Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2019 22:39:54 GMT -5
Trump never did finish this tweet today. Probably just as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2019 23:08:12 GMT -5
An even better thread (than the one I posted earlier) explaining what the Mueller report did with regard to obstruction:
|
|
|
Post by prozyan on Apr 19, 2019 23:46:28 GMT -5
Huckabee is a douche.
I always thought Romney would've made a decent President.
On a separate note, Mueller should've brought the obstruction charges. I get that he feels that is the purview of Congress. He could have at least spelled it out in Redneck English..."Congress, bring obstruction charges against this dude".
ETA: What I mean by Mueller should've brought charges....CNN currently has a headline that reads: "Mueller had everything he needed to charge Trump with obstruction, but didn't".
That is what is going to stick in most people's minds.....no charges were brought by the special investigator.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Apr 23, 2019 7:14:08 GMT -5
Trump never did finish this tweet today. Probably just as well. One must assume before he got to the follow up tweet he needed to bear down to push out a presidential size turd, and then needed someone to come in and wipe his ass for him. Wonder if he shits orange? Anyhoo, now that I've planted that image in y'alls head, have a great day.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Apr 23, 2019 14:57:02 GMT -5
Informative.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2019 17:34:25 GMT -5
Heh. A thank you to all the lawyers out there beating me to writing up an extensive analysis of the Mueller report! Seriously, though, read it -- there are some great analyses floating around right now, but to the extent you're doubting whether they are just spin and Barr had the right take...yeah, read it!
Btw, Trump made a lot of noise about this yuuuugggee rebuttal his lawyers were doing to the report, but it seems to have been lost with his tax returns...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2019 10:57:37 GMT -5
Ah, here we go. Trump's rebuttal:
This. Guy. Controls. Our. Nukes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2019 21:06:54 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 9:07:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by prozyan on May 1, 2019 9:31:41 GMT -5
Which sums up well this current dog and pony show.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 11:43:26 GMT -5
You know, though I was fairly skeptical of Barr, I thought better of him than this:
As I follow this story, I honestly am having difficulty grokking that Barr was so willing to torch his integrity so deeply...for Trump. For GHWB's administration, I understood a little better how Barr could have justified himself. To be clear, I definitely did NOT agree with Barr's coverups there, either -- but I at least could grok how maybe, just maybe, a partisan could tell himself it was for the greater good (he'd still be wrong, of course). Here...yeah, no. I always knew Trump was a grifter, so little he does can totally surprise me. But Barr and some of the other people around Trump...yeah, I'd hoped for better. Rick Wilson's saying is true: "everything Trump touches dies."
(And before anyone tries to argue that Barr hasn't torched his integrity, be aware I'm going to turn around and ask you if you've read the Mueller report and Mueller letter, among other things, in full before opining. Because if all you've read is the Barr letter and some spin in the National Review...
Lord knows I always thought I was a political cynic -- I can now see that I wasn't nearly cynical enough for this administration.
Truly -- the House needs to impeach. Even if it goes nowhere, as it likely will, even if it backfires politically on the Dems. (It may or may not -- most people were not in favor of impeaching Nixon until after the impeachment hearings, at which point the percentage went up dramatically. I think the same would happen here, just because I think this is actually much worse, but that most people aren't yet paying enough attention to see just how bad it really is.) It is the only way, IMO, at this point, to signal that this is all NOT okay, that this is NOT business as usual.
(Sorry for so many Twitter links -- I've had a buttload going on right now in RL and sometimes a twitter post with a link expresses exactly what I'm thinking.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 17:08:22 GMT -5
FFS
That's just fucking insane. He cleared Trump of criminal wrongdoing without reading the evidence.
He's not AG of the United States. He's Trump's Roy Cohn, paid for by us.
