ADVERTISEMENT

So Mueller was not satisfied with the way Barr summarized his report

And I think that anyone who voted for Clinton voted for the most vile human being on Earth. So there!!

Do you honestly believe that Clinton is the most vile human being on Earth?

I wouldn't even say that about Trump on account of the mass murderers terrorizing this planet. Frankly, i don't know how you could possibly justify your statement.
 
Do you honestly believe that Clinton is the most vile human being on Earth?

I wouldn't even say that about Trump on account of the mass murderers terrorizing this planet. Frankly, i don't know how you could possibly justify your statement.
I was speaking in hyperbole, similar to that of the poster I was responding to frequently does.
 
The story is extraordinary from a couple of angles. First, it shows that even though the FBI elected to not give a defensive briefing to Candidate Trump on their concerns about some members of his campaign, they did elect to try to spy, or "spy", on some members of that campaign. Papadopoulos believes that Turk was one of at least two women dangled in front of him hinting they would trade sex for information. Of course, if they went to this extent on Papadopoulos, you know a "high value target" like Carter Page probably had FBI folks crawling up his butt. Second, we learn the operation was run by a counterintelligence agent from the New York field office of the FBI who just happened to have a long history of working with Trump hater, former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Preet Bharara. What makes it really interesting is that the FBI prophylactically revealed the story ahead of the upcoming report by DOJ IG Michael Horowitz and the spin they put on it was they did this to protect the Trump campaign.

Curious. Why do you think a US attorney like Preet (whose jurisdiction was Trump's backyard) would hate Trump? Do you think he hated Trump as a person,or more for the way Trump conducted himself?
 
Curious. Why do you think a US attorney like Preet (whose jurisdiction was Trump's backyard) would hate Trump? Do you think he hated Trump as a person,or more for the way Trump conducted himself?
It's an age-old story really. Like the way Elliot Ness turned his inexplicable, irrational and unfounded hatred for Capone into a witch hunt.



Or the way the football coach on Friday Night Lights was insanely jealous of Leonardo DiCaprio for no apparent reason and weirdly tried to make trouble for him. And it wasn't even on the football field!!



Or the way wacko lib Ryan Phillippe totally lied and pretended to be somebody else (he admits it!!!!) just to take down a patriotic Christian American like the guy whose name I can't remember but he seems to have been in a lot of films or something.

 
Last edited:
It's an age-old story really. Like the way Elliot Ness turned his inexplicable, irrational and unfounded hatred for Capone into a witch hunt.



Or the way the football coach on Friday Night Lights was insanely jealous of Leonardo DiCaprio for no apparent reason and weirdly tried to make trouble for him. And it wasn't even on the football field!!



Or the way wacko lib Ryan Phillippe totally lied and pretended to be somebody else just to take down a patriotic Christian American like the guy whose name I can't remember but he seems to have been in a lot of films or something.


Those are all decent documentaries, but not as good as the documentary 13 Hours
 
It's an age-old story really. Like the way Elliot Ness turned his inexplicable, irrational and unfounded hatred for Capone into a witch hunt.



Or the way the football coach on Friday Night Lights was insanely jealous of Leonardo DiCaprio for no apparent reason and weirdly tried to make trouble for him. And it wasn't even on the football field!!



Or the way wacko lib Ryan Phillippe totally lied and pretended to be somebody else (he admits it!!!!) just to take down a patriotic Christian American like the guy whose name I can't remember but he seems to have been in a lot of films or something.


Chris Cooper rules.
 
It's not the Democrat's fault.

It's not a matter of assigning fault.

The underlying premise of this whole "fault" discussion is that the Trump personality and misdeeds are imputed to people who voted for him. That is, was, and always will be pure bullshit. The Democrats hand-picked Clinton for their candidate, and Trump used the primary voting process to become the GOP nominee. Each state's voters had a substantially binary choice in the general election. Presidents make hundreds of important decisions. Saying the public, or voters, are at "fault" for the bad decisions, or saying the public takes credit for the good things is nuts.

Calling a portion of the public "deplorable," "Trumpbots," "racists," "supporters" "faulty," or what have you is injecting emotions into politics and policy. The Democrats have been driven by their emotions about Trump since the inauguration marches. And it continues to the detriment of the country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IUJIM
It's not a matter of assigning fault.

