We're getting off topic again.
If we believe the Mueller report can exonerate the President from collusion, then we must believe that the Russians are actively hacking us and prefer Trump, per the Mueller report. Correct?
Blowing whistles
- Thread starter tigers30cocks0
- Start date
If we believe the Mueller report can exonerate the President from collusion, then we must believe that the Russians are actively hacking us and prefer Trump, per the Mueller report. Correct?
Yes, I think a lot of it is a distraction. So, if one person (AG Barr) states that he believes the president was spied on and he would look into it, what does that mean to you? It seems to carry a lot more weight than anything any Democrat could say. You admit you think it’s a distraction here but constantly post things like “it’s about to all pop!” “Everything is going to crash down on the dems!” Etc...do you really think these are distractions or do you really believe the things you say?
Look at what you just did - “I do think we should work together but what about Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, etc.” You’re stuck in this thought process that the media/other actors have put you in. You’re pitted in a war against the “other side.”
I’m not sure what you’re talking about with asylum loopholes. And reducing drug prices are definitely being worked on by both sides in a big way. There are just some disagreements like conservatives seemingly wanting to protect big healthcare corps and democrats wanting to spend a lot of government money. I don’t work on this myself but I’ve actually met a good bit of people the last few months who have done polling and worked with both parties. Reducing drug prices are very high on the priority list for everyone it seems.
Last edited:
I don’t know much of anything about this. Do you just bring up random topics that are party vs party and try to argue them?
So why the distractions? Who is causing the distraction and why? If the Attorney General thinks that a sitting POTUS has been spied on; by his own country, well, that is a little more than a distraction, no? If it turns out to be not true, I'm sure Barr and Durham will let us know. They are both honorable men and have served the country well for many years. If it turns out to be true, then we have a serious issue in the country that will have serious consequences, no?
No, not at all. Since you have intimate knowledge of what's going on in DC, I thought you might have some insight as to what people in DC are saying about it.
The distractions are there so we don’t worry about the real threats and problems going on. It’s funny your rhetoric regarding Barr and Durham compared to others. Pretty subjective if you ask me.
I think if someone has illegally spied on the president then they should be prosecuted, of course. It’s just funny that Barr is “honorable” and will let us know the truth but would you give this same credibility to someone similar wanting to look into Trump’s dealing with foreign countries? Or Trump’s tax records? What if someone said, “I believe our president has put our national security at risk” or “I believe he handled his money illegally or immorally” - would you give that person the same credibility you give Barr or would you immediately say they’re a low-life loser who is out to destroy the country?
It’s hard for me to ever imagine a scenario where you don’t believe everything Trump says and believe nothing “the Democrats” say. It’s so obvious that your opinion has been shaped by the rhetoric of the media. CNN is very opinionated but it’s just as much “fake news” as most of the things you say and post here. You and the people you seem to disagree with mostly are just 2 sides of the same coin.
I have knowledge about some things going on. Not everything you would see on the news.
reading trump's twitter is comical, he is losing his marbles. Yesterday he tweeted that people should not judge him on the stock market performance since his inauguration, but instead from when he won the election, By tweeting that he basically admitted that the positive market growth was negated by his own policies. Someone smarter must have pointed that out to him, because today he blamed the poor stock market performance on the democrats impeachment push. He is all over the place.
No... Here is the way it works. The parts of the Mueller Report that exonerate the President are absolutely true. The parts that state Russian Interference and infer that the President obstructed the investigation are untrue because Mueller is part of the deep state. Just like anything the intelligence community puts forth that Trump agrees with is good information and should be acted on. Anything that Trump doesn't agree with is because they are deep state, full of traitors, and are out to get him.
While you are factually correct in what you are saying, you are dead wrong about Trump being all over the place. Trump is about Trump. Period. He will say and do ANYTHING to promote himself. That's what he does and he's absolutely consistent about this 24/7/365. Truth or Lies, Consistent or Inconsistent, Right or Wrong are not even considerations when he is making a point. If the stock market jumps to 30K tomorrow, he will take full credit for it. If it drops below 20K he'll blame the Dems or the Fed. It's what he does.
