THE REPORT, buttoned up (SCO Thread v. 33)

[zebby23]

zebby, you are faaaaaaar too rational and just to even glance at clueless shit hole comments.

The fact that you even post here is mind boggling...................

 

[waiguoren]

the report shows that people in the campaign knew that they shared goals with Russia and were enthusiastic about working with them

From my view and the view of many others, that is a good thing. The Cold War is over and we should try to work with Russia.

But they knew about Russia hacking of emails and their efforts to help them win and did not report it to the authorities.

The campaign knew about the hacking only at the same time and via the same channel that we all knew about it. Mueller uncovered no evidence that the Trump campaign had advance notice of the hacking.

 

[King in the North]

Sure, that’s easy.


“I stand by the legal decisions made by the AG, Rod Rosenstein, and the OLC.”


Btw, that is all the republican house members have to say. The media/dems glorified Rosenstien so much, they won’t be able to get any serious traction by demeaning a decision he helped make.[/QUOTE]

What? Again, the President never was going to get indicted. Didn’t we all know this? It’s up to congress to impeach.

So, that didn’t change anything. Please address the obvstruction mentioned in the Mueller report. Or is it not a big deal because your guy did it?

 

[kpt018]

From my view and the view of many others, that is a good thing. The Cold War is over and we should try to work with Russia.

Weird take. They believed they would benefit from a Trump presidency so they interfered in our election. That's not what "working together" looks like.

The campaign knew about the hacking only at the same time and via the same channel that we all knew about it. Mueller uncovered no evidence that the Trump campaign had advance notice of the hacking.

Advance notice? No. But they knew and didn't report it. Not only that they were enthusiastic about the opportunity.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

If you're wondering why people call you dishonest, this post of yours explains why.

You keep omitting that while Mueller doesn't draw a line from trump to russia, he draws it clearly from trump -wikileaks - russia. He went so far in the report to have Barr address it with his asinine "There's no collusion with russia because they used a middle man."

Knowingly omitting that tidbit is why people call you a liar.

No, I don't wonder why you call me dishonest. It's because this is politics and some people get angry and lash out in political conversations when facts don't go their way.

Did you read any of the report? Mueller says again and again and again that the evidence does not establish collusion, conspiracy, or coordination between Trump or his campaign and the Russians. It is not dishonest in the slightest to point out the single biggest point Mueller makes, and he makes it repeatedly, is that the level of collusion people have insinuated for years simply doesn't exist. He put that there so often because folks like you will cherrypick a few details and keep running on with your collusion conspiracy theories that Mueller entirely rejects.

 

[waiguoren]

They believed they would benefit from a Trump presidency so they interfered in our election. That's not what "working together" looks like.

I certainly agree with that. I don't see how it's relevant.

Advance notice? No. But they knew and didn't report it.

The campaign learned of the hacking the same time the public did. Why would they report it when it's already on the news?

 

[kpt018]

I certainly agree with that. I don't see how it's relevant.

It's relevant to debunking your point that they want to work with us.

The campaign learned of the hacking the same time the public did. Why would they report it when it's already on the news?

Not true. Check out the report.

 

[bobgeese]

Sure, that’s easy.


“I stand by the legal decisions made by the AG, Rod Rosenstein, and the OLC.”


Btw, that is all the republican house members have to say. The media/dems glorified Rosenstien so much, they won’t be able to get any serious traction by demeaning a decision he helped make.

What? Again, the President never was going to get indicted. Didn’t we all know this? It’s up to congress to impeach.

So, that didn’t change anything. Please address the obvstruction mentioned in the Mueller report. Or is it not a big deal because your guy did it?[/QUOTE]



I stand by the decision on the AG, Rod Rosenstein, and the OLC, that the president’s state of mind weighed heavily against any charges levied.


You see how easy that was? The left will not get any traction out of this. You’ll bitch, you’ll complain, but ultimately, you lost.

 

[cincymma79]

I certainly agree with that. I don't see how it's relevant.

The campaign learned of the hacking the same time the public did. Why would they report it when it's already on the news?

Trump not calling the FBI to tell them Anderson Cooper is reporting about Wikileaks is obviously collusion

 

[AndroidRage]

I'll find specific passages when I have time and none of it is new but the report shows that people in the campaign knew that they shared goals with Russia and were enthusiastic about working with them. And that Jr was essentially too dumb to prosecute. But they knew about Russia hacking of emails and their efforts to help them win and did not report it to the authorities. Not a crime but unethical and their failure to realize it's shady makes them incompetent.

It's in there. If you get through it all you'll see it.

I don't understand the too dumb to prosecute part. JR and SR are both the dumbest fucks on 2 legs but I don't see how that saves anyone from the law.

 

[Confucamus]

Can you read at least a summary of the report and come back? It’s obvious you haven’t looked into it and you look like a fool. Trying to do you a solid here.

Also the investigation was launched by republicans lol.

