The Robert Mueller Investigation

[henrygandorf 29,174]

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

It's a bit tiring having to re-state shit that is obvious and publicly known to the trumpkins, especially when they are just going to ask the same question again a few days later.

i still don't understand the mindset.  are they sitting behind their keyboards giggling, or are they really that brainwashed?

[retread 2,951]

3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

It's a bit tiring having to re-state shit that is obvious and publicly known to the trumpkins, especially when they are just going to ask the same question again a few days later.

Usually 2-3x per day, depending on which Trumpkins are working the morning and night shifts itt.

[Captainant 27,310]

2 hours ago, Zavala said:

Is The Hill right-wing Russia propaganda?

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/441580-nellie-ohrs-hi-honey-emails-to-doj-about-russia-collusion-should-alarm-us#.XMo3POquQ5U.twitter

 

 

That opinion writer used to be the editor in cheif of the Washington times, so that particular op-ed is at the very least right-wing garbage that opens with an oft-repeated Russian active measures phrase. But you aren't here to discuss in good faith anyways

[Chad Fuck 17,503]

5 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Why would he leave willingly?  We've made it very clear that as long as he is president, he is out of legal jeopardy.  The second he leaves office he's likely to be indicted.

Who will be our Augustus?  Fredo?  Eric Jr.?

[David Dennison 18,603]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s not like Trump’s personal attorney testified under oath that Trump wouldn’t leave peacefully.

Then he will leave by force.

Whatever.

[Eskimohorn 5,610]

The fact that people here are debating whether or not Trump would peacefully leave office, shows the level of delusion present. Come back down to planet Earth people. 

Why would we be worried?

After some laughter from the crowd, Trump continued: “I was going to joke, General, and say at least for 10 or 14 years, but we would cause bedlam if I said that, so we’ll say six.”

Trump also made a joke on the same topic last year. In a speech to Republican donors at his Mar-a-Lago estate, he praised Chinese President Xi Jinping for doing away with term limits.

Meanwhile...

“The Chinese helped Bernie Sanders win the election to spread socialism. Until Attorney General Barr and Mitch McConnell get to the bottom of it, they cannot certify the election. What planet are you living on?”- GRHorn, Nov ‘20

[David Dennison 18,603]

7 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:

“The Chinese helped Bernie Sanders win the election to spread socialism. Until Attorney General Barr and Mitch McConnell get to the bottom of it, they cannot certify the election. What planet are you living on?”- GRHorn, Nov ‘20

 

Please, please, please let this happen.

[Winona's Big Orange Bevo 197]

24 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Oh I’m not saying it’s confined to here. Just kind of disappointed to see it. 

Trump has crapped all over the principles of the government that we have held up as a standard for the rest of the world and that's what your disappointed about? WTF?!?!

[henrygandorf 29,174]

honest question for all the republicans here - trolls or otherwise.

seeing as how it's been proven that russia meddled in the election, and according to the president, they acted alone (no cooperation from the trump campaign), do you feel that trump is adequately addressing this issue to the american people?  it was essentially an attack, almost an act of war, on our democratic process, by a hostile foreign entity.  a totally non-partisan fact.

wouldn't you like to see trump on tv (or twitter) telling america that this type of aggression will not stand (man)?  wouldn't strong words and actions be necessary here to let foreign nations know that this shit isn't ok, and to let the american people know that our democracy is safe and this type of shit will not be tolerated, excused, or allowed?  shouldn't he be aggressively pursuing retribution, or at the very least legislation preventing this in the future?

i don't think all republicans are bad people, i'm related to plenty of them.  i just would like to hear an honest answer or assessment.

 

 

 

Edited May 2, 2019 by henrygandorf
typo fixin

[David Dennison 18,603]

3 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i don't think all republicans are bad people, i'm related to plenty of them.  i just would like to hear an honest answer or assessment.

And there's the rub.

[Winona's Big Orange Bevo 197]

47 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

The fact that people here are debating whether or not Trump would  _________________________, shows the level of delusion present. Come back down to planet Earth people. 

