Archive 2017-2019 Political Thread

[gangstonc]

Evan, list the names of those indicted for collusion or obstruction ? Thank you!

Roger stone was charged with obstruction. Lying is a form of obstruction. There have been a few charged with that. What was most of the lying about? Meetings with Russians: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ort-robert-mueller-russia-trump-2016-campaign

Collusion isn’t even a legal term and was no part of what Mueller was meant to investigate.

 

[JayF]

Look you two have beat the Mueller report with a dead horse. I think now even Republicans and Democrats are starting to come to this page to get their talking points because the two of you have spouted on about this for to long now. The News has passed you by and their are many other things going on right now. I don't care if you agree with the report or not. Nothing you say is going to change the current outcome.

Hope you two have a great day!

 

[gangstonc]

Look you two have beat the Mueller report with a dead horse. I think now even Republicans and Democrats are starting to come to this page to get their talking points because the two of you have spouted on about this for to long now. The News has passed you by and their are many other things going on right now. I don't care if you agree with the report or not. Nothing you say is going to change the current outcome.

Hope you two have a great day!

the report is very much in the news.

It’s also fun to talk about.

 

[KoD]

Evan, list the names of those indicted for collusion or obstruction ? Thank you!

I don't know if you're asking an empty question to make a point or truly asking for evidence, but it's ridiculous to read either way given your responses over the past couple years. Unsubstantiated short responses, a right wing version of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez if not more radical and brainwashed. I'm not trying to be ugly, I'm just calling it how I see it... And I've been on the radical side of things before so it's from experience. I've been victim to Fox News propaganda and internet Liberal extremism. I just wonder if you realize how far displaced you are from looking at things unbiased and rationally.

 

[JayF]

Last thing I have to say about the Mueller Report LOL

 

[maroonedinhsv]

I don't know if you're asking an empty question to make a point or truly asking for evidence, but it's ridiculous to read either way given your responses over the past couple years. Unsubstantiated short responses, a right wing version of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez if not more radical and brainwashed. I'm not trying to be ugly, I'm just calling it how I see it... And I've been on the radical side of things before so it's from experience. I've been victim to Fox News propaganda and internet Liberal extremism. I just wonder if you realize how far displaced you are from looking at things unbiased and rationally.

On the contrary, he feels that he is the only person who is actually behaving in this manner.

 

[gangstonc]

 

[Evan]

Evan, list the names of those indicted for collusion or obstruction ? Thank you!

Not sure I understand the question. Can you refer me to the federal stature that says collusion is a crime? Perhaps you meant conspiracy. On that charge, Mueller says his investigation was hindered by witnesses and Trump campaign members that took the 5th, provided false or incomplete testimony, deleted records/communications or used encrypted/quickly expiring messaging applications that prevented the Mueller team from reviewing their communications.



As it pertains to obstruction, we've already discussed this ad-nauseam. Emphasis on the nausea. Trump couldn't be indicted because of the OLC memo, and Mueller refused to accuse him of a crime because of the Constitutional and fairness concerns this would invoke.

Let me ask you a question, Matt. How many Presidents named Donald Trump were exonerated by Mueller? I have your answer: zero.

 

[Evan]

Last thing I have to say about the Mueller Report LOL

View attachment 1801

Considering only about 3% of Americans have read the Mueller report (according to polling) he must be in the 97%.

Or like the lady from Justin Amash's townhall...

 

[Evan]

the report is very much in the news.

It’s also fun to talk about.

Barr is a liar. He's so in the tank for Trump that even Eric Holder is like: woah, woah, even I wasn't that much of a wingman.

It's kind of amazing that out of our last 4 confirmed Attorneys General that Jeff Sessions is the least corrupt and has the most integrity.

 

[gangstonc]

Barr is a liar. He's so in the tank for Trump that even Eric Holder is like: woah, woah, even I wasn't that much of a wingman.

It's kind of amazing that out of our last 4 confirmed Attorneys General that Jeff Sessions is the least corrupt and has the most integrity.