I can't imagine why people are so upset over tax returns. It's unconstitutional to try and force it. California judge just upheld it. I imagine Trump gets audited regularly. I am not worried so much about a guy who became wealthy in the private sector and then wants to serve his country. I am more concerned with people who go serve and then become wealthy; while serving.
The people currently saying that Trump "has put our national security at risk, are literally the very ones who are putting the country at risk. I've been around the block a few times. If you've never heard me say this before, this is what I think. There are only a handful of people in the entire Congress that I trust. None of them are dem. The dems are all about regaining power; by any means possible. This feaux impeachment, that you call a distraction, is hurting Trump's ability to deal with other countries. I believe everything that they've done since his election has been an attempt to remove him.
Can you see what Pelosi is doing? She is running a defacto impeachment inquiry through the House Intel Committee! A constitutional impeachment inquiry has to involve the entire House of Rep.; with a roll call vote on the House floor. By doing it this backhanded way, Adam Schiff can issue subpoenas, but the repubs on the committee cannot.
All I care about is the Constitution and those who love it, understand its importance, why it exists, and defend it. As I think I've said earlier in the thread, I have known for a long time that DC really is a swamp. I have watched seemingly good people get elected, go there for a few terms, and all of a sudden, they're no longer principled, but compromised in some way; both repubs and dems. A few years ago, I was at a function where Sen Jim Demint was one of the speakers. Jim was a kind, decent, gentle kind of guy, even if you disagreed with him politically. This was a year or so before he decided to not run again. Someone in the small group asked him a question about how bad the corruption is in DC. He hesitated momentarily, as if to choose his words carefully, and somberly stated this: However bad you can imagine it could be, it is 10x worse.
I have only been supporting Trump since the election; didn't vote for him in the primary. The reason I've grown to admire him, is he fights back against a corrupt system that is trying to railroad him out, and he gets things done.
EDIT: I do think Dem. Sen Manchin from WV is probably a good guy. And, I never trusted the Bush family regardless of the fact that they all had good personalities.
Last edited:
Why is it so far out of the realm of possibility that he has become part of the corruption you don’t like? Why is it that you take some people’s word as fact and write off others as a power grab? What if your fear of government corruption has just been a tool to galvanize people like you to vote for someone as outlandish as Trump? How have you known these interworkings so long? The republicans aren’t on some moral high ground as compared to dems and I think it’s sad that a lot of conservative’s rally cry has basically become to overthrow the power/corruption that is our US govt. It seems to me like that could be the party that wants to regain power by any means necessary (if that were happening).
Well, it's simple. The Mueller Report, as @hopefultiger13 so aptly stated, only inferred that there was Obstruction. It listed the incidents that they investigated. Weismann, who I believe was really running the investigation; Mueller was just a figure head, as demonstrated from his performance in the hearing, decided to leave the Obstruction issue "open". These people are/were, prosecutors. Prosecutors never "not exonerate" anyone. They either charge or don't charge. Barr was clear in his first appearance before the congress. He spoke of his conversation with Mueller about the fact that he punted on the Obstruction issue. Barr even stated that he asked Mueller if his refusal to make a determination was based on the DOJ rules that state a sitting Pres can't be indicted while in office. (Indicted is different than being charged). Mueller told Barr, his friend for over 30 years, that it had no bearing on it; according to Barr's testimony. Twice afterwards, Mueller in-explicitly tried to infer that the DOJ rule did affect their decision not to charge; only to have to correct himself after Barr called him down on it. So, Barr, Rosenstein and a few DOJ lawyers met to determine if the instances of potential Obstruction listed in the report, met the legal threshold for Obstruction. They unanimously agreed that it did not.
Also, in previous discussions with @hopefultiger13, he has also stated that how can someone obstruct something they are not guilty of doing?(paraphrased). Trump cooperated completely with the investigation; never once did he claim executive privilege, which is basically unprecedented. Every president I can remember has used their Constitutional right of Executive Privileged; even to the point of having a court make the determination of its appropriateness. He even exposed himself to conversations with his own WH lawyers, which is absolutely privileged conversation.
Satisfied?
