Summery in March (SCO v 31)

[glenwo2]

I just don’t get all the hot takes...

Until we see the report, all we have is the word of Trump’s hand picked, loyalist AG.

Plus, it is impossible to indict a sitting president.

Put that together, and we basically know nothing about what the report does or doesn’t say about “individual #1” potentially illegal dealings, right?

Am I way off in left field here? Is there something I’m missing?

In the report, though, wasn't it stated that the decision as far as obstruction goes, had zero to do with the "impossible to indict a sitting president" thing?

Or are we going to stick with the "Boo fucking hoo! He's Trump's Puppet / Appointee so he's biased. Waah Waah Waah!" argument?

 

[franklinstower]

Lol, you’re losing me now man. You made your case, I apologized for the misunderstanding. And that bothers you?

Sorry man its so hard to tell on the net. New reply.

 

[bobgeese]

A summary from a Trump nominee who lobbied for the job by publicly criticizing the Mueller investigation does not exonerate him. Especially when we consider the findings on obstruction of justice. The only way to exonerate Trump is to release the report or to hear from Mueller himself. The country deserves it.

And wtf are you taking about when you call people “treasonous”? Talk about disengenuous!

And chill out with the “mourning shit”. I’d like to get the country to get past this. And like I said (which you ignored) blocking the release of the report drags it out.

Talk about disingenuous...


Do you think Rosenstien, who was consulted along with other, would just sit by and let Barr “cover it up”?


Give it up bro, it’s over.

 

[bobgeese]

You need to make more meaningful distinctions. The majority of progressive voices out there did NOT buy into collusion and were very vocal about it all along.

This is false.

 

[xcvbn]

Yup agreed plenty to to actually talk about, people don't really give a shit about this compared to the issues.

I want to see the report though.

I want to see the report too but at this point I think a fight for it plays right into McConnels/GOP hands.

The Dems need to focus on real issues if they want a real chance at 2020. Not trannies, not race politics, not banning guns, etc. Then they will have the power to release the report themselves, Republican support be damned.

 

[HereticBD]

Am I way off in left field here? Is there something I’m missing?

Yeah, your hackish and desperate insinuation that Barr's assessment of the Mueller report must have been shadily falsified in some way, 'cause like, he was like appointed by like, The President n' stuff.

It's fucking pathetic how you guys just want to pile on another conspiracy theory onto the original conspiracy theory, because it failed. It's over. Get to the acceptance grieving stage already.

 

[grizzard2bid]

This is false.

Progressives are the most mentally challenged subset of far-left voters, so it's more than fair to assume they bought the Russian collusion hoax.

 

[xcvbn]

This is false.

 

[Factory]

I just don’t get all the hot takes...

Until we see the report, all we have is the word of Trump’s hand picked, loyalist AG.

Plus, it is impossible to indict a sitting president.

Put that together, and we basically know nothing about what the report does or doesn’t say about “individual #1” potentially illegal dealings, right?

Am I way off in left field here? Is there something I’m missing?

What have you been dreaming up? That Barr misinterpreted the report in a historic fashion?

There are no further indictments, no collusion. Trump is not a traitor. Your last hope is obstruction.

It's over and both sides should be happy about that. Time to focus on real politics.

 

[glenwo2]

I want to see the report too but at this point I think a fight for it plays right into McConnels/GOP hands.

The Dems need to focus on real issues if they want a real chance at 2020. Not trannies, not race politics, not banning guns, etc. Then they will have the power to release the report themselves, Republican support be damned.

I think Mitch is in the Driver's seat here and he's playing a Good Hand in this Poker Game. For example, not all of the focus will be on the Mueller Report :

McConnell to put Green New Deal to vote, forcing Democrats to go on record

Remember this? lol.

 

[Strychnine]

Why did you think the post was directed at you

You didn't specify.

 

[Strychnine]

You want the president to be a Russian puppet.

What could be more treasonous? You are actively rooting for the highest office in the land to be compromised so you can 'win' on a message board.

If it were a democratic AG saying that a Democratic President was all clear just based on his summary of an investigation and didn't release the full report post-haste, Right-Wingers would be camped out opposite the WH, burning them in effigy.

I accept Muller's report.

Now I just want to see it.

 

[Not A Theist]

Of course and the logic is pretty straight-forward. If we are to assume impeachment is off the table (and it is) and Trump is so despised by the left they will have to get him out of office the old fashioned way - vote his ass out of office. It's hard to tell this early but this type of stuff can improve turnout. Dems are a combination of "why are we drawing conclusions based on a summary, one that shows he may have obstructed justice" to he's gaming the system.

Instead of the knee jerk reactions from you guys would one of you care to explain why you think I'm wrong? Or are memes and "are you kidding" shit enough?

