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
One Brow said:
To quote the post to which I responded, with important words in bold, "The FBI colluded with Trump's political opponents to produce the original Trump dossier,...".

Last I heard, parts of the Steele dossier were part of the evidence to get the warrant on Page. Wow, what an accusation.



Not at all. Are all naughty things criminal?
Click to expand...
Whoops. Yes, I think he did go too far with that one. I have never heard such an accusation.
 
One Brow said:
Out of my 56 years, I have only see the press treat a sitting President that way for about 56 of them.



Like claiming that you lied about where you were born and so could not be President of the US?



Again, 56 out of 56.



Well, he is the POTUS.
Click to expand...
I have never seen a president treated anywhere near this poorly by the press. To be fair, I also have never seen a president treat the press so poorly.

I would be interested to see your evidence that the press was having a contest to twist Obama's words into the worst possible interpretation. Show me a CNN source since you claim they are down the middle and only skewed toward sensationalism.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
I would be interested to see your evidence that the press was having a contest to twist Obama's words into the worst possible interpretation. Show me a CNN source since you claim they are down the middle and only skewed toward sensationalism.
Click to expand...

So, to be clear, I do to the trouble of hunting down 3-10 year-old news clips that show CNN twisting words, and if I successfully do so, you will stop talking about how unfair the press is to Trump and how CNN is so left-leaning?
 
Red said:
Sorry, man, another long reply. I believe the lies are originating from Trump's side of the equation. Of course I would not like what you are describing, and I have considered that, and mentioned as much earlier in this thread, as being the reason he's been so bent out of shape by the Mueller investigation and press feeding frenzy at times. But, this is Trump, and I don't believe him for one second.

First, a much more honest and direct answer to the questions you asked me earlier in this thread, regarding spying, etc., would have been that no, I am not concerned with any of the points you mentioned, and in fact I have not followed closely the alternative history or alternative interpretation offered by the Deep State hypothesis. It would have been far better to simply say that, rather then let myself be triggered by a presentation of view points associated with that narrative. I don't mind being labeled biased over this. I have been convinced long since that the Trump/Fox News/Deep State/ Dems-attempted-a-coup narrative is all a lie. And I won't waste my time on it as a result. They have spun several conspiracy theories since the 2016 campaign. I don't expect them to ever stop.

I assume, Trump, Fox News and other Trump-friendly sites, and the GOP in general are running with that narrative to simply provide cover. I still believe Trump feared something where the Mueller investigation was concerned, or he would not have obstructed justice so many times. Sure, it's distracting, but if you really are innocent, just hands off and wait for the findings.

Follow the money. There will be Russian connections, and Trump is hiding that fact. I do believe he is compromised, and if we can get those financial investigations off the ground, we'll find that out. IMO.

This alternative narrative all started with the Nunes Memo. As this Washington Post article points, out, the Deep State narrative launched in part by the Nunes Memo has grown and been increasingly adopted by the entire GOP. Please understand that, to me, this is a construct, a lie, a false narrative designed to protect Trump, and its embrace now by the GOP can be traced to the finding of no conspiracy by Mueller (As Colton has pointed out a couple of times, the Post can be read in incognito mode using chrome browser):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...sing-embrace-trumps-russia-conspiracy-theory/

Now, once again, Trump is focusing on the "coup narrative" in his tweets today:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/tru...ims-coup-attempt-fbi-lawyer/story?id=63001147

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/trump-quotes-right-wing-commentator-in-accusing-democrats-of-waging-american-coup

And, another Post opinion piece indicating that Trump is already getting set to use the power of the federal government against the eventual Democratic nominee in 2020:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...et-use-government-destroy-democratic-nominee/

Now, many conservative lawyers are getting on Trump's case for his abuse of power. Over 700 ex prosecutors from GOP and Democratic administrations have signed on to the statement saying they would charge Trump with instruction, based on the Mueller report:

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-republican-lawyers-20190512-story.html
Click to expand...
So in other words, no, you will not accept the results of the Muller investigation. You are certain that a bunch of bad things have happened and don't need the evidence in order to prove it. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you don't care about the growing evidence that the investigation began as a politically motivated hit job. Evidence doesn't really matter to you because the bad orange man must be stopped at all costs.
 
One Brow said:
So, to be clear, I do to the trouble of hunting down 3-10 year-old news clips that show CNN twisting words, and if I successfully do so, you will stop talking about how unfair the press is to Trump and how CNN is so left-leaning?
Click to expand...
If you are able to convince these people that the yellow dot for CNN ought to be placed in the center of the spectrum then I will agree with your currently crazy claim that they are not liberally biased.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

That could only happen if CNN were to make drastic changes because currently the only people who could possibly miss the bias are those who are biased in the same direction.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
If you are able to convince these people that the yellow dot for CNN ought to be placed in the center of the spectrum then I will agree with your currently crazy claim that they are not liberally biased.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

That could only happen if CNN were to make drastic changes because currently the only people who could possibly miss the bias are those who are biased in the same direction.
Click to expand...