I'm 63 years old. I've seen a lot. The only moral high ground that matters is the Constitution. I was basically just coming into voting age as the Watergate scandal unfolded. Just like 9/11 affected a generation of young Americans, I was pulled into the inner workings of gov;t as an 18 year old, new voter.
No one is talking about overthrowing the gov't, except in my view, those that slip around the constitution with slick words and deeds.
It was harder for the Swamp before the advent of the digital, information age. There was a time when the press' job was to be suspicious of all pols and look into everything they did and report the facts. A free press is paramount to holding people with power in check. The press is no longer free. They take sides...almost all of them. So, now the consumer of news decides what is true based on whether the source is lib or conservative. You really have to see what both sides are saying, then look at the actual happenings and find the truth in it. Believe it or not, I remember a time when you really didn't know if a reporter was lib or conservative. The danger to the country arrives when you have a large portion of the press, a portion of the intel agencies and a group of pols in high places, plotting against the constitution and the American citizenry for their own gain. Without a doubt in my mind, that's where we were going into the 2016 election. Not trying to offend any of you Obama supporters, but the fact is, Obama used intel to spy on Americans, and because it is about to be exposed, the Resistance is going full bore, any means necessary, to get him out. That's the way I see it.
What seems to be lost in all this is that the Russians actually supported Hillary Clinton to win the Presidency.
The Steele Dosier was a manufactured political document to be a smoke screen that was then used as evidence to begin the Mueller investigation.
Now this whistleblower document is another forgery.
Ive seen this on HBO.
The Steele Dosier was a manufactured political document to be a smoke screen that was then used as evidence to begin the Mueller investigation.
Now this whistleblower document is another forgery.
Ive seen this on HBO.
It's not wrong. Mueller tried to say this in his 14 minute press conference before his house testimony and had to issue a statement 20 minutes after the presser to correct it.
During his house testimony he agreed with a dem questioner that the reason he didn't charge was because of the DOJ rule. After the lunch break, he immediately made a statement to rectify what he said before lunch; regarding the DOJ rule.
Do i believe that Russians are continually trying to hack the US? Of course. Am I convinced that the Russians are the hackers of the DNC server and that the Russians preferred Trump? No, I'm not convinced. Why? Because it doesn't make sense. Even if they were the hacker, it doesn't make sense that they'd prefer Trump. Why? Because Russian oligarchs, close to Putin have donated hundreds of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation. Hillary as SEC of State showed up in Russia with a red reset button. Remember? Hillary, as SecState signed off on giving Russia access to 20% of US uranium. Why would Putin not want Hillary, and why would he want Trump? You see, it has to pass some muster for me to believe it. Hillary was the first to spout this. Brennan and Clapper said it and Clapper strong armed the lesser intel agencies into going along. The only guy who resisted it, was Adm Rogers. At this point, I couldn't believe anything Clapper and Brennan ever said. They both lied to Congress and I believe we will soon find out they did much worse.
Let me ask you a question: Did the Mueller report state that Prof. Mifsud was a Russian asset? If it does, and that is found to be false, what would that say about the entire report? Mifsud's lawyer is on record stating that Mifsud has always been a Western intel affiliate. DO you where Barr and Durham have been recently? Italy.
Just wanted to get you on record. You believe the part of the report that supports you, you don't believe the part of the report that doesn't support you.
This is how Trump gets republican support for stuff like Nationalism and makes Globalism the enemy, despite Republicans being the party of Globalism for 50 years. Reagan was the champion of Globalism, but now it's bad. Believe the stuff that supports you, find crazy conspiracy theories for the stuff that doesn't.
I get that’s how you see it but why can’t you fathom being wrong?
I also see what you’re saying about Obama but did you have any problem with the patriot act? What about this: https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1F82MK
Please just read that short article. Reuters (imo) is very unbiased. Not saying I agree or disagree with the bill but your claims are very arbitrary.
"CNN creates Zombies"
That should be hesdlines.
I think its nuts how these news organizations bend the truth. The all do it.
Just ask "How do you think this impeachment inquiry goes?
Dont rant 2 minutes with a question into an acute answer. Let the person be free willed to speak openly from their actual view.
Reagan had to unite with the globalist to pull the united states out of an economic nightmare.