I agree with you 100%. Sessions is a terrible human being. He lied to my face. But he’s the best we’ve had in a while. He was also knowledgeable. I would consider voting for him.

 

[Arcadia]

Wow, okay. I didn't realize the job of a prosecutor was to exonerate the person they were investigating. I thought the job of a prosecutor was to investigate, obtain evidence, and based on that evidence decide whether to move forward with legal proceedings and charge the person with a crime or not. When did we change the role of a prosecutor to guilty until proven exonerated? Seriously, when did that happen? The role of Robert Mueller was of a prosecutor. Am I wrong here? No, I'm not. I looked it up. At the end of the day, he was supposed to make a decision; either bring charges or drop the matter. Evan, I respect you, I do, but I do not agree with your analysis on this matter at all. Not at all. If you think Barr acted outside his purview and is Trump's wingman then you have every right to your opinion. But frankly, I believe Mueller is the one acting outside his purview here and here is why I believe so:

Since he said his hands were tied by the OLC's opinion and was restricted from making a decision about obstruction, then why was he wasting time investigating a case he had no hope seeing through to its natural end as a prosecutor? And why was he able to make a decision about the conspiracy aspect of the case and determine there wasn't enough evidence, yet obstruction was a no-go? If he couldn't make a decision one way or the other, then what are we doing here? Preserving memory he said. Memory for what? To be charged later? Not likely. I think we all know he was collecting evidence to be used against the president outside the criminal justice system as he so stated as one of his reasons in his statement for going forward with his investigation. But that was not his job, because he works within the criminal justice system. He was to investigate criminal activity. His was a criminal investigation. Instead, as it turns out, all this time, Bob Mueller has been engaged in a political investigation on behalf of congress to give them a road map to impeachment. I mean, he gave it to them on a platter. That's the entire point of Volume II of the Mueller report. He wants impeachment. He's like... There, Congress. I've done your job for you. I'm going home now. Don't bother me. And I guess people are okay with this since they hate the target-- Trump. But I'm not okay with this. I'm not okay with this new standard of "that if we were confident someone had not committed a crime, we would have said so." If the new standard in our criminal justice system is going to now be that prosecutors say.... "I can't clear this guy so he must be guilty" then we got serious problems. We're planting the burden of innocence on the shoulders of the accused now. But it's Trump so who cares? He's probably guilty, right? He's despicable. I mean, anyone who read the impeachment road map, I mean the Mueller report would see firsthand how Trump is lacking the plastic thingy hold his six pack together. So the ends must justify the means. To some I guess they do. But the way I see things, they don't. I also find it so damn hypocritical for Mueller to say how unfair it would be to potentially accuse someone of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the charge. Yet, that is exactly what he has potentially done here. Accused without charging. Is he guilty of obstruction? Maybe. Maybe not. If you google search 'intent obstruction of justice' all things related to Trump and the Mueller report pulls up and the question..."is Trump guilty of obstruction?" with a litany of "it's complicated" answers. Because, as it turns out, it's actually pretty damn complicated. A lot of legal minds are conflicted. You, however, are one hundred percent convinced Trump is guilty of obstruction, thanks to Mueller's report. He has aired out all of Trump's dirty laundry and has given Trump no recourse to defend himself. I mean, am I the only one trying to wrap my head around this logic? If you can't charge a sitting president and you are soooo beholden to OLC's opinion then why would you do this to someone? It's literally talking out of both sides of your mouth. I understand he had to write a report, but if he truly believed what he said, this report wouldn't have been made public. But he wanted it public. Barr, made it public because if he didn't make it public people would be calling for his head even more than they are now. This is all politics. It always comes down to f'n politics. And I'm so sick of it.

I think it's safe to say we are at an impasse here, my friend, unless one of us changes our mind. And that isn't likely.

 

[gangstonc]

Isn’t it possible that they both aren’t doing their jobs well?

