Stormy Daniels.
Will You Accept the Findings of the Muller Probe?
- Thread starter Gameface
- Start date
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/...ekTxTOPZ1abYEx9Z4Isn-06nKASPzF-QIYDh_yXwb3UDw
"But more often, proximity to an amoral leader reveals something depressing. I think that’s at least part of what we’ve seen with Bill Barr and Rod Rosenstein. Accomplished people lacking inner strength can’t resist the compromises necessary to survive Mr. Trump and that adds up to something they will never recover from. It takes character like Mr. Mattis’s to avoid the damage, because Mr. Trump eats your soul in small bites.
It starts with your sitting silent while he lies, both in public and private, making you complicit by your silence. In meetings with him, his assertions about what “everyone thinks” and what is “obviously true” wash over you, unchallenged, as they did at our private dinner on Jan. 27, 2017, because he’s the president and he rarely stops talking. As a result, Mr. Trump pulls all of those present into a silent circle of assent.
Speaking rapid-fire with no spot for others to jump into the conversation, Mr. Trump makes everyone a co-conspirator to his preferred set of facts, or delusions. I have felt it — this president building with his words a web of alternative reality and busily wrapping it around all of us in the room."
"But more often, proximity to an amoral leader reveals something depressing. I think that’s at least part of what we’ve seen with Bill Barr and Rod Rosenstein. Accomplished people lacking inner strength can’t resist the compromises necessary to survive Mr. Trump and that adds up to something they will never recover from. It takes character like Mr. Mattis’s to avoid the damage, because Mr. Trump eats your soul in small bites.
It starts with your sitting silent while he lies, both in public and private, making you complicit by your silence. In meetings with him, his assertions about what “everyone thinks” and what is “obviously true” wash over you, unchallenged, as they did at our private dinner on Jan. 27, 2017, because he’s the president and he rarely stops talking. As a result, Mr. Trump pulls all of those present into a silent circle of assent.
Speaking rapid-fire with no spot for others to jump into the conversation, Mr. Trump makes everyone a co-conspirator to his preferred set of facts, or delusions. I have felt it — this president building with his words a web of alternative reality and busily wrapping it around all of us in the room."
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
The real question is, does Muller accept the findings of the Muller report?
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Again, its all about vantage point.
The left is so far left now that it when looks at the middle it appears to be far right.
How in the world can you not see how extreme the left has gotten?
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Think about the spectrum of politics. The country has become more left like. Gay marriage, weed legalization, socialism being openly discussed like a real option, etc, etc..
The country is moving more left. That means the left is pulling it that way. The left is putting more weight on the left side.
The left is going to extremes. The right has changed just a little and its to the left because of the left. Not because the right is being extreme.
If you use more than two brain cells and stop parroting the tube, you might actually notice what is going on.
The country is moving more left. That means the left is pulling it that way. The left is putting more weight on the left side.
The left is going to extremes. The right has changed just a little and its to the left because of the left. Not because the right is being extreme.
If you use more than two brain cells and stop parroting the tube, you might actually notice what is going on.
I'm one of the loons that buys into the traditional measures of an economy needs to be expanded.
Yes, "the economy" looks good with the standard measuring stick. But that measure, which has been in a near - constant uptick this decade, measures a vacuum.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
You have extreme paranoia. Seeing those liberal democrat boogeymen everywhere. Its all you talk about anymore. You are dutch. Congrats
Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app
Maybe you are too young to remember. The right started its rightward march in the 80s. In the 90s, Gingrich made compromise a dirty word. The right today is much further right than it was in the 1970s.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
I'm 5 pages behind the conversation. I will be stunned if I read through those 5 pages and anyone offers a halfway plausible answer to this question.
Jazzta
Guest
Thanks, it all makes perfect sense now.
The answer that that they sowed doubt, relied on innuendo and confirmation bias, and reiterated discredited topics without regard for truth.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Just read the 5 pages. I'm not at all stunned to discover that I was right.
confirmed
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Just curious, are we at a constitutional crisis yet?
Trump’s AG is lying all over the place. Clearly, he has convinced himself that saving Trump's presidency is equivalent to saving the country.
Trump is refusing any and all attempts for the House to investigate him.
Trump’s AG just refused to testify before the House over fear of being further exposed. The White House is sending junk stories to be published to further obfuscate things.
And democrats don’t want to pursue impeachment over fear that the senate won’t convict and that’ll be a boost to Trump in 2020.
Are we at a constitutional crisis yet?
This has been a slow motion Saturday night massacre once Sessions was ousted. Slowly, there’s been a coup in the DOJ where no longer it appears that law applies to the executive.
Now what? If we aren’t in a constitutional crisis now, when will we?
Trump’s AG is lying all over the place. Clearly, he has convinced himself that saving Trump's presidency is equivalent to saving the country.
Trump is refusing any and all attempts for the House to investigate him.
Trump’s AG just refused to testify before the House over fear of being further exposed. The White House is sending junk stories to be published to further obfuscate things.
And democrats don’t want to pursue impeachment over fear that the senate won’t convict and that’ll be a boost to Trump in 2020.
Are we at a constitutional crisis yet?
This has been a slow motion Saturday night massacre once Sessions was ousted. Slowly, there’s been a coup in the DOJ where no longer it appears that law applies to the executive.
Now what? If we aren’t in a constitutional crisis now, when will we?
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
I'll take your refusal to answer and sidestepping babble as a yes. Loon status confirmed.
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.