Here's a fun game for long road trips. Just fill in the blank and let the guffaws ensue!

*Warning: not to be played while driving near cliffs.

[retread 2,951]

14 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i don't think all republicans are bad people, i'm related to plenty of them.  i just would like to hear an honest answer or assessment.

I think the short answer, in part, is that many Rs view the Ds as the primary enemy of America's survival. The Clintons and the Ds have been painted as the epitome of evil for >25 years by LimbaughFox. People believe it.

From Limbaugh

Quote

RUSH: Let me tell you why you can’t wrap your head around this. By the way your observation of the past is right on the money and it wasn’t that long ago. When a party lost the presidency, they looked inward and say, “What did we do wrong?” They accept the results of the American people. The American people’s decision mattered, what the American public opinion was mattered. And if you were rejected, then you had to go look at yourself and figure out what you’d done wrong and try to fix it the next time around.

And even if that wasn’t exactly what went on, it was still the illusion, and that’s what most voters thought, that there was an understanding that power is gonna be shared, that nobody wins everything. You’re asking, what’s happened to the Democrats?

The Democrats now want to rule America after having destroyed it, and you’re asking yourself what’s there gonna be to rule? Where’s the playground if they’re gonna tear it apart and destroy it, what do they want to rule over? And so that’s a big intellectual disconnect. You can’t understand wanting to control what you are destroying. Like would you want to live in your house after you’ve burned it down? No.

CALLER: Exactly.

RUSH: The reason this is hard to understand and the reason it’s hard for a lot of people who are not ideologically oriented is that people don’t understand what’s happened to the Democrat Party. And they don’t understand, in the process, what has happened to Washington. The Democrat Party has transformed, and it has been under the influence that has been increasing over the years of a socialist, almost a Marxist way of thinking.

The Democrat Party implanted literal Marxist and communists in universities as professors and presidents. Natural leaning progressives and leftists have been in charge of pop culture, you know, what’s on TV and what isn’t, what’s in the news and what isn’t, what books are published and which aren’t. This has been going on for 50 or more years. And it’s just now coming to a head.

The effort to influence and take over the Democrat Party by international socialists has reached the point now where it has become obvious. Twenty years ago we were warning people this was happening. Thirty years ago I was trying to get people to understand where they were headed, but I was thought of as an extremist, using too much shock therapy. But that is what is happening.

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2019/05/02/why-dont-we-learn-historys-lessons-on-socialism/

Edited May 2, 2019 by retread

[Tyler Durden 132]

3 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Barr didn’t show up today. From what I read on The Hill he said he would show if they had the standard questioning involved in all similar hearings. Pretty simple. 

Are you trying to fill the completely unneeded role of someone who is completely clueless but still offers commentary?  When not asking endless questions, your thoughts on the level of American Voices from the Onion.  At least those are funny.  

[elguapo 4,583]

honest question for all the republicans here - trolls or otherwise.
seeing as how it's been proven that russia meddled in the election, and according to the president, they acted alone (no cooperation from the trump campaign), do you feel that trump is adequately addressing this issue to the american people?  it was essentially an attack, almost an act of war, on our democratic process, by a hostile foreign entity.  a totally non-partisan fact.
wouldn't you like to see trump on tv (or twitter) telling america that this type of aggression will not stand (man)?  wouldn't strong words and actions be necessary here to let foreign nations know that this shit isn't ok, and to let the american people know that our democracy is safe and this type of shit will not be tolerated, excused, or allowed?  shouldn't he be aggressively pursuing retribution, or at the very least legislation preventing this in the future?
i don't think all republicans are bad people, i'm related to plenty of them.  i just would like to hear an honest answer or assessment.
 
 
 

[jimmyjazz 45,513]

47 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Based on what?

Jesus Christ.  You're the worst.

[David Dennison 18,603]

6 minutes ago, retread said:

I think the short answer, in part, is that many Rs view the Ds as the primary enemy of America's survival. The Clintons and the Ds have been painted as the epitome of evil for >25 years by LimbaughFox. People believe it.