 

[Matt]

Wow, okay. I didn't realize the job of a prosecutor was to exonerate the person they were investigating. I thought the job of a prosecutor was to investigate, obtain evidence, and based on that evidence decide whether to move forward with legal proceedings and charge the person with a crime or not. When did we change the role of a prosecutor to guilty until proven exonerated? Seriously, when did that happen? The role of Robert Mueller was of a prosecutor. Am I wrong here? No, I'm not. I looked it up. At the end of the day, he was supposed to make a decision; either bring charges or drop the matter. Evan, I respect you, I do, but I do not agree with your analysis on this matter at all. Not at all. If you think Barr acted outside his purview and is Trump's wingman then you have every right to your opinion. But frankly, I believe Mueller is the one acting outside his purview here and here is why I believe so:

Since he said his hands were tied by the OLC's opinion and was restricted from making a decision about obstruction, then why was he wasting time investigating a case he had no hope seeing through to its natural end as a prosecutor? And why was he able to make a decision about the conspiracy aspect of the case and determine there wasn't enough evidence, yet obstruction was a no-go? If he couldn't make a decision one way or the other, then what are we doing here? Preserving memory he said. Memory for what? To be charged later? Not likely. I think we all know he was collecting evidence to be used against the president outside the criminal justice system as he so stated as one of his reasons in his statement for going forward with his investigation. But that was not his job, because he works within the criminal justice system. He was to investigate criminal activity. His was a criminal investigation. Instead, as it turns out, all this time, Bob Mueller has been engaged in a political investigation on behalf of congress to give them a road map to impeachment. I mean, he gave it to them on a platter. That's the entire point of Volume II of the Mueller report. He wants impeachment. He's like... There, Congress. I've done your job for you. I'm going home now. Don't bother me. And I guess people are okay with this since they hate the target-- Trump. But I'm not okay with this. I'm not okay with this new standard of "that if we were confident someone had not committed a crime, we would have said so." If the new standard in our criminal justice system is going to now be that prosecutors say.... "I can't clear this guy so he must be guilty" then we got serious problems. We're planting the burden of innocence on the shoulders of the accused now. But it's Trump so who cares? He's probably guilty, right? He's despicable. I mean, anyone who read the impeachment road map, I mean the Mueller report would see firsthand how Trump is lacking the plastic thingy hold his six pack together. So the ends must justify the means. To some I guess they do. But the way I see things, they don't. I also find it so damn hypocritical for Mueller to say how unfair it would be to potentially accuse someone of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the charge. Yet, that is exactly what he has potentially done here. Accused without charging. Is he guilty of obstruction? Maybe. Maybe not. If you google search 'intent obstruction of justice' all things related to Trump and the Mueller report pulls up and the question..."is Trump guilty of obstruction?" with a litany of "it's complicated" answers. Because, as it turns out, it's actually pretty damn complicated. A lot of legal minds are conflicted. You, however, are one hundred percent convinced Trump is guilty of obstruction, thanks to Mueller's report. He has aired out all of Trump's dirty laundry and has given Trump no recourse to defend himself. I mean, am I the only one trying to wrap my head around this logic? If you can't charge a sitting president and you are soooo beholden to OLC's opinion then why would you do this to someone? It's literally talking out of both sides of your mouth. I understand he had to write a report, but if he truly believed what he said, this report wouldn't have been made public. But he wanted it public. Barr, made it public because if he didn't make it public people would be calling for his head even more than they are now. This is all politics. It always comes down to f'n politics. And I'm so sick of it.

I think it's safe to say we are at an impasse here, my friend, unless one of us changes our mind. And that isn't likely.

Exactly right. You said what I have been trying to say for a long time. Thank you!

 

[gangstonc]

He’s a child:

 

[Kory]

CNN is running with the story of the Virginia shooter using a suppressor on his handgun. You mean, registering it with the ATF and paying a tax stamp didn’t stop that mass shooting? Why is the ATF involved with that if it doesn’t prevent these shootings? Is the ATF a useless piece of government bureaucracy?

 

[Kory]

An absolute moron.

 

[gangstonc]

Why is Emmett Flood resigning?

Is it because his work is done or because there is nothing he can do?

