What's new
By:

Will You Accept the Findings of the Muller Probe?

Will You Accept the Findings of the Muller Probe?

  • Total voters
    29
And there you have it.

I bet they’d totally have this same view if the Chinese had hacked the RNC and worked to help elect Clinton. Right?

Yet another democratic norm tossed aside in one party’s desire to hold onto power. Meanwhile, the American electorate is trampled upon.

 
The Thriller said:
And there you have it.

I bet they’d totally have this same view if the Chinese had hacked the RNC and worked to help elect Clinton. Right?

Yet another democratic norm tossed aside in one party’s desire to hold onto power. Meanwhile, the American electorate is trampled upon.

Click to expand...


These are all just political games. You are acting like Trump shot your grandma. The left is over reacting, on purpose. To get you gullible guppies revved up and outraged. It clearly working.

Seriously, how dumb do you have to be to not see it? Did the left have the same level of outrage when Hillary was committing obstruction of justice?

You are being hypnotized and dont even know it.

No, there isnt anything wrong with taken information from the Russians. Your whole stance against it flies in the face of your supposed thirst for truth. Or your supposed stance against government corruption. Or your supposed ok-ness with not being a country and ok with open boarders, anti-nationalism etc... Why arent the Russians included in your warm welcome of everyone to the country? Why are they inherently evil? Why cant they influence elections like Mexico does? Whats the difference? Location? Well then why cant Russians just come right over and be instant citizens who can vote?

What I am saying is that there are a million holes in your logic. You have inconsistencies and hypocrisy littered through your logic. That can only mean you really aren't thinking. Someone is telling you what to think.
 
Last edited:
NPC D4617 said:
Red, it doesnt appear that you have accepted the results of the Muller probe. You voted yes in this thread.
Click to expand...

I view the Mueller report as being, in part, a roadmap for Congress to decide what further action they want to take.

Further, in the report itself, and regarding obstruction of justice, Mueller specifically stated that if they felt the evidence justified exonerating the president, they would have done so, but that the evidence presented did not permit such a conclusion. He spells that right out. I don't find myself disagreeing with that at all, or unaccepting of it. What part of that eludes your comprehension?

It's possible that you have a different interpretation of the report then I do, but that does not mean your conclusion above is accurate.

Further, the picture that emerges of Trump, from the Mueller report, is of a man unfit for the office. Democrats may feel, as I believe Cummings indicated this morning, that "history would smile on the Democrats" if they defended the Constitution, even if drafting articles of impeachment were doomed to be defeated by Senate Republicans.

I have not decided as yet where I stand on that component of the problem facing my nation at this time. I don't wish to do anything that might actually help Trump win in 2020, but I can appreciate Cumming's perspective. Sometimes you have to take a stand.

At any rate, the picture of this president's character that emerges from the Mueller report is of a man unfit for that office. The conclusions of the Mueller report do not preclude possible articles of impeachment at all. That is my opinion, and your judgement of where I stand simply carries no weight with me.
 
NPC D4617 said:
Red, it doesnt appear that you have accepted the results of the Muller probe. You voted yes in this thread.
Click to expand...

I left a searchable version of the Mueller report. Go to page 2 of Vol. 2, or simply type "exonerate" into the document search field:

"If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgement".

In fact, I may not agree with Mueller's judgement there, but I must accept it. The question remains what must the House Democrats decide at this point? And that question always hung over the eventual report. The "problem" here is likely your idea of the "results" differ from mine. Try to keep that in mind, since, basically what you're really saying here is "Red, it does not appear as if what you see as the results of the Mueller report are the same as what I see are the results of the Mueller report". Regarding which, I could not care less that we differ. Remember that, and save yourself the bother of making pointless observations.
 
Last edited:
Red said:
Cheapskate.



Fixed.
Click to expand...

Haha.

I can afford a dollar, but its the principal of the matter. I feel like its a biased news organization. And most other news is free anyways. Why would I want to pay for someone's else rude and biased opinion on things? I feel like they have a lot of nerve even asking for it. They are targeting a certain group of people, well then thats all the type of payers they are going to get.
 