But he did make sure he showed his Americanism and Nationalism thru out his 8 years.
Reagan governed as a fulcrum.
Well, we'll find out how crazy my beliefs are. I'll be here to accept the hazing.
What country has a humming economy? Is Pelosi and the dems rushing to pass USMCA?
Is their resistance hurting American business?
Every country monitors everything that crosses their borders either inbound or outbound.
For stats, to protect from viruses and diseases, new ones never heard of, all types of drugs, children being sold into slaves, and members of gangs or any jihadist.
These things we pay the govt to protect us from.
Now should mental thoughts be examined inbound and outbound the country.
If you are not doing anything illegal, does it matter?
Very good article. Yes, I was very wary of The Patriot Act. The Patriot Act is totally dependent upon good people using it as intended. There was/is always the possibility of it being used for political gain, and worse. If not for 9/11, it would have never been allowed. It is certainly a slippery slope and it needs some form of checks and balances.
Which of my claims are arbitrary? It's not my fault that Obama happened to be in power when it is being revealed. Maybe, it will also be traced back to Bush as well. I am still skeptical about the WMD intel that led up to the Iraq conflict. It wasn't just Bush that was co opted by the intel, however.
Your last sentence is the key to the Gen Flynn situation. FLynn's perfectly legal conversation with Russian Ambassador is the example of how bad actors use this to their advantage. Comey, McCabe and Strzock had the recording/transcript of the conversation. They called him up wanting a meeting. Told him he didn't need a lawyer, by Comey's own admission. Then, they tried to lead him into a perjury trap. Why? It looks like Flynn's case is about to be thrown out by a Clinton appointed judge. How many times does someone who has plead guilty get their case thrown out? What situation has to exist for this to happen? If it does happen and you are a reporter, would you not dive into it and come up with some facts going all the way back to the origins of the initial charges?
Absolutely false. Reagan was unequivocally Pro-Free Trade and Globalism. You are rewriting history.
America's most recent experiment with protectionism was a disaster for the working men and women of this country
Source: Ronald Reagan
The American people have stayed true to our heritage by rejecting the siren song of protectionism.
Source: Ronald Reagan
Today protectionism is being used by some American politicians as a cheap form of nationalism
Source: Ronald Reagan
America led the way to dismantle trade barriers and create a world trading system that set the stage for decades of unparalleled economic growth.
Source: Ronald Reagan
Yes, back in 1776, our Founding Fathers believed that free trade was worth fighting for. And we can celebrate their victory because today trade is at the core of the alliance that secure the peace and guarantee our freedom
Source: Ronald Reagan
Now we have a President using massive Tariffs to strangle the world economy. Reagan is rolling in his grave.
A few more thoughts before I have to run off for afternoon appointments.
I know your thoughts on globalism as it relates to economics. In a lot of ways, I don't disagree with basic premise. But, what do you do, when one one side apparently has a vision that we, the US, should give up national sovereignty, for globalism. The problem at our own border would be a start. There is much evidence that China has assets in our country to steal intellectual property, etc and I would say that China has bought and paid for politicians who covertly and even overtly aid them in that endeavor. Just look at how Biden portrays China, for instance. We know about the relationship with his son, John Kerry's step son and even Whitey Bulger's nephew being involved. No? A $1.5 Billion private equity fund financed by a subsidiary of The Bank of China? If only the msm was as interested in this as they were Trump wanting to build a hotel in Moscow years ago; before he was president.
At face value, I agree with everything you and especially Reagan believe. I believe that Trump believes the same. His actions on tarrifs are the only way he can fight China primarily. He is also influenced by the military which rightfully, in my view, understands that in order to remain strongest, militarily, we have to have manufacturing capacity in steel, aluminum and electronics. The Chinese are evil and not to be trusted selling us steel, aluminum or electronics, for that matter. The world is a lot different now, than during Reagan's time.
What? I said I didn’t agree nor disagree by posting that. I’m pretty sure this comes from the ability of the govt to monitor things overseas but that includes US company servers that are abroad (google, apple, etc) that contain domestic information. It was a response to “Obama using the intel community to monitor our citizens.”
