sure why you're mixing apples and oranges with this statement. To be criticized for making a joke when you shouldn't be joking directly implies they know you're joking. And if the press takes you literally then it means they either (a) didn't realize you made a joke, or (b) knew you did but were deliberately misinterpreting it to suit their own purposes. Case (a) can certainly happen but should result in a "well, that was a stupid joke then" response when it's explained that it was a joke. Somehow that result doesn't happen, and seemingly keeps reverting back to (b). In Trump's case I could understand the theory that it wasn't entirely a joke (although I think it was); but not the theory that there's no other possible explanation for it. By far the likeliest explanation was that it was a stupid joke, like he does many times, and that it said nothing in particular about his views about Russia.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #82 on: March 28, 2019, 03:14:29 PM »
Now this is what I'm looking forward to seeing for the Mueller Report. 

I'm sure no one would have any objections...  :D

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #83 on: March 28, 2019, 03:20:35 PM »
I am happy to see as much of the report released as legally possible. Somehow, I think any redacted grand jury testimony or classified information is simply going to be seen a "proof" of the hoax. It's like talking to flat earthers.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #84 on: March 30, 2019, 08:18:33 AM »

Case in point, Trump’s Treachery Goes Way Beyond Russia

It doesn’t matter. Release everything, release nothing, the story won’t change.

The left has gone insane. Trump broke you guys.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #85 on: March 30, 2019, 09:22:09 AM »

Case in point, Trump’s Treachery Goes Way Beyond Russia

It doesn’t matter. Release everything, release nothing, the story won’t change.

The left has gone insane. Trump broke you guys.

Do you expect less from a group of activists where every single weather event "proves AGW is happening" without regard to there being 100+ year old records of comparable events happening, or other more mundane explanations. (Such as Forrest fires in California being as bad as they were due in large part to Forestry management practices and poor/inadequate response to invasive species, and so on)

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #86 on: March 30, 2019, 12:20:31 PM »
Or get all their information from Quora or other sources that only reinforce their belief. 

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #87 on: April 01, 2019, 11:10:19 AM »
Seriati, you're acting like you know what's in the report. All you have is Barr's narrowly focused letter. Why don't you wait and see what else is in there.

Barr's letter was not "narrowly focused" it had a broad and sweeping focus.  Summary is not the same thing as narrow.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #88 on: April 01, 2019, 11:12:34 AM »
You cannot be serious with that. If you say things like that, expect to be ridiculed and laughed at. That is the ultimate in fake news to put that out as a true fact.

"Russia, please if you can, get us Hillary Clinton’s emails, please, Russia, please, please get us the emails."

Direct quote, an absolute undeniable fact. Just because he said "JUST KIDDING" doesn't mean he didn't say it, that he didn't think it, and that he thought Russian hacking was a matter to make light of. There is absolutely nothing fake about it.

You should literally be embarrassed. 

I heard him say it, in context and it was absolutely clear it was nothing but a dig at Hillary.  It's total delusion to take a light hearted comment out of context and misrepresent it.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #89 on: April 01, 2019, 11:16:33 AM »
Quote
See, nobody can tell if you're kidding. There are people seriously floating just this. It's so insane but it's taken seriously.

I was kidding. Should have guessed people were floating that conspiracy around
Still what would have happened if the evidence concluded that Trump colluded and was a traitor? I can only imagine chaos

Then the reaction would have been to question why Mueller sat on it for 2 years.  I said a year ago, he knew that he had it or that he didn't have it and neither situation tolerated sitting on it.

If he had let a traitor sit in office for a year, then Mueller was a traitor.  If he undermined a President without cause for a year, then Mueller was a traitor.

Quote
It is a better outcome that collusion was ruled out. I only wish the obstruction shadow was equally ruled out as I feel keeping the idea alive actually works in Trump favor

Obstruction is the shadow of a shadow.  It's been ruled out.  Barr flat out told you the elements don't exist.

Finding otherwise would mean it's literally a crime to defend your self against an unjust prosecution.  Literally a crime to call out an investigation for being false. 

Even if there had been a "there" there it is completely inconsistent with American values to claim that defending yourself in public is a crime.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #90 on: April 01, 2019, 11:34:36 AM »
Quote
Obstruction is the shadow of a shadow.  It's been ruled out.  Barr flat out told you the elements don't exist.

