Russia probes II -- The Mueller Report

[Farmer77]

2 minutes ago, Jerry Gallo said:

I guess my question is, if you truly are Switzerland in most elections, can you name a Republican who honors the four pillars you listed? I voted for Ted Cruz in the primary, most moderate Republicans hated that guy because he was too much of all those things. And they cringe at the idea of Pence taking over the country. Those items are sturdy Conservative tenets and most indies lean away from them. 

No I honestly cant, years ago I would have fought to the death to argue GW , Buchanan et al were though.

Youre right I definitely do way more than cringe at the thought of Pence taking over the country, thats down right terrifying for me.

My point really was just about the evolution of the as you say message board debates. Todays Trumpism is largely antithetical to large parts of recent historical republicanism

[Jerry Gallo]

3 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

American spelling isn’t that comprehension affecting, as your language is omnipresent (including in auto-correct). 

But if the odd letter difference is an issue, wait until you hit culturally specific words like gaol (jail).

Oh my, I may have to retire from posting at that point! Believe me, it's more a case of my moderate OCD than judgement of others. I've actually added the alternates to the dictionary so they don't underline in squiggly red, but I still can't stop focusing on them. Carry on my friend, it's just always been a curiosity for me.

[+and-then]

22 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

Mueller's investigation didn't address collusion because there is no crime for collusion under the current American law code. there just isn't enough evidence to prove that Trump made a deal with with Russia. but his lackeys were trying very hard too. 

If the investigation by a team of Trump-hating Democrat lawyers, ostensibly to find collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia wasn't actually investigated, what was?  Why did he specifically rule out that any collusion happened?  He couldn't even make a certain determination that obstruction was committed.  Now, I'm sure we'll see multiple experts on the Left who will say obstruction occurred and even point to Trump's statements about a witch hunt as proof but the truth is that Mueller would not go there.  So is he a dignified professional or is he a gutless swamp dweller?  He can't be both.  If he had proof of obstruction he would have put it out there.

[Jerry Gallo]

17 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

1) It was already happening without the dossier from what was in the Mueller report's introduction into cause.  We could always compare what was in the dossier to what was in the report to gauge the level of influence the dossier had.  None of the allegations in the report listed the dossier as the source or even as supporting evidence that I recall seeing, however.

2) Not so much being witty but pointing out the serious flaw of judging because of a simple partisan label.  There is literally nothing stopping everyone in America from switching parties today and bringing their beliefs and platforms with them.  The labels are meaningless. 

That's why I agreed with you that it wasn't the sole or originating cause. The omission of the dossier in his final conclusion does not erase it's importance to the investigation at the time, when it was all the news could talk about. I mean, wouldn't you minimize the most embarrassing parts in your summary if you could?    

[+and-then]

5 hours ago, Einsteinium said:

I only said that there was a crime that occurred here (hacking) and that crime was committed by the GRU.

How was that conclusion reached when the DNC server was never evaluated by the FBI or any other "impartial" entity other than the DNC contracted Crowdstrike?  You do realize that, right?  There has never been ANY verified source that corroborated the DNC claim.  

[+and-then]

5 hours ago, Einsteinium said:

they ARE however working to destablize/weaken/divider our society, and it sure looks like they have succeeded beyond their wildest expectations.

The divisions in our society are being fomented and driven by a media complex that is an anti-American, anti-Constitution 5th column.  The only access Russia or any other government has to the masses here is through those media outlets and the comparatively limited internet sites. 

[Jerry Gallo]

18 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

No I honestly cant, years ago I would have fought to the death to argue GW , Buchanan et al were though.

Youre right I definitely do way more than cringe at the thought of Pence taking over the country, thats down right terrifying for me.

My point really was just about the evolution of the as you say message board debates. Todays Trumpism is largely antithetical to large parts of recent historical republicanism

I agree, which is why when Republicans pander to those long gone ideals, I ignore them. No disrespect intended, I can comprehend someone not voting for the man for not being a traditional Republican, but to still HATE the man today and claiming it's based solely on non-traditional Republican policy doesn't square. Reagan was and is the most beloved R President in my 50 years of life and there are huge similarities in results between the two thus far. I just don't see evidence it's not personal or that folks are more D than they know or acknowledge.

