Will You Accept the Findings of the Muller Probe?

[LogGrad98]

You're just part of the conspiracy! But that's OK, you're in good company--Mythbusters Adam and Jamie are as well:

Well mine was in Germany so that conspiracy goes a long freaking way!

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. Recall at the drop of a hat a very particular reference in a 400+ report produced over the span of a two year marathon investigation.

He should have known who Fusion GPS is. Everyone watching the investigation knows who they are. Now maybe Mueller wanted to be careful, or maybe he was befuddled, but he said, "I'm not familiar..." which can't possibly be true if he read his own report.

Exactly why I called it DOA and the system broken. The Clinton Impeachment taught me one thing: The POTUS would have to be filmed committing a murder and whizzing on the corpse to make their most frothing supporters flinch. Even then, it's a crapshoot at best. Personally, I don't really care if Billy Boy lied about receiving fallatio or not, or even if he lied about it. But it taught me that politics is a dirty pool by nature and the entire system is broken.

A president can invade a foreign country on a false pretense, kill hundreds of thousands of people, have thousands of his own soldiers killed, and get a simple pardon by the next president who takes office. Business as usual.

 

[Hotdog]

Jimmy Dore who is a self proclaimed liberal even understands what the hell just happened with the Mueller report.

 

[Hotdog]

"Exonerated has no legal meaning"

Facts

Yet Mueller decided to throw that in the report anyways.

 

[One Brow]

They're not directly campaign contributions, but they're direct donations to the non-profit that the Clintons administer. They're far more direct a monetary contribution than a foreign diplomat choosing to stay at a Trump International Hotel.

You don't think Trump makes money from the Trump International Hotels? How more direct does it need to be for you?

 

[One Brow]

Just so we are clear and factual when it comes to laws and rights.

It is not the job, duty, within the law, nor the right of Mueller to exonerate the president...

Just so we are clear and factual, Mueller explicitly said that Trump could be charged with crimes if he left office in 2020, based on the results of Mueller's investigation.

 

[One Brow]

So you're saying that verifying Russians indeed hacked DNC servers (the underlying premise of the entire investigation) is beyond the scope of the Russia investigation?

It was beyond the scope of Mueller's investigation, as set forth by Rosenstein. You didn't know that?

If the DOJ were acting impartially (let alone on Trump's behalf), that would be the very first question to investigate. Even still, that question hasn't been conclusively answered, and it wasn't brought up by either party in this week's hearings.

The DOJ has a separate investigation into the hacked DNC servers. You didn't know that?

Fusion GPS was mentioned in the Mueller report. Their allegations were instrumental in launching the FBI's Russia probe.

Odd how they could be instrumental in launching a probe that began before people were aware of their involvement.

During the court proceedings, the DNC admitted they favored Hillary and asserted that they had the right to do so. They're not denying it. Whether Bernie's supporters are rational on other issues, isn't relevant to the question.

As I said, Clinton got what she paid for.

Just because Papadopoulos was told the Russians had dirt on Hillary (prior to April 26) doesn't mean the Russians hacked the DNC on July 5.

I agree. There are other reason to suspect further Russian-ordered hacking.

 

[One Brow]

Yeah but the whole thing is kinda slimy even if legal.

Agreed.

 

[One Brow]

Zombie can you not realize that the investigation team was made up of democratic donors, ...

Can you list the names, the amounts donated, and the source for this information? If not, why should we believe this is true?

 

[Red]

The resignation of Coats as Director of National Intelligence, and the appointment of a Trump loyalist, Rep. Ratcliffe, to that position, could conceivably be part of the plan to deligitimize the Mueller report. Would Ratcliffe come right out and say Russian interference in the 2016 election was a hoax?? Trump does want "hoax" to replace the intelligence community's conclusion that Russia interfered to help Trump win.

If Ratcliffe did come out and say that, I would expect all hell to break loose among the rank and file in the intelligence community. Why are they serving their country if all their work is dismissed as hoax? Anyway, I can't help but think Trump wants a loyalist as DNI simply to support his hoax claim, and to defuse any efforts to protect future elections. One more step toward one man rule, all you folks who say "can't happen here".

http://www.businessinsider.com/dni-dan-coats-quit-white-house-suppressed-russia-warnings-nyt-2019-7

 

[Gameface]

The resignation of Coats as Director of National Intelligence, and the appointment of a Trump loyalist, Rep. Ratcliffe, to that position, could conceivably be part of the plan to deligitimize the Mueller report. Would Ratcliffe come right out and say Russian interference in the 2016 election was a hoax?? Trump does want "hoax" to replace the intelligence community's conclusion that Russia interfered to help Trump win.

If Ratcliffe did come out and say that, I would expect all hell to break loose among the rank and file in the intelligence community. Why are they serving their country if all their work is dismissed as hoax? Anyway, I can't help but think Trump wants a loyalist as DNI simply to support his hoax claim, and to defuse any efforts to protect future elections. One more step toward one man rule, all you folks who say "can't happen here".

http://www.businessinsider.com/dni-dan-coats-quit-white-house-suppressed-russia-warnings-nyt-2019-7

I don't think Trump is making intentional steps towards Authoritarianism, as some sort of philosophical belief in the superiority of that as a system of government.

I think he just sees himself as the best leader, so he should have more power to do what he thinks should be done.

I also think he looks at the "strong" leaders around the world and thinks it is better for their countries to be lead by strong leaders who don't have to answer for every little comment or every little action and can take their people in the direction they feel is best without too much interference.

 

[Hotdog]

I don't think Trump is making intentional steps towards Authoritarianism, as some sort of philosophical belief in the superiority of that as a system of government.