The underlying premise of this whole "fault" discussion is that the Trump personality and misdeeds are imputed to people who voted for him. That is, was, and always will be pure bullshit. The Democrats hand-picked Clinton for their candidate, and Trump used the primary voting process to become the GOP nominee. Each state's voters had a substantially binary choice in the general election. Presidents make hundreds of important decisions. Saying the public, or voters, are at "fault" for the bad decisions, or saying the public takes credit for the good things is nuts.

Calling a portion of the public "deplorable," "Trumpbots," "racists," "supporters" "faulty," or what have you is injecting emotions into politics and policy. The Democrats have been driven by their emotions about Trump since the inauguration marches. And it continues to the detriment of the country.

Show me the presidential candidate who can more successfully appeal to the emotions of the electorate, and I'll show you a winner.

" Hope and change" and " Make America great again" are emotional appeals which have a great deal more impact on a race than a political platform.
 
iHytEG5w8Z5Tdaof8
It's not a matter of assigning fault.

The underlying premise of this whole "fault" discussion is that the Trump personality and misdeeds are imputed to people who voted for him. That is, was, and always will be pure bullshit. The Democrats hand-picked Clinton for their candidate, and Trump used the primary voting process to become the GOP nominee. Each state's voters had a substantially binary choice in the general election. Presidents make hundreds of important decisions. Saying the public, or voters, are at "fault" for the bad decisions, or saying the public takes credit for the good things is nuts.

Calling a portion of the public "deplorable," "Trumpbots," "racists," "supporters" "faulty," or what have you is injecting emotions into politics and policy. The Democrats have been driven by their emotions about Trump since the inauguration marches. And it continues to the detriment of the country.[/QU
It's not a matter of assigning fault.

The underlying premise of this whole "fault" discussion is that the Trump personality and misdeeds are imputed to people who voted for him. That is, was, and always will be pure bullshit. The Democrats hand-picked Clinton for their candidate, and Trump used the primary voting process to become the GOP nominee. Each state's voters had a substantially binary choice in the general election. Presidents make hundreds of important decisions. Saying the public, or voters, are at "fault" for the bad decisions, or saying the public takes credit for the good things is nuts.

Calling a portion of the public "deplorable," "Trumpbots," "racists," "supporters" "faulty," or what have you is injecting emotions into politics and policy. The Democrats have been driven by their emotions about Trump since the inauguration marches. And it continues to the detriment of the country.
https://images.app.goo.gl/iHytEG5w8Z5Tdaof8
 
Supporting Trump is not a political opinion. How do you not understand that? It’s different than supporting Romney, Bush, Pence, basically anyone else. Yes I do think less of people that support him. Just as I think less of people that cheer on the neighborhood bully. Just as I think less of people so obviously racist they call the police on someone for having a picnic. Just as I’d think less of someone thinking Kim Kardashian is qualified to be President. Just as I’d think less of someone who supports tyrannical leaders. I do think less of them. It’s not politics. It’s morals and values. You may not be any of those things, but you gladly support someone who has the very worst qualities possible in a human being.
I do support Trump. However, that doesn’t mean I think he’s a good person. I put Up with all the nonsense that comes with Trump because even with all his flaws, he is night and day better than anything the Democrats can roll out. It’s not close either.
 
But you have no valid reason for thinking that so why would it bother anyone if you think that?
This, right here, explains a lot. The fact you don’t think Hilldog is a terrible human being say a lot about you. Put it this way, the way you feel about people supporting Trump, that’s how I (and assumingely other Rs as well) feel about people like yourself after reading that pure lie about Hilldog.
 
I do support Trump. However, that doesn’t mean I think he’s a good person. I put Up with all the nonsense that comes with Trump because even with all his flaws, he is night and day better than anything the Democrats can roll out. It’s not close either.
What a surprise!
 
Rep. Cicilline says Mueller will testify before the House Juduciary Committee, possible date being May 15th.
 
This, right here, explains a lot. The fact you don’t think Hilldog is a terrible human being say a lot about you. Put it this way, the way you feel about people supporting Trump, that’s how I (and assumingely other Rs as well) feel about people like yourself after reading that pure lie about Hilldog.
Why do YOU think HRC is a terrible human being? What are the ten biggest things that make her so?
 