NPC D4617 said:
Haha.

I can afford a dollar, but its the principal of the matter. I feel like its a biased news organization. And most other news is free anyways. Why would I want to pay for someone's else rude and biased opinion on things? I feel like they have a lot of nerve even asking for it. They are targeting a certain group of people, well then thats all the type of payers they are going to get.
Click to expand...

Actually, I find the number of news sites erecting paywalls is increasing. Kinda ticks me off, but in the case of the Post, I just surrendered and subscribed for a year, in my second year now. The investigative journalism is just too good, they have the resources many other news outlets do not. With something like the New York Times, I get 5 articles per month before the paywall goes up. I can't afford them all. Even my one state wide local paper has a paywall. I can understand some of this is due to a big decline in hard copy subscriptions. In other cases, the news sites only have an online version, no hard copy versions, and I just see that trend increasing.

If it's done due to declining subscription rates for the traditional hard line copies, or they simply are not selling the papers they once did, then I can at least understand the struggle to simply survive in the internet age. I will likely always prefer reading a hard copy newspaper, but my local rates for that went up to the point I canceled delivery years ago now.
 
NPC D4617 said:
Haha.

I can afford a dollar, but its the principal of the matter. I feel like its a biased news organization. And most other news is free anyways. Why would I want to pay for someone's else rude and biased opinion on things? I feel like they have a lot of nerve even asking for it. They are targeting a certain group of people, well then thats all the type of payers they are going to get.
Click to expand...

Sometimes, if it's the Post, I will do a search for the article title to see if I can find a free copy of the piece, but most times I don't bother going through that. I am aware people will run into a paywall, but others will not run into one, whether because they have not reached the limit allowed for free reads, and other times I'm not sure why they don't have a problem where paywalls are concerned. I think sometimes if one finds the article on Apple News, the paywall does not come into play. And of course we gravitate toward outlets that support our own viewpoints.

The Post article you could not read simply listed a number of occasions where Trump said a news report was fake news, but Mueller demonstrated the news report was in fact accurate. I would not hold the fact that the word "suggested" was used against them in that instance.

I have always seen much of Trump's fake news mantra as the technique or position I expect to see from authoritarians or would be authoritarians. Attacking an adversarial press is authoritarianism 101, but of course all presidents have had problems with adversarial press coverage. IMHO, it beats a totally compliant press, since we must never abdicate the freedom to speak truth to power.

Of course, we should expect debate and disagreement on what constitutes "truth", but Trump's relentless attacks on our free press is one of the chief ways he is helping erode our democratic institutions. In that endeavor, it does not help that the press suffers from historic low opinions among the public.
 
Last edited:
If The Mueller Report didn't prove a coordinated attempt by Trump and the Russians to rig the election in his favor, can we all agree that it illustrated that the people representing the nominated candidate for one of our major political parties had WAYYYYYY more interactions with Russian operatives than we should be comfortable with?
 
The Mueller Report Amounts To A Democratic Oppo Research Document

https://www.dailywire.com/news/46272/hammer-mueller-report-amounts-democratic-oppo-josh-hammer

"For two years now, many in the right-leaning political/commentariat class have advanced the notion that Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe, which began as a counter-intelligence investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election but quickly transmogrified into a catch-all criminal probe against the president's 2016 campaign and subsequent administration, would ultimately serve no purpose other than as grist for over-zealous Democratic impeachment efforts."
 
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/n...an-rips-media-obsession-over-impeaching-trump

"On ABC’s This Week With George Stephanopoulos Sunday, Terry Moran doubled down on a surprising admission he made one month ago on the program, that the Mueller report would be a “reckoning” for the media and Democrats, after they spent so much time hyping it. On Easter Sunday, Moran emphasized again how the “obsession” of using Mueller to impeach Trump was going to backfire spectacularly for both the media and the left."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top