[Tatetopa]

2 hours ago, Jerry Gallo said:

Short answer is The Wall Street Journal non-editorial content, probably the best at simply passing along information. Not many folks there making mint off being sensational in either direction.

Honestly, local media on radio is often the best place to sift through the typical partisan nonsense from national media. Find some campy but intelligent local personality, if they haven't bashed both sides in a week, move on to the next.

Well said.  Thanks.  I used to look at the WSJ, but its been a while.  Thanks for the reminder.

[Jerry Gallo]

17 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Well said.  Thanks.  I used to look at the WSJ, but its been a while.  Thanks for the reminder.

No worries sir. I don't read it all that often based more on lack of time. I heard they tried to make the site pay-based, unsure where they are with that. Now a lot of sites just want you to agree to look at their ads, think I'd rather pay. LOL

[Gromdor]

1 hour ago, and then said:

How was that conclusion reached when the DNC server was never evaluated by the FBI or any other "impartial" entity other than the DNC contracted Crowdstrike?  You do realize that, right?  There has never been ANY verified source that corroborated the DNC claim.  

We have an official source now.  Muller report pages 36-50 details the GRU's actions.  Pages 38-40 specifically talks about the DNC hack.

[Farmer77]

4 hours ago, Jerry Gallo said:

I just don't see evidence it's not personal or that folks are more D than they know or acknowledge.

Is disliking someone because they are rude, lie, insult and swindle a personal dislike or a societal norm? I would argue its the latter.

Edited April 20, 2019 by Farmer77

[Helen of Annoy]

9 hours ago, Merc14 said:

 Um, okay?!   Wow, amazing that not a word of that is true but you still fervently believe it.  It is like studying an alien species.  A a card carrying member of the far left, do you think the democrat ledcongress will impeach despite Pelosi's wishes? 

It's obviously a magical phrase for you. 

(Not that it matters, but I carry no cards and in my life I certainly had done more against actual, armed, state far left than you.)

Only magic doesn't work like that, of course. It's never enough to close your eyes, spew mantras and pretend the reality has an alternative. 

If you could be realistic, you'd notice people don't have to be lefties in order to be horrified with Trump. In fact, his progressive private life should be enough of a deterrent for any decent conservative. Not to mention the complete chaos that follows him. No one sane should wish for geopolitical chaos, regardless the platform.  

 

Regarding the impeachment, it's not important if Democrats will attempt it. It's not even important if it would work. 

The only important impeachment would be the one coming from the Republicans. It would mean there's still hope for your country.  

[RoofGardener]

14 hours ago, hacktorp said:

JHK writes some pretty good stuff sometimes...and this paragraph jumps out as both graphic and entertaining:

An Empire of Bullsh!t

https://kunstler.com/cluster****-nation/an-empire-of-bull****/

Tofu fried in olestra...eeeew!

This gets my vote, purely for the use of the word "hebephrenic ". It's a brilliant word, and one I intend to use henceforth. 

15 hours ago, Einsteinium said:

What was staged here?

 

The russians hacked the DNC, that was a crime and we know that to be true. We even know when they did it (the night after Trump asked them to find the missing emails) and we know from what computers they launched this attack from.

So the window explosion DID happen in this case.

Umm.. how, pray, do we know that ? We know when the Democrats STATED that it happened, when they ADMITTED to it. But in the current climate, can we take that as truth ? It is my understanding that the Russian penetration of the DNC (and the Obama White House) dated back to 2014 ? Trump made the 'Hilaries email' joke in 2016, two years later. 

[Farmer77]

5 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Umm.. how, pray, do we know that ? We know when the Democrats STATED that it happened, when they ADMITTED to it. But in the current climate, can we take that as truth ? It is my understanding that the Russian penetration of the DNC (and the Obama White House) dated back to 2014 ? Trump made the 'Hilaries email' joke in 2016, two years later. 

Russian Hackers Went After Hillary Clinton's Emails 5 Hours After Trump 'Joked' About It

Quote

Russia really was listening, according to the Mueller Report.

 

[Farmer77]

@Tatetopa This is a good article touching on what we discussed yesterday regarding impeachment.

 

The problem with impeachment: Does Mueller’s report create a “constitutional duty” to impeach Trump?