I think he just sees himself as the best leader, so he should have more power to do what he thinks should be done.

I also think he looks at the "strong" leaders around the world and thinks it is better for their countries to be lead by strong leaders who don't have to answer for every little comment or every little action and can take their people in the direction they feel is best without too much interference.

Agreed

I dont thinks its difficult to see what Trump is.

He has an ego. He is cringey. He is Authoritarian.

He's not Hitler. He's not a mastermind. Hes not trying to do evil things.

 

[Red]

I don't think Trump is making intentional steps towards Authoritarianism, as some sort of philosophical belief in the superiority of that as a system of government.

I think he just sees himself as the best leader, so he should have more power to do what he thinks should be done.

I also think he looks at the "strong" leaders around the world and thinks it is better for their countries to be lead by strong leaders who don't have to answer for every little comment or every little action and can take their people in the direction they feel is best without too much interference.

When I think "can't happen here", I'm thinking "one man rule". I don't believe Trump consciously had that in mind. Not sure he even anticipated winning the election.

On the plus side:

We are a long lasting constitutional republic. We don't have any banana republic history.
We have term limits on the office of the presidency.
We do still have a free press.

On the negative side:

Unlike Republicans of the Watergate era, today's GOP will never turn on Trump. No matter what he says or does. This may alter in the future, but we are not there yet.

Trump has no respect for the separation of powers established by the constitution. Thus he tells current and former administration officials to ignore all Congressional supoenas. He does not recognize the Constitutional right of congressional oversight of the Executive branch. Basically, this represents Trump dismissing our very constitution.

AG Barr seems like he is loyal to Trump, and not the Constitution. There may be other such examples in earlier administrations, but this seems the worst case of abandoning the independence of the Justice Dept. I've seen so far.

He has never made one single, heart-felt, effort to be a president for all Americans. He caters to his base, and only his base. In this respect, his is more a cult of personality, and it is clear that is exactly how he wants it.

The strong arm men he does praise, and makes no effort to hide the fact he admires, do not reflect American values. I leave open the possibility that I am simply naive as to what those values are. I may be overly idealistic about what my country stands for. And, indeed, there are many ugly chapters in our history. But when a reporter tells Trump that Putin has reporters killed, and Trump replies "you don't think we kill people too?", that does leave a lot to be desired where me and my notion of what we stand for is concerned. I could offer so many more examples besides Putin.

Those are some of the negatives that seem to erode our democratic institutions.

But, when someone says to me, "can't happen here", I consider that it can actually happen in a sort of accidental way, especially with a party that seems more like a slavish cult. I would never expect to wake up to a headline like "Trump dissolves Congress", no, no overt "one man rule" power grab. But, in increments, in bits and pieces, in response to the Democrats, or with the help of a Justice Dept. or SC amenable to a strong man Executive, I think it possible we can one day wake up to what "can't happen here". Without really recognizing it until there it is, upon us.

 

[One Brow]

Hes not trying to do evil things.

He is doing evil things, whether he is trying to or not.

 

[DasJazz]

He is doing evil things, whether he is trying to or not.

Damn that evil economy and historic low unemployment! It's just so evil that he is trying to secure the border that Democrats have used as a crisis talking point for years on end! Damn him for not escalating into a war with Iran who shot down a US drone. Oh the humanity!

 

[One Brow]

Damn that evil economy and historic low unemployment! It's just so evil that he is trying to secure the border that Democrats have used as a crisis talking point for years on end! Damn him for not escalating into a war with Iran who shot down a US drone. Oh the humanity!

Are you saying that since some of things Trump does are not evil, nothing he does is evil?

Let's start with a really hard one: a family follows US law in declaring asylum after crossing the border. Is it evil to separate the parents from the children of this family?

 

[Hotdog]

Are you saying that since some of things Trump does are not evil, nothing he does is evil?

Let's start with a really hard one: a family follows US law in declaring asylum after crossing the border. Is it evil to separate the parents from the children of this family?

They falsely claiming asylum when they crosss through other countries to get here, and/or there is no reason to flee your country. Other than you seek free stuff the Democrats promise.

By your logic the whole world could just claim asylum and take over the country if they please to. And then we might as well throw out all immigration laws.

Just come on in everyone. Come take the goods and services from the people who created them. Everything is free. Come live off the backs of other people. You didnt have to pay any taxes to help create this, but its yours to enjoy.

 

[One Brow]

They falsely claiming asylum when they crosss through other countries to get here, and/or there is no reason to flee your country. Other than you seek free stuff the Democrats promise.

By US law, the truth or falsity of their claim is decided in a courtroom hearing.

By your logic the whole world could just claim asylum and take over the country if they please to.

Do you support the President imprisoning people who have committed no crime, because he doesn't like the current law?

And then we might as well throw out all immigration laws.

I am *very* much in favor of a major re-write of our current immigration laws.

Just come on in everyone. Come take the goods and services from the people who created them. Everything is free. Come live off the backs of other people. You didnt have to pay any taxes to help create this, but its yours to enjoy.

The reverse is true of immigrants. They contribute much more to the economy than they take overall.

I see you didn't answer the question in the post you trolling.

 

[jazzrule]

Just so we are clear and factual, Mueller explicitly said that Trump could be charged with crimes if he left office in 2020, based on the results of Mueller's investigation.

Could versus should is very different.

 

[jazzrule]

You don't think Trump makes money from the Trump International Hotels? How more direct does it need to be for you?

Wow they would have to stay in his hotel everyday for a million years to match what was given to the Clintons for letting the Russian have so much of our uranium. Think much?