 

[ARCC]

Wow, okay. I didn't realize the job of a prosecutor was to exonerate the person they were investigating. I thought the job of a prosecutor was to investigate, obtain evidence, and based on that evidence decide whether to move forward with legal proceedings and charge the person with a crime or not. When did we change the role of a prosecutor to guilty until proven exonerated? Seriously, when did that happen? The role of Robert Mueller was of a prosecutor. Am I wrong here? No, I'm not. I looked it up. At the end of the day, he was supposed to make a decision; either bring charges or drop the matter. Evan, I respect you, I do, but I do not agree with your analysis on this matter at all. Not at all. If you think Barr acted outside his purview and is Trump's wingman then you have every right to your opinion. But frankly, I believe Mueller is the one acting outside his purview here and here is why I believe so:

Since he said his hands were tied by the OLC's opinion and was restricted from making a decision about obstruction, then why was he wasting time investigating a case he had no hope seeing through to its natural end as a prosecutor? And why was he able to make a decision about the conspiracy aspect of the case and determine there wasn't enough evidence, yet obstruction was a no-go? If he couldn't make a decision one way or the other, then what are we doing here? Preserving memory he said. Memory for what? To be charged later? Not likely. I think we all know he was collecting evidence to be used against the president outside the criminal justice system as he so stated as one of his reasons in his statement for going forward with his investigation. But that was not his job, because he works within the criminal justice system. He was to investigate criminal activity. His was a criminal investigation. Instead, as it turns out, all this time, Bob Mueller has been engaged in a political investigation on behalf of congress to give them a road map to impeachment. I mean, he gave it to them on a platter. That's the entire point of Volume II of the Mueller report. He wants impeachment. He's like... There, Congress. I've done your job for you. I'm going home now. Don't bother me. And I guess people are okay with this since they hate the target-- Trump. But I'm not okay with this. I'm not okay with this new standard of "that if we were confident someone had not committed a crime, we would have said so." If the new standard in our criminal justice system is going to now be that prosecutors say.... "I can't clear this guy so he must be guilty" then we got serious problems. We're planting the burden of innocence on the shoulders of the accused now. But it's Trump so who cares? He's probably guilty, right? He's despicable. I mean, anyone who read the impeachment road map, I mean the Mueller report would see firsthand how Trump is lacking the plastic thingy hold his six pack together. So the ends must justify the means. To some I guess they do. But the way I see things, they don't. I also find it so damn hypocritical for Mueller to say how unfair it would be to potentially accuse someone of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the charge. Yet, that is exactly what he has potentially done here. Accused without charging. Is he guilty of obstruction? Maybe. Maybe not. If you google search 'intent obstruction of justice' all things related to Trump and the Mueller report pulls up and the question..."is Trump guilty of obstruction?" with a litany of "it's complicated" answers. Because, as it turns out, it's actually pretty damn complicated. A lot of legal minds are conflicted. You, however, are one hundred percent convinced Trump is guilty of obstruction, thanks to Mueller's report. He has aired out all of Trump's dirty laundry and has given Trump no recourse to defend himself. I mean, am I the only one trying to wrap my head around this logic? If you can't charge a sitting president and you are soooo beholden to OLC's opinion then why would you do this to someone? It's literally talking out of both sides of your mouth. I understand he had to write a report, but if he truly believed what he said, this report wouldn't have been made public. But he wanted it public. Barr, made it public because if he didn't make it public people would be calling for his head even more than they are now. This is all politics. It always comes down to f'n politics. And I'm so sick of it.

I think it's safe to say we are at an impasse here, my friend, unless one of us changes our mind. And that isn't likely.

Mueller did exactly what anyone with an unbiased opinion knew he would, he threw out a report that either side could latch on to and try to prove their point while throwing up his hands and giving excuses. It actually was very smart on his part because at worst he looks inept and it saved him from endless investigation into him by the other side that didnt like his conclusion.

At the end of the day he was a politician who muddied the water while he slipped away in common politician fashion.

 

[Kory]

The president of the United States.