The problem is that Barr said obstruction wasn't possible before he got the job which understandably opens the door of possible bias in reporting of the report
Either way its ammo for the troll farms.
America divided is America controlled

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #91 on: April 01, 2019, 11:34:50 AM »
Quote
have you considered that Trump was making the same type of assumption, and rather than mocking a Russian hack was mocking the DNC claim that they were hacked?

I can see that as a potentially valid point of view, but that's not how I take it.

There was no consistent theory at that time as to what had happened.  It was alleged that it was hackers, maybe Russian, maybe US, Wiki leaks was denying Russian involvement, there were stories of DNC leakers, including - as you recall - allegations of suspicious murder, it was generally acknowledged with Hillary that potentially multiple countries had hacked her servers, and oh year, Podesta fell for the most basic phishing attack on earth.

Looking back from today with hindsight is not the same as real time.

And yes, laughing at the Dems was perfectly legit at the time.  Terrible as the hacking was, what was even worse was the absolute contempt they held their voters in  as revealed in their email.  These were bad people pretending to be good guys, and seeing that exposed is pretty much the plot of several shows every night.

Quote
I have to concede that Trump may have thought such things and his delivery was so garbled that he didn't make the DNC the obvious punchline.

Garbled?  Really, you are going with garbled?  Why don't you go back and pull up the video on Youtube and watch it with some context.  This may be one of those times, when refreshing your memory could do some wonders.

Quote
Possibilities about his mindset at that time, from what I see.

1. Trump believes that Russians have been hacking and is actively trying to shield them from blame.
2. Trump believes that Russians have been hacking, but doesn't think it is a big deal.
3. Trump doesn't believe that Russians have been hacking, and is mocking it

How about, Trump knows that Hillary screwed the pooch with her server, believes she is an intentional criminal with her email practices and deliberate deletion of emails (that everyone assumes had incriminating evidence in them) and saw a great opportunity to stick it to with a multi-sided swipe?  He got to ridicule Hillary, the DNC and the Russian conspiracy angle simultaneously.

Quote
All 3 have troubling implications about his relationship with the Russian government.

Believing those are 3 likely, and the only 3 likely possibilities have troubling implications with respect to objectivity on the point. 

Quote
1. Collusion - full bore
2. An historic acceptance, considering his normally belligerent stance with foreign nations
3. Takes Russia's excuses over intelligence reports, implying he trusts them a great deal

Again at that point, we hadn't and neither had he seen anything objective and convincing that says it was the Russians, which means neither 2 or 3 makes sense.  As there was no collusion, you seem confused about what was really going on.

It's entirely possible to think Russian hacking is a serious issue, that any hacking is a serious issue, and still enjoy the DNC being revealed for a bunch of lying hypocrites in the moment. 

For goodness sake, you can't be arguing principal here, where you've enjoyed leaks from inside the government that hurt the administration.  Leaks are in many ways worse that what hostile powers are doing.  We should expect and defend ourselves against Russian actors, which in the case of attempted infiltration of the Trump campaign the Obama administration seemed reluctant to do (compare, Feinstein being warned of her driver versus Trump being spied on).  Every single leaker is compromised from a blackmail perspective, so even if you think foreign influence is "worse" every one of them is a blackmail risk away from becoming a foreign asset.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #92 on: April 01, 2019, 11:36:43 AM »
Quote
Obstruction is the shadow of a shadow.  It's been ruled out.  Barr flat out told you the elements don't exist.

The problem is that Barr said obstruction wasn't possible before he got the job which understandably opens the door of possible bias in reporting of the report

Barr said that a President couldn't obstruct before he got the job.  His "narrow" summary, specifically said he did not rely on that principal in reaching his conclusions.

Don't let the media confuse you.  Barr ruled out obstruction as a factual matter, not as a matter of executive interpretation.

Quote
Either way its ammo for the troll farms.
America divided is America controlled

So ask yourself why the media is working so hard to divide us?