Usually conservatives say terrible things about people like Obama doing this and how the federal government has overreached dramatically but it’s okay when republicans do it. It’s just hypocritical. I guarantee you wouldn’t have this argument if it were posted 4-12 years ago. Most conservatives say they are extremely pro-small government but you’re completely okay with the government monitoring everything everyone does?
Yeah, I really like Reuters. It’s my go to online news source. I wish more sites would put “OPINION” before an opinion piece so it would be easier for anyone to decipher between news and opinion. Most media outlets combine the two so much that it’s impossible to separate.
It’s arbitrary that you claimed Obama used intel to “spy” on or monitor Americans but I’m not so sure you would claim that it’s equally as obvious that both parties have done it from the Bush Admin, through the Obama years, into the Trump Admin.
These are the things (like in the article) that mostly have bipartisan support that continue to pass no matter who controls each branch of government and rarely get covered (except during the Snowden time). Some of the distractions are so US citizens don’t pay attention to this stuff. Btw I think Snowden is a huge POS but I do think Americans should have a voice in this. Almost nothing with bipartisan support gets covered..party because it wouldn’t get as many views on Fox or CNN but also because the government doesn’t want it questioned. I think Rs and Ds actually agree on 80-90% of stuff but most average people don’t talk about that or even know much about it. Maybe it’s a good thing but I’m not the one to make that call. I really have learned while working where I do that I want to make a difference in the things that matter and many times those things aren’t even close to getting covered by mainstream media.
I agree with you actually that China is evil and a lot of what you posted is true. I think Biden and know the majority of dems know this as well. Both sides want China to stop with their way of doing business.
However, tariffs are definitely not the only way to combat China.
Dude, please, Putin actually said that he preferred Trump as President publically. The investigation into Trump was well under way before the Steele document, and you don't even Know who the whistleblower is, much less whether he is a fraud or not. That's 3 things wrong that you just stated as fact.
On this we agree and as I've said on multiple occasions, Trump's policy toward China (and in fact toward all our enemies except Russia) is good. His say anything then reverse himself style is hell on wheels when dealing with countries that have used the US's adherence to the "rules" to gain an advantage over us for years. This style is less useful with our friends and domestically.
It’s very anti-American to call a likely hero a fraud. The whistleblower had obviously been vetted and each aspect of his life scrutinized by the government to determine if he was trustworthy enough to gain access to sensitive information. You literally know nothing about this person but discredit what he/she says. Shame on you.
facts-
ukranian prosecutor picked to investigate corruption.
when he gets to his office, his staff has been bought and paid for.
he fights back. papa joe says no. we want u fired. we need someone who will fight corruption in a different direction.
i bet biden's son paid some of those staff members to look the other way.
i have absolutely no proof, thats just a speculation. why was biden being paid so much for what?
change government to liberal operatives and you nailed it.
ukranian prosecutor picked to investigate corruption.
when he gets to his office, his staff has been bought and paid for.
he fights back. papa joe says no. we want u fired. we need someone who will fight corruption in a different direction.
i bet biden's son paid some of those staff members to look the other way.
i have absolutely no proof, thats just a speculation. why was biden being paid so much for what?
change government to liberal operatives and you nailed it.
crazy how these liberals on cnn spin the truth. rudy guliani is the presidents personal attorney and is acting in such a manner, he is not "the shadow sec of state"
they also say that the prosecutor was doing nothing. thats not accurate. his staff was bought and paid for. he couldnt get them to do shyt.
biden wanted a different prosecutor. one who pretended to review case then closed case. pleasing both his staff and the united states(bidens)
the prosecutor that biden wanted fired, wanted to dig deep into baurisma, all the way to interviewing biden.
hillary destroys servers- trump moves tele convos to a secure cia server. didnt destroy.
nothing there either based on precedence dems sat.
lol i do doubt that. heard schiff's staff helped write the complaint and change the form.
Lol russia today news. On ukraine and trumps opponent....
Russia is actually suceeding in indoctrination.
Latest posts
-
-
⚾ Official TI (SEASON OPENER) #11 Clemson vs. #17 Oklahoma State In-game Thread- Latest: CharlieWhitehurst
-
-
