Unless I answered "ABSOLUTELY, IDESTROYEDTHEDOILET, YOU'RE RIGHT", you would have anyway.
Will You Accept the Findings of the Muller Probe?
- Thread starter Gameface
- Start date
Unless I answered "ABSOLUTELY, IDESTROYEDTHEDOILET, YOU'RE RIGHT", you would have anyway.
And there is the problem with the Republican party. They have let these "moral issues" take over their party and change what they should be. The Republicans took the liberal side of these moral issues. Having government not allow adults to marry if they want is more government and more control. Not allowing adults to smoke what they want is more government and more involvement. The republicans have changed what they stand for and have let the Christian right take over the party. They are more worried about pushing their morals on people and using the government to do it then real conservative issues.
Just checking back into this thread. So if I'm understanding things, it looks something like this:
** Russia does have a cyber-intelligence team that spread propaganda via social media and hacked Democratic emails prior to the 2016 election. They released emails to Wikileaks some of which Wikileaks published prior to the election.
** However, there wasn't enough of a direct connection to the Trump campaign team to warrant additional criminal indictments for 'collusion with a foreign enemy.' (Russia isn't really our enemy btw, but that's a separate topic.)
** There were 10 (or so) instances in Mueller's report where Trump and/or his administration tried to thwart the investigation. The underlying theory is that Trump felt the collusion investigation was politically motivated and unwarranted. He wasn't cooperating and was actively resisting it.
** Upon reviewing these incidents, Wm. Barr and Rod Rosenstein did not find that this interference with the investigation met the standard for obstruction under federal statutes, notwithstanding the fact that the person in question is a sitting President (who cannot be indicted in the first place). Barr released these conclusions and eventually released the Mueller Report in full.
** Dems are angry that Barr's initial 4-page letter to Sen. Graham on March 24th and his subsequent press conference a couple weeks later failed to adequately characterize the Trump administration's interference with the investigation and appeared to exonerate President Trump (although Barr wrote a sentence that said the report did not exonerate Trump. The Dems felt they lost control of the media spin for a whole 4 weeks.
** Barr testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee, during which Dems accuse Barr of misrepresenting the truth and protecting the President.
** The Dems are losing their **** and are attacking Barr personally, calling him a liar and a traitor who is unfit to be AG.
Anything else?
** Russia does have a cyber-intelligence team that spread propaganda via social media and hacked Democratic emails prior to the 2016 election. They released emails to Wikileaks some of which Wikileaks published prior to the election.
** However, there wasn't enough of a direct connection to the Trump campaign team to warrant additional criminal indictments for 'collusion with a foreign enemy.' (Russia isn't really our enemy btw, but that's a separate topic.)
** There were 10 (or so) instances in Mueller's report where Trump and/or his administration tried to thwart the investigation. The underlying theory is that Trump felt the collusion investigation was politically motivated and unwarranted. He wasn't cooperating and was actively resisting it.
** Upon reviewing these incidents, Wm. Barr and Rod Rosenstein did not find that this interference with the investigation met the standard for obstruction under federal statutes, notwithstanding the fact that the person in question is a sitting President (who cannot be indicted in the first place). Barr released these conclusions and eventually released the Mueller Report in full.
** Dems are angry that Barr's initial 4-page letter to Sen. Graham on March 24th and his subsequent press conference a couple weeks later failed to adequately characterize the Trump administration's interference with the investigation and appeared to exonerate President Trump (although Barr wrote a sentence that said the report did not exonerate Trump. The Dems felt they lost control of the media spin for a whole 4 weeks.
** Barr testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee, during which Dems accuse Barr of misrepresenting the truth and protecting the President.
** The Dems are losing their **** and are attacking Barr personally, calling him a liar and a traitor who is unfit to be AG.
Anything else?
Red
Well-Known Member
I think something people may forget, since it's been awhile since Mueller indicted 13 Russians working for the Internet Research Agency, that much of the Russian focus in helping Trump was not focused on getting Americans to vote for Trump, but convincing black Americans in particular to either sit the election out, or vote for a third party candidate.
https://www.ebony.com/culture/russians-target-african-american-voters-help-donald-trump/
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rus...press-black-vote-indictment/story?id=53185084
This does not answer your specific question, but I think it's worth pointing out, since, in general, your question might be seen as part of the broader question as to whether the Russian active measures campaign actually had an effect on the election, or more specifically, whether Russian active measures could actually have influenced any members of our electorate as to how to vote, or whether to vote at all.
Heathme
Guest
Holy crap...
New York Times Admits Obama Admin Deployed Multiple Spies Against Trump Campaign In 2016
"The New York Times admitted on Thursday that the Obama administration deployed multiple spies against the Trump campaign in 2016, confirming recent comments by Attorney General William Barr that 'spying did occur' during the campaign."
https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/0...ltiple-spies-deployed-against-trump-campaign/
New York Times Admits Obama Admin Deployed Multiple Spies Against Trump Campaign In 2016
"The New York Times admitted on Thursday that the Obama administration deployed multiple spies against the Trump campaign in 2016, confirming recent comments by Attorney General William Barr that 'spying did occur' during the campaign."
https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/0...ltiple-spies-deployed-against-trump-campaign/
Red
Well-Known Member
Yes, the letter Special Council Mueller addressed to AG Barr. Not long, can be read in full at this link:
https://www.npr.org/2019/05/01/7190...ng-concern-about-barr-s-summary-of-his-report
Red
Well-Known Member
All part of the effort by Trump, the DOJ, whose leadership is now under the control of Trump, i.e., AG Barr, and, without a doubt, IMO, the DOJ Inspector General, when he issues his report in a month or two, to rewrite history to their advantage. It may work temporarily, but the truth will out, and History will judge accordingly...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/...ator-trump.html#click=https://t.co/oHqt5LAdVs
The decision to use Ms. Turk in the operation aimed at a presidential campaign official shows the level of alarm inside the F.B.I. during a frantic period when the bureau was trying to determine the scope of Russia’s attempts to disrupt the 2016 election, but could also give ammunition to Mr. Trump and his allies for their spying claims....
....The London operation yielded no fruitful information, but F.B.I. officials have called the bureau’s activities in the months before the election both legal and carefully considered under extraordinary circumstances. They are now under scrutiny as part of an investigation by Michael E. Horowitz, the Justice Department inspector general. He could make the results public in May or June, Attorney General William P. Barr has said. Some of the findings are likely to be classified.
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
If you know that it's absolutely yes then why continue with all this incoherent babbling attempt to counter something simple?
Trump's stimulus stimulated the economy. Moon at conspiracy theorist says otherwise.
The New York Times doesn't "admit" things...
Collusion is not a crime to begin with. There was collusion. There was not enough to warrant a charge for conspiracy, thinks in part to the ignorance of some members of Trump's team regarding the law and the incompetence of Cohen.
Russia sees us as an enemy.
The Mueller report has been released with redactions, not in full.
Not that I saw.
Quoting a leaked memo from Mueller which says the same thing.