What's new
By:
Filters

Four oil tankers sabotaged

Carbon13 said:
Look, I get it. We were all invested in a 3 year Easter egg hunt to prove collusion. But the fact remains that chosen investigator by Democrats, armed with subpoena power, unlimited resources, two years of investigative work, and a top tier team of investigators didn’t find anything.

It’s possible that even with unlimited resources and an investigation that exceeded even the original scope that perhaps Mueller missed something that may have proven collusion existed. But then again, anything is possible? It’s possible that anyone is guilty of any crime, but in the absence of evidence you are stuck trying to prove a negative. This called a counter factual and those are impossible to prove.

The thing that stinks about all of this is that the Democrats gave trump a massive assist by pursuing Russian collusion. It really does look like the media, in all its rush to push the collusion agenda is in fact - fake, or at least has an anti-Trump agenda. Many will also conflate legal with ethical, when truly, the evidence that does exist paints trump to be a despicable character.
Click to expand...

Have you read the Mueller report yet?
 
Also, what carbon and all the other Trump defenders stupidly and amazingly keep managing to not understand is that the investigation found enough evidence to indict Donald Trump the civilian. Problem is that Trump is not just a civilian but the president of the United States and therefore is protected and can't be indicted.

It's amazing how much this fact has been discussed yet so many idiots can't grasp it. Selective memories perhaps

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
fishonjazz said:
Also, what carbon and all the other Trump defenders stupidly and amazingly keep managing to not understand is that the investigation found enough evidence to indict Donald Trump the civilian. Problem is that Trump is not just a civilian but the president of the United States and therefore is protected and can't be indicted.

It's amazing how much this fact has been discussed yet so many idiots can't grasp it. Selective memories perhaps

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
I’m not a trump defender
 
fishonjazz said:
Also, what carbon and all the other Trump defenders stupidly and amazingly keep managing to not understand is that the investigation found enough evidence to indict Donald Trump the civilian. Problem is that Trump is not just a civilian but the president of the United States and therefore is protected and can't be indicted.

It's amazing how much this fact has been discussed yet so many idiots can't grasp it. Selective memories perhaps

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

Hence an investigation that changed nothing. Just like this new one will change nothing. Despite the differences in the “why”. Some people are beyond the law it appears.
 
Stoked said:
Hence an investigation that changed nothing. Just like this new one will change nothing. Despite the differences in the “why”. Some people are beyond the law it appears.
Click to expand...
I mean I think something changed. People were in fact indicted. It opened many people's eyes to what Trump and his staff have been up to and hopefully makes us watch elections more closely in the future.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
fishonjazz said:
I mean I think something changed. People were in fact indicted. It opened many people's eyes to what Trump and his staff have been up to and hopefully makes us watch elections more closely in the future.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

I don’t think very many opinions on Trump changed. Americans are lazy and elections will go on as they have been.

Yeah a couple of side actors got indicted but nothing really changed. He’s still president, Ds are still hopping mad, Rs still mostly have their head in the dirt.

I’m thoroughly unimpressed and disappointed.
 
Red said:
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opini...ion-president-trump-threat-within-ncna1006996

Barr occupies the cabinet position arguably most critical to preserving our unique form of government. More than any of his administration colleagues, the attorney general must be apolitical, independent and loyal only to the Constitution. The role is rightly described as “the people’s lawyer” because we count on the AG to uphold the rule of law so that the least among us may receive justice.

But instead, our current attorney general would have us believe the myth that some kind of deep state resides within the corridors of our most trusted institutions, a conspiracy theory the president’s supporters have repeatedly echoed. Despite ongoing related investigations by a capable DOJ inspector general, Barr wants us to believe, as does his boss, that our system is broken and that the only fix lies outside the practices and policies that served our democracy for centuries.

We don’t know if Barr’s decisions are malicious, self-serving or simply ignorant. But by perpetuating the president’s falsehoods and eroding Americans’ trust in our institutions, Barr has become the kind of threat capable of doing severe harm; he has become a threat from within.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/17/we-dont-have-an-attorney-general/

So despite the fact that Russia launched a “sweeping and systematic” effort to help Trump get elected; despite the between 100 and 250 contacts between Trump campaign figures and people associated with Russia; despite Trump World repeatedly signaling eagerness for the Kremlin’s help; despite that fact that everyone involved was constantly lying about contacts with Russia; despite the fact that Trump’s former campaign chair, former national security adviser and former personal lawyer would all go on to plead guilty to crimes — despite all that, Barr is still casting doubt on the investigation’s legitimacy.

Donald Trump now has an attorney general. But the United States no longer does.
Click to expand...

Cass Sunstein had a good presentation to Congress? on the unitary presidency, which included some stuff on the AG's role to the president. It was in 1994 IIRC, if you are interested in looking it up. I might have time to find it tomorrow.
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
Cass Sunstein had a good presentation to Congress? on the unitary presidency, which included some stuff on the AG's role to the president. It was in 1994 IIRC, if you are interested in looking it up. I might have time to find it tomorrow.
Click to expand...

These are the two items I located. I have not read either completely, and I am no legal mind....

https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=11680&context=journal_articles

https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu...edir=1&article=12368&context=journal_articles
 
One Brow said:
Collusion is not a crime.
Click to expand...

Carbon13 said:
Let me reiterate, zero Americans were indicted for colluding with Russia.
Click to expand...

Zombie said:
It would be pretty remarkable for someone to be indicted for a crime that doesn't exist so *shrug emoji*
Click to expand...

One Brow said:
Let me reiterate, collusion is not a crime. I'm sure no one was indicted for insulting people, either.
Click to expand...

Mueller did not address collusion, as it is not a crime. And by harping on the mantra "no collusion", Trump basically set the table for disappointment for Trump opponents since he was never going to be judged guilty of a non-existent crime. And that in turn assisted in people simply overlooking the fact that Trump was nonetheless open to assistance from Russia.

From the Mueller report:

“Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...er-report-showed-that-russia-did-affect-vote/

Because Trump, and really the liberal media, focused on "collusion", somewhat lost is the fact that a presidential campaign willingly accepted help from a foreign adversary in the 2016 election. Trump claimed "anybody" would accept such help(actually it might have been Giuliani who made that claim), yet we cannot say that another candidate would not have properly reported such offers of help to the FBI.

And I think we can find collusion, even though it could not be judged criminal. One such example would be the infamous Trump Tower meeting, where Donald Trump Jr. prefaced that meeting by saying he would "love it" if damaging info on Clinton could be given to the Trump campaign. That seems like collusion to me. They've been told the Russians have dirt, the Russians state it is part of Russia's desire to help Trump win, and the meeting is held. Would that not be collusion?
 
It’s always funny when arguments fall apart and opposing parties need to fall back on semantics in order keep face.

Let me word it another way: Mueller concluded that not only was there not enough evidence to charge any American with crimes relating to Russian election inference, he also stated that there was no evidence in many of the circumstances.
 
Carbon13 said:
It’s always funny when arguments fall apart and opposing parties need to fall back on semantics in order keep face.

Let me word it another way: Mueller concluded that not only was there not enough evidence to charge any American with crimes relating to Russian election inference, he also stated that there was no evidence in many of the circumstances.
Click to expand...
I'm sure you are cool with obstruction of justice.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top