From Limbaugh

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2019/05/02/why-dont-we-learn-historys-lessons-on-socialism/

Translation: The Democratic Party is the primary enemy to white rule in America.

[UpperWestside 6,104]

54 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

the 14 open investigations and the ola policy being lifted.

sorry, was that a serious question?

He's just asking questions. 

[Zavala 1,384]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Translation: The Democratic Party is the primary enemy to white rule in America.

 

I'm curious DD, are Jewish people (AIPAC) white?

[Anastasis 23,375]

Another NYT flushing out another aspect of Horowitz's pending OIG report.  FBI ran a honeypot at Papadopoulos in London.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/us/politics/fbi-government-investigator-trump.html

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Another NYT flushing out another aspect of Horowitz's pending OIG report.  FBI ran a honeypot at Papadopoulos in London.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/us/politics/fbi-government-investigator-trump.html

You mean they investigated a credible lead on a crime.

The horror.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

 

[babysdaddy 2,711]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

honest question for all the republicans here - trolls or otherwise.

seeing as how it's been proven that russia meddled in the election, and according to the president, they acted alone (no cooperation from the trump campaign), do you feel that trump is adequately addressing this issue to the american people?  it was essentially an attack, almost an act of war, on our democratic process, by a hostile foreign entity.  a totally non-partisan fact.

wouldn't you like to see trump on tv (or twitter) telling america that this type of aggression will not stand (man)?  wouldn't strong words and actions be necessary here to let foreign nations know that this shit isn't ok, and to let the american people know that our democracy is safe and this type of shit will not be tolerated, excused, or allowed?  shouldn't he be aggressively pursuing retribution, or at the very least legislation preventing this in the future?

i don't think all republicans are bad people, i'm related to plenty of them.  i just would like to hear an honest answer or assessment.

 

 

 

Off the top of my head, my opinion is campaigns, news media, etc. had much more of an effect on voters than Russian meddling.  Mentioning it as an act of war comes off as hyperbole.  Off the top of my head, when the Chinese hacked and stole 21.5 million records in 2015 that could be construed as an act of war.  Facebook and twitter trolls?  Come on.  I also believe that the Russian fb ads/memes did not alter votes or change minds. 

But setting that aside, has he done enough to address the issue? Not at all.  He should be hammering them publicly and privately about it.  I think he's been tougher on Russia than he gets credit for but not vocal or tough enough about the bullshit they pulled.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

 

3 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

Off the top of my head, my opinion is campaigns, news media, etc. had much more of an effect on voters than Russian meddling

Do you not see how the Russians manipulated the media and the campaigns with the stolen emails? 

Literally the most covered topic in the election was Hillary’s stolen emails, which, unconfirmed at the time, was part of a covert Russian Military Intelligence operation to interfere in the election. 

[henrygandorf 29,174]

3 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

Off the top of my head, my opinion is campaigns, news media, etc. had much more of an effect on voters than Russian meddling.  Mentioning it as an act of war comes off as hyperbole.  Off the top of my head, when the Chinese hacked and stole 21.5 million records in 2015 that could be construed as an act of war.  Facebook and twitter trolls?  Come on.  I also believe that the Russian fb ads/memes did not alter votes or change minds. 

But setting that aside, has he done enough to address the issue? Not at all.  He should be hammering them publicly and privately about it.  I think he's been tougher on Russia than he gets credit for but not vocal or tough enough about the bullshit they pulled.  

i don't care what it was or if it worked or what other countries have done it before.  i'm also not blaming the election results on the russian meddling (i've said that a number of times) or even claiming their effectiveness.

the mueller report states "the russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion."

to me, that sounds like more than fb ads and memes, and i'd like to see more from this president (especially if he is totally blameless in all this like he claims) to ensure the american people that it's not ok. 

but i am glad you agree he should be hammering them on it (since nobody from the gop is saying this).  it seems to me that he's more wrapped up in "beating the democrats" than keeping our democracy safe, and that should be alarming to people on both sides of the aisle.