I do support Trump. However, that doesn’t mean I think he’s a good person. I put Up with all the nonsense that comes with Trump because even with all his flaws, he is night and day better than anything the Democrats can roll out. It’s not close either.
So then you support Bill Weld in the primary right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoosboot
Well it looks like 370 former federal prosecutors actually disagree with a bunch of lay persons guided by pure tribalism:

Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president, hundreds of former federal prosecutors assert


“Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice,” the former federal prosecutors wrote.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b51db039833f
 
  • Like
Reactions: mashnut
Well it looks like 370 former federal prosecutors actually disagree with a bunch of lay persons guided by pure tribalism:

Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president, hundreds of former federal prosecutors assert


“Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice,” the former federal prosecutors wrote.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b51db039833f

Is there and over/under on the number of replies (not including this one) invoking the words, "deep state"?
 
Is there and over/under on the number of replies (not including this one) invoking the words, "deep state"?

No it will be silence. Every time Trump does something that even the far right extremists can’t defend, they go silent. Because at the root of it all they just don’t care what he does. He’s a Republican and that’s all that matters. Our country be damned.
 
No it will be silence. Every time Trump does something that even the far right extremists can’t defend, they go silent. Because at the root of it all they just don’t care what he does. He’s a Republican and that’s all that matters. Our country be damned.
Not necessarily. We have a poster right here doing backflips trying to make Barr's case seem justified.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rockfish1
No it will be silence. Every time Trump does something that even the far right extremists can’t defend, they go silent. Because at the root of it all they just don’t care what he does. He’s a Republican and that’s all that matters. Our country be damned.

Looks like you were correct, crickets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rockfish1
I do support Trump. However, that doesn’t mean I think he’s a good person. I put Up with all the nonsense that comes with Trump because even with all his flaws, he is night and day better than anything the Democrats can roll out. It’s not close either.

Your ability to characterize Trump's actions as "all the nonsense" would be amazing, if it wasn't so widespread in the GOP. "Nonsense" sounds so whimsical, don't you agree?
 
UPDATE: It’s now over 500 federal prosecutors who agree that the POTUS committed felonies. This deep state rolls very deep.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rockfish1
UPDATE: Now over 650 federal prosecutors believe the POTUS committed federal felonies.
 
UPDATE: Now over 650 federal prosecutors believe the POTUS committed federal felonies.

Have any of the 650 shown their work? We read the SC and Barr materials. SC indicted nobody in the Trump orbit and after an exhaustive discussion of the facts and a detailed analysis and interpretation of the obstruction statutes in a light most favorable to prosecution, the SC stated no similar "belief". What did the 650 rely on?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SNU0821
Have any of the 650 shown their work? We read the SC and Barr materials. SC indicted nobody in the Trump orbit and after an exhaustive discussion of the facts and a detailed analysis and interpretation of the obstruction statutes in a light most favorable to prosecution, the SC stated no similar "belief". What did the 650 rely on?
What did they rely upon? Orders from their political party and its influence in putting them in their offices? Maybe? They haven't shown their work neither has their party affiliation been revealed. There is no neutrality requirement to be a federal prosecutor. They are appointed.
 
the SC stated no similar "belief".
He also stated that he was precluded by DOJ policy from stating such a belief. He then offered that he could, on the other hand, state that Trump was innocent, and then declined to do so. After this, he spent 200 pages detailing all the elements of several instances of obstruction of justice committed by Trump.

Mueller wasn't allowed to accuse Trump of obstruction, but he nevertheless did so. It just takes the ability to appreciate a little bit of...nuance...in order to see what is right in front of your face.
 
What did they rely upon? Orders from their political party and its influence in putting them in their offices? Maybe? They haven't shown their work neither has their party affiliation been revealed. There is no neutrality requirement to be a federal prosecutor. They are appointed.

Look at the list, a lot were appointed by Reagan and two Bush's, as well as Nixon. There is at least one appointed by Ike.
 
He also stated that he was precluded by DOJ policy from stating such a belief. He then offered that he could, on the other hand, state that Trump was innocent, and then declined to do so. After this, he spent 200 pages detailing all the elements of several instances of obstruction of justice committed by Trump.

Mueller wasn't allowed to accuse Trump of obstruction, but he nevertheless did so. It just takes the ability to appreciate a little bit of...nuance...in order to see what is right in front of your face.

It doesn't appear to me that the DOJ no indictment policy intimidated SC into a particular action even a little bit. SC wrote a complete and exhaustive report. And Mueller (morel likely Weissmann) had the luxury of providing an opening statement, closing argument, and legal brief without having to consider any other and exculpatory evidence or counter legal arguments. SC's treatment of interfering with the official proceeding element of the obstruction statute is particularly questionable.
 
ADVERTISEMENT