Why those people, and not https://www.adfontesmedia.com/?

This is the standard for your site:
CNN has a left bias in story selection that often favors the left while being critical of the right. For example, during the 2016 Presidential Election Pew Research concluded that the majority of CNN stories covering President Donald Trump were negative. While less dramatic, Pew also determined that more stories were negative toward Presidential candidate Mitt Romney in 2012.

Can a simple count of how many negative/positive stories really tell you about the organizations bias? Compare:

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/how-ad-fontes-ranks-news-sources/

At any rate, I have no reason to go hunt up old CNN stories on Obama.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
So in other words, no, you will not accept the results of the Muller investigation. You are certain that a bunch of bad things have happened and don't need the evidence in order to prove it. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you don't care about the growing evidence that the investigation began as a politically motivated hit job. Evidence doesn't really matter to you because the bad orange man must be stopped at all costs.
Click to expand...

But I posted the following just a few hours ago. The conservative piece in particular seems to reflect your point of view. Read it, why don't you. I'll listen to the findings, but, yeah, I do assume it will be possible to come to more then one interpretation when that investigation concludes, and I do assume the "growing evidence" you refer to likely will not hold up, but is simply designed to discredit the entire Mueller report. There will be two sides to this. I suspect the "growing evidence" that it began as a "politically motivated hit job" will not hold up, as, for instance Jim Baker suggested just a few days ago.(https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/10/politics/james-baker-brookings/index.html)

There is also the Inspector General's report due later this month or in June. I'll pay attention to what it says as well, and I will also pay attention to how the Democrats respond to both the IG's report and the Ct. prosecutor's investigation, which apparently is a few weeks old already. (Edit: and a few more details here, since I posted the comment below: https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/14/poli...tion-origin-barr-haspel-coats-wray/index.html). And I told you I don't mind being seen as biased. You're biased as well, whether you want to admit it or not.

Red said:
AG Barr has appointed the US Attorney for Ct. to investigate the investigators:

https://www.courant.com/breaking-ne...0190514-y3azsicsb5aezexkat2zltjuxa-story.html

And the view from a conservative news source:

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/articl...emocrats-should-be-quite-worried-about-latest
Click to expand...

As far as "the bad orange man must be stopped at all costs", what the hell do you think I'm advocating here, a revolution? A coup attempt as Trump sees it? No, not at all costs. I'll settle for the ballot box in 2020, and if he gets a second term, I'll still be in the Resistance, but that is my right. I don't have to agree with you to be a good citizen.

Edit: I've mentioned this before, probably one of the other Trump threads. I resist Trump, and I will always resist Trump, due to my position on climate change and global warming. I am a big fan of Tom Engelhardt, who publishes TomDispatch, and I agree with him 100% that, due to his position on climate change, history will judge Trump as having been guilty of "crimes against humanity":

https://www.thenation.com/article/trumps-biggest-crime-isnt-being-covered-by-the-mainstream-media/
 
Last edited:
Red said:
AG Barr has appointed the US Attorney for Ct. to investigate the investigators:

https://www.courant.com/breaking-ne...0190514-y3azsicsb5aezexkat2zltjuxa-story.html

And the view from a conservative news source:

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/articl...emocrats-should-be-quite-worried-about-latest
Click to expand...
So instead of working on how to prevent future meddling, the administration is concentrating on the true enemy, the FBI. That shows their priorities. Anything to protect the ego of the Donald.
 
Investigating the FBI over a legit counter intelligence operation is how despots take power. Anyone who doesn’t seem the danger of attacking our own intelligence and law enforcement communities for doing their jobs in order to intimidate them to serve the president (not the country) needs to have their heads examined.

Fascism is here. Will it continue to take over our institutions?
 
One Brow said:
Why those people, and not https://www.adfontesmedia.com/?

This is the standard for your site:
CNN has a left bias in story selection that often favors the left while being critical of the right. For example, during the 2016 Presidential Election Pew Research concluded that the majority of CNN stories covering President Donald Trump were negative. While less dramatic, Pew also determined that more stories were negative toward Presidential candidate Mitt Romney in 2012.

Can a simple count of how many negative/positive stories really tell you about the organizations bias? Compare:

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/how-ad-fontes-ranks-news-sources/

At any rate, I have no reason to go hunt up old CNN stories on Obama.
Click to expand...
I bet you're happy about that because you know you would fail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top