Summery in March (SCO v 31)

[SBJJ]

Some are still in the denial stage of grief.

So many people wrapped up major parts of their own identity in the Russian collusion hoax.

It'll take days, or possibly even weeks for some people to finally reach acceptance.

No coincidence only the deepest partisan posters are still riding the train.

To be fair, many honest progressive posters have come to grips

 

[bobgeese]

Is it me or do republican supporters posting ITT have 1) no desire to see the Mueller report itself as unredacted as possible and 2) not a sceptical bone in their body regarding the Barr (of Iran-Contra fame) interpretation?

I personally can’t wait, it will be another chance to bathe in the delicious tears of salty liberals.

 

[SBJJ]

Why don't you post some actual substantiated information that falsifies the dossier rather than continuing to shit up the forum with empty bullshit posts? How you have managed to continuously post like this and not get banned is beyond me but I'm still reasonably sure it's only a matter of time.

tl;dr GFY, you're a waste of time and space.

You want him to prove unverified accusations false? You sound like Alex Jones

 

[vengeful]

These are the tears I crave. Thanks




Your inability to address the fact that Steele used literal anonymous cnn user comments as a source, is transparent as can be.

But please, continue to lash out in anger.

He never used them as sources you dork, he used it in the report. That's not using them as a source, are you intentionally being dishonest or just stupid?

 

[vengeful]

You want him to prove unverified accusations false? You sound like Alex Jones

It's not hard to prove something false from the dossier that's false.

For example, Michael Cohen was said to have been in Prague.....Cohen testified he's never been to Prague.

Falsified!

 

[Ophydian]

We should be skeptical of everyone. That said, it seems highly unlikely that Barr would risk his entire reputation by mischaracterizing the Mueller report, particularly since Mueller has a recent history of speaking out when his investigation has been mischaracterized.

You know the funny thing is time and time again we’re constantly asking ourselves that question is why would somebody around Trump sacrifice going to jail or damaging their rep by lying about connections they had more conversations they had with people so it wouldn’t surprise me that bar maybe playing a little bit conservative with his report to keep Trump off his ass.

What this 2016 election is taught me is that conservatives are willing to sacrifice morals and reputation for employment. No I’m not saying that Democrats are any better but the Republicans are on display now because of Trump and his antics and their lack of or inability to say anything negative about his comets.

 

[bobgeese]

He never used them as sources you dork, he used it in the report. That's not using them as a source, are you intentionally being dishonest or just stupid?

“Former British spy Christopher Steele confessed that he used an unverified report submitted to a CNN website, where “random individuals” can post information, for his salacious anti-Trump dossier.

Steele made the awkward revelation during a deposition last year in a case involving Russian entrepreneur Aleksej Gubarev, who claims his companies Webzilla and XBT Holdings were defamed by Steele after the dossier was published by BuzzFeed.”


He claims he “found allegations”

Asked “how did you verify this claim”

CNN user comments of course...Well then, into the dossier it goes.




You see, it’s laughable that anyone would defend this. There is literally zero evidence he didn’t just copy it from the cnn user comments. Even worse, the other possibility is that this was part of the Russian propaganda paid for by team Clinton when they colluded with Russians.

 

[SBJJ]

It's not hard to prove something false from the dossier that's false.

For example, Michael Cohen was said to have been in Prague.....Cohen testified he's never been to Prague.

Falsified!

And how do you prove you were not with a hooker in a room years ago

How would you prove you are not a phile if a poster accused you of being one?

 

[waiguoren]

You know the funny thing is time and time again we’re constantly asking ourselves that question is why would somebody around Trump sacrifice going to jail or damaging their rep by lying about connections they had more conversations they had with people so it wouldn’t surprise me that bar maybe playing a little bit conservative with his report to keep Trump off his ass.

Sure, that's possible. I think blatant misrepresentations are out of the question though, since we're going to see the report soon. I've already noted two posters here who are claiming that Barr has totally misrepresented Mueller's findings. How can they possibly know that without seeing Mueller's report?

 

[method115]

Like I said before to those spazzing out about no collusion. The four page report from the AG Says there’s no reason to move forward with collusion but that doesn’t mean there isnt evidence be at circumstantial that Congress can move forward with that information. I think it was pretty much a given that Mueller would not indict a sitting president but that he would give enough data to Congress to move forward if they so wish to

This is exactly what was said:


The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.

It doesn't say Barr wasn't moving forwarding with collusion it's that they couldn't establish that there was any collusion even with Russia attempting multiple offers to Trumps team.

 

[BarryDillon]

Let's see that report.

 

[Ophydian]

Sure, that's possible. I think blatant misrepresentations are out of the question though, since we're going to see the report soon. I've already noted two posters here who are claiming that Barr has totally misrepresented Mueller's findings. How can they possibly know that without seeing Mueller's report?

Yes impossible to come to that conclusion now. Sounds like grasping.

 

[andnowweknow]

Looking forward to the report being released and the lib line switching to, “we need to see the underlying documents! We can’t just trust Mueller’s word!”

I'll enjoy it going back to a witch hunt.

Don't you think Barr would have backed up his opinions in his report if he could have? He had 300+ pages and he couldn't note one full sentence that helped his boss?

 

[andnowweknow]

This is exactly what was said:


The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.

It doesn't say Barr wasn't moving forwarding with collusion it's that they couldn't establish that there was any collusion even with Russia attempting multiple offers to Trumps team.

Again, this quote is about chargeable items, it speaks nothing to the idea of there being no evidence of collusion/conspiracy.

 

[SBJJ]

Yeah, the Barr Report is basically 2 pages, you can't even summarize a college paper in 2 pages. I mean technically it's 4 pages, but the 1st page was just addresses of the Congressmen it was going to, and the last pages was basically like footnotes.

A thorough summary that would be needed for something like this should have been at least 30 pages.

If we find out Barr misrepresented the report he should be removed

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

Let's see that report.

Why are you trying to rush Attorney General Barr's investigation into the report?

We've heard for 2 years how unjust the very idea of rushing an investigation is.

Now you're going to have to just sit, and wait, until our Senate confirmed Attorney General decides to release the portions of the report that doesn't violate anyone's right to privacy.

 

[andnowweknow]

Let's see that report.

Barr will try to remain vague on the number, book it. If it is "between 300 and 400", nobody can determine how much is omitted.

 

[BarryDillon]

Why are you trying to rush Attorney General Barr's investigation into the report?

We've heard for 2 years how unjust the very idea of rushing an investigation is.

Now you're going to have to just sit, and wait, until our Senate confirmed Attorney General decides to release the portions of the report that don't violate anyone's right to privacy.

It's not an investigation. It's just redactions.

 

[SBJJ]

Again, this quote is about chargeable items, it speaks nothing to the idea of there being no evidence of collusion/conspiracy.

LOFL

 

[Bloody Pulp]

I'll enjoy it going back to a witch hunt.

Don't you think Barr would have backed up his opinions in his report if he could have? He had 300+ pages and he couldn't note one full sentence that helped his boss?

The witch hunt is dead.

Don’t think he needed to if he’s going to be releasing the report. Its just a summary of the main points that everyone would care about - was there collusion or obstruction. Details of why not can follow after they finish redacting whatever they have to.