Read and React Request for those still Believing Russiagate

#301
#301
lawgator1 said:
I have zero reason not to trust Mueller at this point.

You assume that Barr's representation of Mueller's findings on this point are accurate and complete. I question whether that is true.
Click to expand...

If you trust the Muell I would think that you would trust him to take action if his report was not being represented accurately.
 
#302
#302
lawgator1 said:
I have zero reason not to trust Mueller at this point.

You assume that Barr's representation of Mueller's findings on this point are accurate and complete. I question whether that is true.
Click to expand...
for a summary yes.

No way to boil down 400 pages to 4. calm down Spartacus.
 
#304
#304
McDad said:
Does Community Coffee count as day drinking. I am totes serious. Trump isn't a small government president. I haven't seen a viable small government candidate in 2 decades. Just curious if you or anyone thinks a small government candidate will appear to challenge Trump.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen one since the early 1900s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#307
#307
lawgator1 said:
It does not have to be a "smoking gun." It does not have to be audio of Trump on the phone with Putin saying "Hey Vlad, let's collude."

The question to me is whether Trump knew Russia was taking action to help him win, that Trump overtly or even impliedly offered to assist in that effort, or whether there was any sort of discussion of helping Russia should he win, i.e. relax sanctions.

We know that Trump publicly invited their help and that his team met with Russian agent to "get dirt" on HRC. We know that polling data was shared with Russian agents. We don't know if there was any other effort to coordinate anything with Russia. We also do not know if there was ever an agreement to favor Russia once elected. The closest we have to that is the change in the GOP platform.

Based on public reporting, Mueller investigated how that change came to be. That,. to me, is of paramount importance. It will tell us a lot, one way or another.
Click to expand...
Liked for "impliedly". one of those seldomly used words.

The rest I didn't read...much like your approach to the Taibbi article.
 
#309
#309
McDad said:
Liked for "impliedly". one of those seldomly used words.

The rest I didn't read...much like your approach to the Taibbi article.
Click to expand...

I confess I did not read the whole thing. Read first part then skimmed the rest given its length.

But I got the gist of it.

Fact is, we are going to have to see the whole report or else it is going to look like Barr is running interference for Trump.
 
#310
#310
lawgator1 said:
I confess I did not read the whole thing. Read first part then skimmed the rest given its length.

But I got the gist of it.

Fact is, I am going to have to see the whole report or else I'm going to continue to pitch a hissy fit and claim Barr is running interference for Trump.
Click to expand...

FIFY
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#311
#311
lawgator1 said:
I confess I did not read the whole thing. Read first part then skimmed the rest given its length.

But I got the gist of it.

Fact is, we are going to have to see the whole report or else it is going to look like Barr is running interference for Trump.
Click to expand...

Isn't this what you are accusing Barr of?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#312
#312
lawgator1 said:
I confess I did not read the whole thing. Read first part then skimmed the rest given its length.

But I got the gist of it.

Fact is, we are going to have to see the whole report or else it is going to look like Barr is running interference for Trump.
Click to expand...

i know you didn't. Im guilty of asking a question I already knew the answer and twisting the knife for fun.

Respectfully, the optics of how it looks do not matter where criminality or lack thereof is concerned. How something looks is only important from the political angle. Furthermore, there will never be 100% belief in the report due to redactions. Even with redactions removed, some influencer will find a section or phrase damning and play it up. How do I know? Ive seen this movie before when it was Birtherism, Private Serverism and WMDism. It's the daily soap opera that many seem to love. They would never watch General Hospital but love General Politics. Keep beating the drum if it makes you happy. I hope the full report does come out. I hope closure is accomplished. I'll believe it when I see it though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#313
#313
McDad said:
i know you didn't. Im guilty of asking a question I already knew the answer and twisting the knife for fun.

Respectfully, the optics of how it looks do not matter where criminality or lack thereof is concerned. How something looks is only important from the political angle. Furthermore, there will never be 100% belief in the report due to redactions. Even with redactions removed, some influencer will find a section or phrase damning and play it up. How do I know? Ive seen this movie before when it was Birtherism, Private Serverism and WMDism. It's the daily soap opera that many seem to love. They would never watch General Hospital but love General Politics. Keep beating the drum if it makes you happy. I hope the full report does come out. I hope closure is accomplished. I'll believe it when I see it though.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why any of you long time guys reply to LG. He seldom, if ever replies back and he only posts to try and trigger someone. He's an antagonist and his only reason for being here is to provoke.
 
#315
#315
VolStrom said:
I don't understand why any of you long time guys reply to LG. He seldom, if ever replies back and he only posts to try and trigger someone. He's an antagonist and his only reason for being here is to provoke.
Click to expand...
Valid question. I have been a part of a board where everyone had general agreement. There was no antagonist(s). That dynamic is boring. It ends up where there is very little discussion. Nothing offered to provoke thought. LG and some others serve that purpose here. Occasionally, he will let his facade crack and post something actually reasonable. So, i believe, who he pretends to be here isn't really who he is. He has interests outside of politics too and when he discusses those he's rather pleasant. He brings value to the board as a thread starter, a pot stirrer which initiates discussion. The hard part is not taking things too seriously.
 
#317
#317
McDad said:
Valid question. I have been a part of a board where everyone had general agreement. There was no antagonist(s). That dynamic is boring. It ends up where there is very little discussion. Nothing offered to provoke thought. LG and some others serve that purpose here. Occasionally, he will let his facade crack and post something actually reasonable. So, i believe, who he pretends to be here isn't really who he is. He has interests outside of politics too and when he discusses those he's rather pleasant. He brings value to the board as a thread starter, a pot stirrer which initiates discussion. The hard part is not taking things too seriously.
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree with your assessment. He's not really a lawyer, but a a serious agitator most likely living in a basement somewhere. Bless his heart.
 
#318
#318
Who am I gonna trust here, Mueller and AG Barr, or anonymous sources at the NYT.

Really tough decision here folks.
 
#324
#324
hog88 said:
Terrible that there are millions pitching another hissy fit.
Click to expand...
True, but I was talking about the millions who want to see the report with minimal redactions, not the millions blindly defending the burying of the report.
 
#325
#325
luthervol said:
True, but I was talking about the millions who want to see the report with minimal redactions, not the millions blindly defending the burying of the report.
Click to expand...
Who has said they don't want the Mueller report to be released?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top