Quote

“If you’re president, you get to commit whatever crime you’d like, so long as your party has enough votes in Congress to help you escape conviction,” writes Favreau. “Does that seem like a great precedent?”

No, it’s a terrible precedent. But then, we’re trapped in a terrible political system. All the options are bad. Justice is never assured, and it’s not even likely.

As I understand the House Democrats’ plan, it’s to use the Mueller report to launch investigations, send out subpoenas, and hold public hearings. All of that could lead to revelations that tilt the public toward impeachment, it could prove that the public doesn’t consider these revelations important enough to merit impeachment, or it could simply inform the public to help them make a decision in the 2020 election.

Either way, it keeps the focus on Trump’s crimes and his lies, rather than overwhelming that conversation with a debate over removing Trump from office at a time when there’s no prospect of marshaling the votes to actually remove him from office. It seems like a reasonable strategy to me.

 

[RAyMO]

49 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

The problem with impeachment: Does Mueller’s report create a “constitutional duty” to impeach Trump?

A constitutional duty?. The problem in American 'political society' is that there is very little actual constitutional obligation per se. what you have is a framework from which opposite 'potential' constitutional obligations can be fabricated. Which in and off itself is NOT a major issue.  It only becomes problematic when both sides to an argument claim a 'holier than thou' attitude to the written constitution, and a biased interpretation of its words.

Perhaps a little closer to reality;

The problem with impeachment: Does Mueller’s report create a platform which vested interests could use to fabricate a “constitutional duty” a to impeach Trump?

To be clear I am not defending Trump or Republicans or castigating Democrats. Merely pondering whether the 'constitution' is really what its made out to be - guiding, almost sacrosanct commands.

Edited April 20, 2019 by RAyMO

[+joc]

On 4/18/2019 at 8:19 PM, Agent0range said:

What I learned from the report.  The press secretary lies to you on a daily basis, and you don't give a damn.  There would have been obstruction of justice if aides carried out Trump's orders.  But, in the government, it's illegal to not follow an order if it's illegal.  Good thing his aides are smarter than him.  It's clear the investigation didn't start because of the dossier, no matter how many time And Then and F3SS say it did.  And it points out at least a dozen lies from Trump directly, from plans for a tower in Moscow to writing a statement about a Russian meeting in New York.  But, hey, who cares if he lies, right?  It's not against the law. 

The man was surrounded by criminals.  So, we have a President, who is so dumb not to realize what the people around him are doing, or we have a genius President who is a criminal who knows how to keep his nose clean.  Either way, you the right can own that trash.

Do you work for CNN or do you just watch constantly?   You sound just like a talking head on any Media Program.  

What we actually have is a genius as President, who gets things done, who did not collude with the Russians, who did not obstruct or attempt to obstruct justice during Mueller's Fake Investigation.  Who knows how to keep his nose clean by being clean.  A President who has reversed the previous president's agenda to bring America into the Socialist Fold.

Trump is a great man...was a great man in the eyes of the Democrats and the Press...until...he came down the Escalator that fateful day...and suddenly, by the time he was at the bottom...he was the Great Satan....now, go figure that one out!  You are on the wrong side of all the issues my friend...and just one of millions and millions who believe the slick propaganda of the left as it is constantly spouted out by every media site in the world.  

[Farmer77]

7 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

A constitutional duty?. The problem in American 'political society' is that there is very little actual constitutional obligation per se. what you have is a framework from which opposite 'potential' constitutional obligations can be fabricated. Which in and off itself is NOT a major issue.  It only becomes problematic when both sides to an argument claim a 'holier than thou' attitude to the written constitution, and a biased interpretation of its words.

Perhaps a little closer to reality;

The problem with impeachment: Does Mueller’s report create a platform which a vested interests could use to fabricate “constitutional duty” a to impeach Trump?

 

The article explores a little of what I was thinking about yesterday though, which was if the individual legislator feels the evidence is compelling enough to push for impeachment, yet the party doesnt, where does the duty of the representative lie?  The author lies on the side of pragmatism.

I do disagree with you on the bolded somewhat however. It is a huge issue that has been taken advantage of massively by the two party system. Rather ironically many of the men who wrote the constitution warned us against ever falling into a two party system.