[babysdaddy 2,711]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Do you not see how the Russians manipulated the media and the campaigns with the stolen emails? 

Literally the most covered topic in the election was Hillary’s stolen emails, which, unconfirmed at the time, was part of a covert Russian Military Intelligence operation to interfere in the election. 

Off the top of my head, I don't recall anything in those emails of substance.  They were Podesta's (not Hillary's) and it was a lot of bullshit, wasn't it?  I remember that Donna Brazille was caught up feeding her questions from those but that's it.

 

The "Hillary emails" were more about the server she had when she was secretary of state that was set up purposefully to avoid FOIA requests.  I'm sure you remember that and that you, of all people, wouldn't be trying to conflate the two.

[David Dennison 18,603]

2 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

The "Hillary emails" were more about the server she had when she was secretary of state that was set up purposefully to avoid FOIA requests.  I'm sure you remember that and that you, of all people, wouldn't be trying to conflate the two.

Why didn't Trump's DOJ do anything about it?

[babysdaddy 2,711]

Just now, henrygandorf said:

i don't care what it was or if it worked or what other countries have done it before.  i'm also not blaming the election results on the russian meddling (i've said that a number of times) or even claiming their effectiveness.

the mueller report states "the russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion."

to me, that sounds like more than fb ads and memes, and i'd like to see more from this president (especially if he is totally blameless in all this like he claims) to ensure the american people that it's not ok. 

but i am glad you agree he should be hammering them on it (since nobody from the gop is saying this).  it seems to me that he's more wrapped up in "beating the democrats" than keeping our democracy safe, and that should be alarming to people on both sides of the aisle.

of course he is.  never admit defeat or weakness is how he's always been.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

A good take on the bigger picture:

As the political world struggles to digest the enormity of Attorney General William P. Barr’s profound corruption of his role on President Trump’s behalf, it’s worth stepping back and surveying a distilled version of what we know, now that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s redacted report has been released:

• Russia launched a massive attack on our political system, undermining the integrity of our elections, to elect Donald Trump president.
• U.S. law enforcement launched an investigation primarily aimed at getting to the bottom of that attack so that we could fully reckon with what happened and ensure the integrity of future elections.
• Trump tried in multiple ways to derail that accounting of this massive attack on our political system — and then tried to bury the truth about that derailment effort — in a manner that was at best corrupt, and at worst criminal.

The simplest way to understand much of what Barr has done — and what Trumpworld will be doing to impede inquiries going forward — is that it’s mainly aimed at obscuring the broad contours of that larger story.

The point here is not that everything they’re doing is deliberately aimed at this end. It’s that this bigger story is at the center of everything — and by “biggest crime of all,” I mean Trump’s most monstrous wrong — and thus efforts to keep smaller truths from coming out will inevitably be about obscuring that larger story.

Here’s how:

The Barr summary. Barr’s summary quoted the Mueller report’s claim that he had not established criminal conspiracy, but Barr omitted the sentence fragment saying the Trump campaign “expected” to “benefit” from Russian help. Barr also took Mueller’s words out of context to omit the conclusion that Trump was motivated to obstruct the investigation because it “would call into question the legitimacy of his election” by spotlighting Russian interference.

This allowed Trump to claim total exoneration on the details, but on that larger story as well: It obscured Trump and his campaign’s embrace of Russian interference and his extensive efforts to prevent an accounting of it. We now know Mueller was deeply concerned that this had profoundly misled the public about the gravity of what he had found, that is, in a big-picturemanner.

Barr’s clearance of Trump on obstruction.At the hearing, Barr engaged in extraordinary verbal gymnastics to argue that, when Trump ordered former White House counsel Donald McGahn to get Mueller fired — which he then pressed McGahn to lie about — he didn’t actually quite mean that.