|
|
|
Post by prozyan on May 2, 2019 3:00:51 GMT -5
That's just fucking insane. He cleared Trump of criminal wrongdoing without reading the evidence. I don't know if that is accurate. The exchange was: Now it seems to me the question was designed to ask if Barr investigated the investigation. I'm not sure any superior, when given an investigators report, would then go on to double check the evidence underlying the report's conclusions. But it was an expertly crafted question. All that said, the dog and pony show was pretty entertaining. Harris did make Barr look like a bumbling fool and she sure did score talking points. You can tell Harris is a damn fine attorney with a sharp mind in the way she presented questions that she knew Barr couldn't answer clearly which made him look bumbling and incompetent. A prime example is when she asked if anyone in the White House had directed him to open an investigation on anyone. A pretty easy and definite no answer. Then she follows that up with "Has anyone in the White House suggested opening an investigation on anyone". Suggested is just vague enough to make it uncomfortable to give a firm "no" while under oath. What does suggested mean? Off-hand comments? Off the cuff comments? And when Barr tried to narrow the question to be more definitive, Harris expertly threw out other vague terms, like inferred and hinted. It was quite fun to watch. Personally after reading the report I have no doubt Trump, at a minimum, attempted to obstruct justice. Now I have no idea if the attempt is enough to prosecute but I have no doubt about what Trump's intentions were. Does the fact that he failed, mainly because people refused to follow his orders, mean he can't be prosecuted for obstruction? I have no idea, that is way above my pay grade. I do know Mueller punted the ball when he should have gone for the touchdown. That's going to be a hard narrative to overcome, regardless of how much people pound the OLC rulings that a sitting President can't be indicted. Mueller screwed up and the wishy-washy "well, we can't charge him, but we can't clear him either" narrative is pretty weak.
|
|
|
Post by markesq on May 2, 2019 9:26:25 GMT -5
A clarification, from my POV as a prosecutor, on whether Barr should've looked at the underlying evidence. My job right now it to decide whether or not to prosecute police officers after they've used force on a citizen. I work with the PD's Special Investigations Unit, and they gather all the evidence and give it to me. I make the charging decision (or not) and ALWAYS look at ALL of the evidence. One simple case can take me two weeks, even when the use of force is evidently justified. It's my job and it's the right thing to do. So, to me, the idea that the country's chief lawyer would reach a decision in one of the most important cases in American history without looking at the underlying evidence is unfathomable, especially when 1. there are, and this cannot be contested, instances that could amount to obstruction, and 2. Mueller himself did not clear Trump. It's not even as if he's taking Mueller's word for the lack of obstruction, because Mueller didn't do that. So he's basing his charging decision on... Complete abdication of his responsibilities for a partisan reason.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on May 2, 2019 10:34:32 GMT -5
Lord knows I always thought I was a political cynic -- I can now see that I wasn't nearly cynical enough for this administration. Truly -- the House needs to impeach. Even if it goes nowhere, as it likely will, even if it backfires politically on the Dems. (It may or may not -- most people were not in favor of impeaching Nixon until after the impeachment hearings, at which point the percentage went up dramatically. I think the same would happen here, just because I think this is actually much worse, but that most people aren't yet paying enough attention to see just how bad it really is.) It is the only way, IMO, at this point, to signal that this is all NOT okay, that this is NOT business as usual. I don't want impeachment. It's a dream. A delusion. A distraction. Anger and frustration with the ruthlessness and rapacious acts of the Trump Administration is at an all-time high and God knows if the Republicans impeached Bill Clinton for lying about a blow job, this asshole should go for collaboration with enemies of the United States for his own political gain.
But Mitch McConnell is never going to impeach Donald Trump. You know it, I know it, and Trump knows it. If Trump were to shoot a kitten and rape a puppy on live TV, he wouldn't be condemned by the GOP. Sarah Suckabee Sanders would go on Fux and Friends and explain the kitten was a deep cover ISIS operative and Kellyanne Crypt Keeper would calmly explain Trump was only playing roughly with the puppy and any rape was strictly play-acting by the puppy.
Holding out hope for the Republicans to come to their senses and stop drifting into America's preeminent White nationalist political party seems like a high-risk, low reward misadventure and personally, I'm not inclined to take away the knife the GOP has pressed against its own throat. As currently constituted the Republican Party needs to be destroyed and the Democratic Party is as equally contaminated and worthy of disinfection.
Impeachment would be emotionally satisfying and politically meaningless. What's the upside of a really stupid and completely ineffectual gesture? To soothe the hurt feelings of liberals who hoped Bob Muller would be their Secret Santa? Operating purely on emotion and damn the torpedoes and consequences may seem to be the urgent need for the Left at this moment, but the more strategic move here is to play the long game and play it cool.
Less satisfying. Much more strategic. What's the Move here? Don't take the bait. Forget about Barr's gaslighting the Senate Judiciary Committee. Don't throw Brer Trump into that impeachment briar patch. That's where he wants to be. Don't give him what he wants. Be cool.
|
|