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #93 on: April 01, 2019, 12:20:21 PM »
Quote
How about, Trump knows that Hillary screwed the pooch with her server, believes she is an intentional criminal with her email practices and deliberate deletion of emails (that everyone assumes had incriminating evidence in them) and saw a great opportunity to stick it to with a multi-sided swipe?  He got to ridicule Hillary, the DNC and the Russian conspiracy angle simultaneously.
All without realizing, despite his intellectual credentials, that Russia, seeing this would think to themselves, "*censored*... this is a win-win!  We do exactly what he says.  He denies it as a joke, we strike a blow against the candidate we defiantly want while putting a cloud over the other guy in the event he actually wins this thing!" 

Even if he's 100% innocent, the guy was a train wreck of a candidate and a train wreck of a president.  He's sold me on the whole "outsider" candidate as a terrible idea.  And that's when compared to some contemptible insider opposition.

Quote
It's entirely possible to think Russian hacking is a serious issue, that any hacking is a serious issue, and still enjoy the DNC being revealed for a bunch of lying hypocrites in the moment. 
I won’t say I enjoyed it, but as a Sanders supporter, it was… illuminating.  I wish it was more shocking.  :(
Quote
Leaks are in many ways worse that what hostile powers are doing.
Depends for me.  If a hostile power leaks/hacks some info out, they’re doing it to cause damage/chaos.  In SOME cases, leaks from within the government are done because the leaker believes it is for the good of the country.  It may or may not be partisan and viewed as nothing but sabotage by one side, but motivations can matter here.  That said, I still think you enforce the laws against the leakers.  I think the self-martyring aspect of it is a good built in safety valve.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #94 on: April 01, 2019, 12:32:34 PM »
D.W., the truth is Russia got everything it wanted when the DNC bought into the Russia collusion hook, line and sinker.  They spent a tiny fraction of money on FaceBook without much effect and the DNC has lauded them as super masterminds capable of disrupting the entire US. 

As a Sanders supporter you might want to be a little more concerned about how quickly the manipulation of the DNC against Bernie dropped out of the public eye (more accurately, how the media has suppressed it because it doesn't favor their chosen DNC insiders).  Like I said at the time, if it were the RNC servers we'd still be seeing "new" stories from the stolen emails leading the headlines.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #95 on: April 01, 2019, 12:59:22 PM »
On the second item, I am.

On the first, I'm still waiting to read the report, (or as much of it ever sees the light of day).  No doubt Russia's efforts were effective.  I would contest the effects of those efforts...   ::) 

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #96 on: April 01, 2019, 01:05:33 PM »
Quote
Obstruction is the shadow of a shadow.  It's been ruled out.  Barr flat out told you the elements don't exist.

The problem is that Barr said obstruction wasn't possible before he got the job which understandably opens the door of possible bias in reporting of the report
Either way its ammo for the troll farms.
America divided is America controlled

Does it help that Rosenstein also agreed with his(Barr's) conclusion on the matter?

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #97 on: April 01, 2019, 01:13:33 PM »
On the first, I'm still waiting to read the report, (or as much of it ever sees the light of day).  No doubt Russia's efforts were effective.  I would contest the effects of those efforts...   ::)

I doubt that "Russia's efforts were effective" at all.  I don't think what you've seen is the effect of Russian manipulation, it's the effect of US media and DNC manipulation that found the Russian story a useful narrative.  It's not the tiny amount of Russian media spend that did this, it's the billions in free "collusion" coverage that did it.

If it's really a Russian master operation, then shortly after Barr releases the report, the Russian's will release something that supports the narrative to further undermine our system.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #98 on: April 01, 2019, 01:19:34 PM »
Careful with that Seriati.  That's the kinda play that makes sense for Russia no matter what the facts are or the report says.  There's no down side for them as far as muckraking on the issue.

Quote
It's not the tiny amount of Russian media spend that did this, it's the billions in free "collusion" coverage that did it.
Depends on what period of time one is referring to.  :P

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Meuller Report
« Reply #99 on: April 01, 2019, 01:31:12 PM »
Quote
So ask yourself why the media is working so hard to divide us?

That's the question, however to answer it the word 'media' is to wide of a brush.
How do you know that the sources of media that you rely on are reliable?


To add. I ask myself that question all the time
« Last Edit: April 01, 2019, 01:33:44 PM by rightleft22 »