This is deeply questionable, because in this case, Mueller flatly concluded there was “substantial evidence” Trump had acted with corrupt intent, “to deflect or prevent further scrutiny.” But as legal experts tell Carol D. Leonnig, what’s crucial here is that Barr went beyond claiming Trump shouldn’t have been indicted, per Justice Department policy, and strained to argue that the underlying misconduct itself was no big deal.

Similarly, in a big moment, Barr declared Trump could terminate the investigation if he believed he was being “falsely accused,” and it wouldn’t display “corrupt intent.” This basically puts Trump above the law, but, like the above example, it also clears Trump of the underlying misconduct — Trump’s efforts to derail an investigation into a Russian attack on our election were no biggie, because he decreed he’d been unfairly swept up in that investigation.

Barr’s constant efforts to downplay the importance of the original investigation itselfare important to keep in mind. Which leads us to...

The replacement narrative. When Barr validates Trump’s conspiracy theories about “spying” on his campaign, he’s propping up the alt-narrative that Trumpworld has been spinning — that the investigation was illegitimately aimed at removing Trump, and that investigators corruptly overlooked the real criminal — Hillary Clinton.

The idea that there was no legitimate basis for the probe is a backdoor way of saying that the Russian assault on our political system, irrespective of any criminal conspiracy with it, was not worth investigating (and by extension, that tacit Trumpworld collusion with it is also no biggie).

Indeed, Barr has basically copped to all those things. At the hearing, Barr validated the ideathat Clinton may have been the real colluder, cast doubt on the investigation’s genesis, and even declined to say that the Trump campaign’s embrace of Russian help mattered.

Many Republicans are all in with this narrative, which you saw when GOP senators used the hearing to steer the subject back to Clinton as the real colluder and the deep-state plot against Trump.

What’s stunning about all this is that Barr does not appear to be a conspiracy theorist. He’s playing footsie with this alt-narrative for cynical instrumental purposes, and these other Republicans probably are as well.

The coming obstruction. Imagine Mueller testifying to Congress about the relative merits of the real narrative (Trump corruptly impeded an investigation into an attack on our election and then tried to cover that up) versus the alt-narrative (deep-state coup), and you see why Barr is reluctant to agree to a date for Mueller’s testimony.

Similarly, the White House might try to block McGahn from testifying — since he might vividly inform the public on the true nature of Trump’s efforts to impede that investigation into Russian sabotage.

Meanwhile, Trump’s blockading of Democratic efforts to access his finances — through closeting his tax returns and lawsuits against outside entities — may be about obscuring foreign financial entanglements, an apparent target of Democratic investigations.

Trump continues to refuse to acknowledge the Russian attack ever happened, because so doing would diminish the greatness of his victory. Worse, this has cramped the government’s efforts to combat the next attack. Barr is helping to quasi-validate this, while minimizing Trump’s corrupt and likely criminal efforts to bury a reckoning with all of it.

It’s doubtful that this will all go according to plan. There are too many constraints built into the system. There are too many ongoing investigations for Trump to outrun. But we should be clear about what’s being attempted: The stage is set for an investigation of the investigators, and the supplanting of a real crime with a fictional one.

Edited May 2, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[David Dennison 18,603]

1 minute ago, babysdaddy said:

of course he is.  never admit defeat or weakness is how he's always been.  

Which, ironically, shows both defeat and weakness.

[henrygandorf 29,174]

2 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

of course he is.  never admit defeat or weakness is how he's always been.  

all the more reason to get in front of america, shake your fist, and tell the world that russia will not get away with it.

we're frustrated because trump can get away with whatever he wants.  isn't trump frustrated that russia can get away with whatever they want?  or is it just "lulz that was obama's fault"?  doesn't he love america more than anyone?  patriotism, nationalism, etc?  you would think someone in his position with his personality would want to bully anyone who thought they could meddle in america's business.

doing nothing makes him look weak or complicit, don't you think?