Ok. Not really worth explaining it, honestly, given your motivations, demeanor, and posting style. I guess we'll see how it plays out.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

Yeah, I’ve been saying that for years. But let me ask you. Did you elect guys that you want to see cover the truth out of part loyalty?

If this was reversed and if Schumer kept the investigation results of Joe Biden hidden from public I’d be pissed. I thought it was great that all the Benghazi stuff was out in the open, for example. It exonerated her and we can move on.

I really don’t understand why you guys don’t want that.

Your complaint was that Attorney General Barr was an appointee of President Trump, and you were upset that an appointee of President Trump that was confirmed by the Senate, gets to decide the obstruction question.

The American people duly and fairly elected President Donald J. Trump to be the Executive, the American people elected a wide majority of Republicans to control the Senate.

Elections have consequences.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Ok. Not really worth explaining it, honestly, given your motivations, demeanor, and posting style. I guess we'll see how it plays out.

This is something that really hurts the group. I see it all the time, too. Someone makes a reasonable statement, and then someone else responds with unsupported gainsaying, and then the first person wants a little more so they can see if they're making a mistake somewhere, and the second person responds with some form of "I don't have to explain myself to the likes of you!" Everyone reading has wasted their time, and both parties to the discussion seem to be worse off.

I think the GOP is engaging in a pretty obvious propaganda tactic (blitz celebration even though no one really knows anything), and it would help to step back and try to examine the situation rationally.

 

[sangreporsangre]

Man some media outlets aren't taking this too well. Like look at this shit:

 

[luckyshot]

In the report, though, wasn't it stated that the decision as far as obstruction goes, had zero to do with the "impossible to indict a sitting president" thing?

I don’t know. No one’s seen the report except Barr.

Yeah, your hackish and desperate insinuation that Barr's assessment of the Mueller report must have been shadily falsified in some way, 'cause like, he was like appointed by like, The President n' stuff.

It's fucking pathetic how you guys just want to pile on another conspiracy theory onto the original conspiracy theory, because it failed. It's over. Get to the acceptance grieving stage already.

And if the shoe was on the other foot... lol... you’d just be so sanguine in your confidence in the Democratic AG’s interpretations!!?

I think we know the answer to that.

Bottom line: there’s a lot the report could say. We know there were 7 guilty pleas and multiple mentions of “individual #1” sprinkled throughout those stories.

The overall picture of the report could stop short of collusion and still be quite damning to Trump.

We don’t know.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I don’t know. No one’s seen the report except Barr.

And if the shoe was on the other foot... lol... you’d just be so sanguine in your confidence in the Democratic AG’s interpretations!!?

I think we know the answer to that.

Bottom line: there’s a lot the report could say. We know there were 7 guilty pleas and multiple mentions of “individual #1” sprinkled throughout those stories.

The overall picture of the report could stop short of collusion and still be quite damning to Trump.

How DARE you insinuate that Republicans would EVER question the finding of a Democratic AG! You, sir, are a cad.

And remember how the FBI concluded that there was no basis to charge Clinton with anything, and Republicans and the MSM *immediately* dropped the issue and agreed that she was 100% vindicated. It was never brought up again, and Republicans all apologized for questioning her information-security practices. You need to stop being a hypocrite and learn from their saintly example.

 

[Not A Theist]

This is something that really hurts the group. I see it all the time, too. Someone makes a reasonable statement, and then someone else responds with unsupported gainsaying, and then the first person wants a little more so they can see if they're making a mistake somewhere, and the second person responds with some form of "I don't have to explain myself to the likes of you!" Everyone reading has wasted their time, and both parties to the discussion seem to be worse off.

I think the GOP is engaging in a pretty obvious propaganda tactic (blitz celebration even though no one really knows anything), and it would help to step back and try to examine the situation rationally.

Perhaps that's what happening, though I think you're ignoring some obvious alternative possibilities to posit a narrative you can't hope to confirm. You're not wrong that such "unsupported gainsaying" isn't helpful though.

That seems like a good reason to let this unfold without my participation and let you guys move this discussion on to page 1501. I'll be curious to see how this works out.

Edit: One last note on the subject though... While I don't know how the affair at large will pan out, there is one thing I am sure of. In this forum, in these threads, there is a snowball's chance in hell that any of you "reasonable" people will be convinced to to change stances, whatever is in that report. It'll be another few hundred pages of rhetorical grandstanding masquerading as reasoned arguments is my guess.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Perhaps that's what happening, though I think you're ignoring some obvious alternative possibilities to posit a narrative you can't hope to confirm. You're not wrong that such "unsupported gainsaying" isn't helpful though.

That seems like a good reason to let this unfold without my participation and let you guys move this discussion on to page 1501. I'll be curious to see how this works out.

Hmm. You're leaving me hanging here. What are the alternative possibilities? Also, I think you'd like the group more if you adjusted your settings to view 30 posts per page.