The whole thing? No, and neither have you. So stop with the weak ass response of "Oh, have you read the report?" "Oh but have you read the WHOLE thing?" I don't need to read all 400 pages to understand there was no collusion. You and anybody else who parroted that nonsense for 2.5 years doesn't get to just move the goal posts to Obstruction of Justice just because the language is vague enough to do so. This is cowardly, and CNN has gone full retard coward about it. Doesn't mean you have to.

There was no collusion. Trump was elected by America. Hillary was rejected. That's all that matters. Nobody gives a shit about things that almost were Obstruction of Justice or could've been Obstruction of Justice. I've read through this thread and nobody is buying what you guys are selling.

Another person strung out on Hannity.

It's not illegal so who cares right?

When it comes to impeaching a sitting President, that's right. Conjecture and opinion doesn't cut it.

 

[King in the North]

What? Again, the President never was going to get indicted. Didn’t we all know this? It’s up to congress to impeach.

So, that didn’t change anything. Please address the obvstruction mentioned in the Mueller report. Or is it not a big deal because your guy did it?

I stand by the decision on the AG, Rod Rosenstein, and the OLC, that the president’s state of mind weighed heavily against and charges levied.


You see how easy that was? The left will not get any traction out of this. You’ll bitch, you’ll complain, but ultimately, you lost.[/QUOTE]

Why does it keep fucking our quotes up?

You still aren’t addressing the obstruction. I’m guessing you went with the Barr reading and it was case closed.

It isn’t a team sport, dummy. Again, you haven’t addressed the obstruction so I’ll assume you’re going with; I don’t care because my team won. Which, again, is weird. It’s not a team sport.

And only a brain-dead moron would look at the Mueller report and think it somehow makes the President look good. He looks incompetent and corrupt, what we’ve been saying all along.

 

[glenwo2]

Reconsider this.

Read the rest of the post. I'm tired of your shit.

 

[Darkballs]

No, I don't wonder why you call me dishonest. It's because this is politics and some people get angry and lash out in political conversations when facts don't go their way.

Did you read any of the report? Mueller says again and again and again that the evidence does not establish collusion, conspiracy, or coordination between Trump or his campaign and the Russians. It is not dishonest in the slightest to point out the single biggest point Mueller makes,

It's incredibly dishonest to leave out the context. Not once have you even attempted to address the trump campaign's go through to the russian state, nor have you addressed any of the incidents of obstruction. Only harping on Mueller's conclusion that there wasn't a direct link to trump russia, but they used an intermediary. You ignore that, and all talk in the report about that, repeatedly.

You do this because it looks unfavorable for trump.

 

[waiguoren]

It's relevant to debunking your point that they want to work with us.

Where did I write that? I am saying we should have a thaw with Russia to the extent possible. We interfere in their elections, and they appear to have interfered in ours. I don't see why that has to be a deal-breaker.

Not true. Check out the report.

I have it here. Cite a page, please.

 

[King in the North]

The whole thing? No, and neither have you. So stop with the weak ass response of "Oh, have you read the report?" "Oh but have you read the WHOLE thing?" I don't need to read all 400 pages to understand there was no collusion. You and anybody else who parroted that nonsense for 2.5 years doesn't get to just move the goal posts to Obstruction of Justice just because the language is vague enough to do so. This is cowardly, and CNN has gone full retard coward about it. Doesn't mean you have to.

There was no collusion. Trump was elected by America. Hillary was rejected. That's all that matters. Nobody gives a shit about things that almost were Obstruction of Justice or could've been Obstruction of Justice. I've read through this thread and nobody is buying what you guys are selling.



When it comes to impeaching a sitting President, that's right. Conjecture and opinion doesn't cut it.

Do you dipshits not know what the word “summary” means?

 

[glenwo2]

They should have all the leftist nitwits appear on her show so they can all give each other reach-arounds...even her.

 

[glenwo2]

What? Again, the President never was going to get indicted. Didn’t we all know this? It’s up to congress to impeach.

So, that didn’t change anything. Please address the obvstruction mentioned in the Mueller report. Or is it not a big deal because your guy did it?

I stand by the decision on the AG, Rod Rosenstein, and the OLC, that the president’s state of mind weighed heavily against any charges levied.


You see how easy that was? The left will not get any traction out of this. You’ll bitch, you’ll complain, but ultimately, you lost.

Holy crap, this Quote literally went off the rails.

Who is quoting whom here?

 

[kpt018]

Where did I write that? I am saying we should have a thaw with Russia to the extent possible. We interfere in their elections, and they appear to have interfered in ours. I don't see why that has to be a deal-breaker.

The last part is insane. Of course it's a deal breaker.

I have it here. Cite a page, please.

Can't right now.

 

[King in the North]

So none of the Trumpers will address the blatant corruption? The attempts to close the investigation. To fire Mueller. The obstruction.

None of that matters? You’re all just going to say, “no collusion” and bury your heads in the sand. Cool.

Donald Trump is a disgrace to the office of the President.

Cult 45 still going strong.