[hayden_horn 11,360]

4 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

all the more reason to get in front of america, shake your fist, and tell the world that russia will not get away with it.

we're frustrated because trump can get away with whatever he wants.  isn't trump frustrated that russia can get away with whatever they want?  or is it just "lulz that was obama's fault"?  doesn't he love america more than anyone?  patriotism, nationalism, etc?  you would think someone in his position with his personality would want to bully anyone who thought they could meddle in america's business.

doing nothing makes him look weak or complicit, don't you think?

narrarator: eventually, america came to understand the president was completely complicit. 

[American Swindle 102]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

A good take on the bigger picture:

 

 

 

Isn't "Huge Attack" kind of embellishing a bit?  I find it a bit ironic that the we've been meddling forever in other country's affairs and we currently have people like Hugo all over the country doubling down on the Russian hysteria for some two-bit trolling done that was compared to "Pearl Harbor" from folks like Jerry Nadler.  It sounds a little loony and demands a big tin-foil hat.

 

 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

 

[Winona's Big Orange Bevo 197]

3 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

 

Isn't "Huge Attack" kind of embellishing a bit?  I find it a bit ironic that the we've been meddling forever in other country's affairs and we currently have people like Hugo all over the country doubling down on the Russian hysteria for some two-bit trolling done that was compared to "Pearl Harbor" from folks like Jerry Nadler.  It sounds a little loony and demands a big tin-foil hat.

 

 

 

username checks out

[Lagunamadre 1,975]

4 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

 

Isn't "Huge Attack" kind of embellishing a bit?  I find it a bit ironic that the we've been meddling forever in other country's affairs and we currently have people like Hugo all over the country doubling down on the Russian hysteria for some two-bit trolling done that was compared to "Pearl Harbor" from folks like Jerry Nadler.  It sounds a little loony and demands a big tin-foil hat.

 

 

 

You should read Vol. 1 of the Mueller report. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

6 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

 

Isn't "Huge Attack" kind of embellishing a bit?  I find it a bit ironic that the we've been meddling forever in other country's affairs and we currently have people like Hugo all over the country doubling down on the Russian hysteria for some two-bit trolling done that was compared to "Pearl Harbor" from folks like Jerry Nadler.  It sounds a little loony and demands a big tin-foil hat.

Funny, this is exactly what the Russians say about it while they celebrate the most successful Intelligence operation in their history.

Me and Robert Mueller are the crazy ones now. 

Edited May 2, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[henrygandorf 29,174]

5 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

Isn't "Huge Attack" kind of embellishing a bit? 

it's a bit hyperbolic.  it's not pearl harbor.

i'm comfortable with the mueller report's "the russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion."

doesn't change the overall story at all.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

1 minute ago, henrygandorf said:

it's a bit hyperbolic.  it's not pearl harbor.

i'm comfortable with the mueller report's "the russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion."

doesn't change the overall story at all.

We are still under attack.  Don’t take my word for it though.  Just wait another five years for another fucking report that says we got screwed by Russia again. 

[TexEx15 17,444]

10 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

 

Isn't "Huge Attack" kind of embellishing a bit?  I find it a bit ironic that the we've been meddling forever in other country's affairs...

 

 

 

Because we try to help other countries avoid electing idiots not qualified to run the country....  Now that I think about it maybe Russia was just a little late with its meddling.

[henrygandorf 29,174]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

We are still under attack.  Don’t take my word for it though.  Just wait another five years for another fucking report that says we got screwed by Russia again. 

the opposition nit-picks word choices.  i don't need to change anything to get my point across.  the sentence in the mueller report would be absolutely horrifying in any other circumstance.

[babysdaddy 2,711]

Just now, henrygandorf said:

all the more reason to get in front of america, shake your fist, and tell the world that russia will not get away with it.

we're frustrated because trump can get away with whatever he wants.  isn't trump frustrated that russia can get away with whatever they want?  or is it just "lulz that was obama's fault"?  doesn't he love america more than anyone?  patriotism, nationalism, etc?  you would think someone in his position with his personality would want to bully anyone who thought they could meddle in america's business.

doing nothing makes him look weak or complicit, don't you think?