Quote

There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution. - John Adams

 

9 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

To be clear I am not defending Trump or Republicans or castigating Democrats. Merely pondering whether the 'constitution' is really what its made out to be - guiding, almost sacrosanct commands.

 No you make very valid points. Ive come to the realization throughout this process that our nation, including the constitution,  was built on the premise that the people as a whole understood the importance of the responsibilities that come along with the rights and would therefore act dutifully. We........we are not that society and im not sure how to fix it.

[Farmer77]

4 minutes ago, joc said:

Do you work for CNN or do you just watch constantly?   You sound just like a talking head on any Media Program.  

Or the Mueller Report. Thats what the Mueller Report sounded like. Its called facts

5 minutes ago, joc said:

What we actually have is a genius as President, who gets things done, who did not collude with the Russians, who did not obstruct or attempt to obstruct justice during Mueller's Fake Investigation.  Who knows how to keep his nose clean by being clean.  A President who has reversed the previous president's agenda to bring America into the Socialist Fold.

You're doing bit comedy here right? Performance art?  Bro you need to read the Mueller Report

The bolded especially

[+joc]

55 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Or the Mueller Report. Thats what the Mueller Report sounded like. Its called facts

You're doing bit comedy here right? Performance art?  Bro you need to read the Mueller Report

The bolded especially

I already know what the Mueller report is..was..and will be.  It was designed from the beginning to keep this President from doing what he said he was going to do.  That isn't the job of Congress, that isn't the job of the intelligence agencies, that isn't the Media's job.  

The Media is a fraudulent, fake, and thoroughly corrupt institution through and through.  Journalism is dead.  You believe what they say is Fact.  I believe it is BS.   

The bolded part especially....there you go...that's the narrative...why do you think Comey exonerated Hillary...but after a 2 year investigation Mueller leaves it to the press and congress to keep the narrative going?   

[RoofGardener]

4 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Russian Hackers Went After Hillary Clinton's Emails 5 Hours After Trump 'Joked' About It

 

Yeeeesss... ummm...... 

1) The hacks began two years previously

2) The article you've posted makes the point that Trump told his joke several hours AFTER the DNC attack had been announced . Shortly after the DNC attack (and also shortly after Trump's joke), the attackers moved on to Hilary Clinton's private office. However, this was very likely as a result of information gleaned from the DNC hack, and in turn had been "in the pipeline" for some time. 

Hackers work like that. They gradually 'unpeel the onion', using information from ONE successful hack to form the basis of the NEXT attack. 

[RoofGardener]

1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

... No you make very valid points. Ive come to the realization throughout this process that our nation, including the constitution,  was built on the premise that the people as a whole understood the importance of the responsibilities that come along with the rights and would therefore act dutifully. We........we are not that society and im not sure how to fix it.

The population of the USA in John Adam's time was about 5 million. Today it is.. what... 330 Million ? The framers of the constitution couldn't have predicted this, or a powerful (and biased) mass media ? 

[Jerry Gallo]

5 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Is disliking someone because they are rude, lie, insult and swindle a personal dislike or a societal norm? I would argue its the latter.

You've been #1 and #3 on this forum multiple times, every politician in federal history has been some derivative of #2 and #4, so I'm still unmoved from my original opinion that it's the former.  

[Vorg]

6 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Russian Hackers Went After Hillary Clinton's Emails 5 Hours After Trump 'Joked' About It

 

In this instance I really don't care. These were all "soccer mom" emails according to Hillary and should have been subjected to the Freedom of information act anyway had they been on a legal server. So when Trump asked Russia for them they would already have had to have them, as Hillary ensured the server had already been wiped, so there was nothing to "hack." 

Edited April 20, 2019 by South Alabam

[+DieChecker]

2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Yeeeesss... ummm...... 

1) The hacks began two years previously

2) The article you've posted makes the point that Trump told his joke several hours AFTER the DNC attack had been announced . Shortly after the DNC attack (and also shortly after Trump's joke), the attackers moved on to Hilary Clinton's private office. However, this was very likely as a result of information gleaned from the DNC hack, and in turn had been "in the pipeline" for some time. 

Hackers work like that. They gradually 'unpeel the onion', using information from ONE successful hack to form the basis of the NEXT attack. 

But... but... it makes good sound bites, and sounds like the collusion the far left desires... so then must be true.

(Sarcasm)