I do.  Just guessing but I think he views it like this, if I come off too strong against the Russians then it looks like I'm trying too hard to be tough because of the investigation, even though I did not conspire with them.  I think he always wanted to play 'nice' with them, even before he started running, because he wanted to pull back from any international conflicts.  A hopelessly naive position, imo.  

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

7 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

I do.  Just guessing but I think he views it like this, if I come off too strong against the Russians then it looks like I'm trying too hard to be tough because of the investigation, even though I did not conspire with them.  I think he always wanted to play 'nice' with them, even before he started running, because he wanted to pull back from any international conflicts.  A hopelessly naive position, imo.  

 

It’s not so much about hurting Russia that is important, it’s about defending against future attacks that will make the most difference.  The first step towards that goal is acknowledging and understanding exactly what they did.  Trump refuses to do this and it is a betrayal of the American people when he neglects his responsibility to protect the United States.  This is why I call him a traitor.  He has put himself over the country in the most treacherous way possible.

We could put a full embargo on Russia and they’re not going to stop hitting us with information warfare and cyber attacks.  

Why would they stop attacking when the attacks are working so well? 

Edited May 2, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[David Dennison 18,603]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s not so much about hurting Russia that is important, it’s about defending against future attacks that will make the most difference.  The first step towards that goal is acknowledging and understanding exactly what they did.  Trump refuses to do this and it is a betrayal of the American people when he neglects his responsibility to protect the United States.  This is why I call him a traitor.  He has put himself over the country in the most treacherous way possible.

We could put a full embargo on Russia and they’re not going to stop hitting us with information warfare and cyber attacks.  

Why would they stop attacking when the attacks are working so well? 

How would you stop the information warfare?

[American Swindle 102]

25 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Because we try to help other countries avoid electing idiots not qualified to run the country....  Now that I think about it maybe Russia was just a little late with its meddling.

American Empire is a big threat to liberty, at home and abroad.  

[David Dennison 18,603]

26 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Because we try to help other countries avoid electing idiots not qualified to run the country....  Now that I think about it maybe Russia was just a little late with its meddling.

Wait, what?

[Rimbo 25,752]

William Barr Shows Up To Congress To Testify At 3 A.M. After Reading Email Wrong

Spoiler

WASHINGTON—Slowly realizing that he had made a big mistake, Attorney General William Barr reportedly showed up to Congress to testify at 3 a.m. Thursday after reading an email wrong. “Oh man, I really screwed the pooch,” said the attorney general, who opened a briefcase full of evidence and prepared to fully cooperate with any requests or questions from House Democrats, before taking out his phone and furiously scrolling through his email app to find that he had misread the time of the planned testimony as the custodial staff began vacuuming around him. “I definitely thought it was weird that the hearing was so late, but I know Congress has been super busy, so I figured I should just set my alarm to 2 a.m. and grab some coffee on the way. I double- and triple-checked the location, but man, I really goofed up.” At press time, Barr just quietly said “Trump obstructed” to the empty chamber.

 

 

 

[Rimbo 25,752]

32 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

the opposition nit-picks word choices.  i don't need to change anything to get my point across.  the sentence in the mueller report would be absolutely horrifying in any other circumstance.

almost as bad as Peacock's 4th-inning pitching

[henrygandorf 29,174]

something something game of thrones something something adjusted the mode on your tv to watch the barr hearing.

[Brian Fantana 6,654]

3 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Based on what?

On crimes you fucking moron. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crime

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

20 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

How would you stop the information warfare?

You can’t stop it but you can do a whole lot to mitigate its influence and impact.  Countries like Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Estonia have been successfully combating Russian information operations for years.  They do this by having nonpartisan and multi-partisan leadership in their government work together to educate their populations on the threats/tactics and also invest in things like media literacy and disinformation identification services.  

In other words, they take it seriously because it is a matter of life and death for them if left unchecked.  Their private sector and business leaders also take it seriously.  

Edited May 2, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz