|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On March 25 2019 07:01 Ben... wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2019 06:55 Tachion wrote:
Until the Mueller report explains the dubious actions of people in Trump's inner circle such as Don Jr., Manafort, and Kushner, without even interviewing them no less, Barr's summary doesn't move my opinion on the subject at all. Hey come on now, that meeting with Russians they definitely tried to hide the existence of, then lied about, and then finally admitted the existence of was about adoptions and adoptions only. It was above board. Above. Board. /s Trump said it was about obtaining info about Hillary from Russia back in August.
That's why people are not buying the 'there is nothing' conclusion from Barr.
Trump himself has admitted to multiple crimes.
|
On March 25 2019 07:07 Plansix wrote:
The report is going to detail exactly what we know, that Trump surrounds himself with talentless grifters tha do shady shit, but there isn’t a smoking gun sufficient to prove a crime.
That's ultimately what it boils down to. If charges aren't brought out, it's almost guaranteed to not be because nothing happened. They can have a very high level of evidence, but still not have quite enough to bring a case of this scope.
|
United States43673 Posts
None of this changes the facts that we’re all aware of.
|
The more I'm seeing the more I don't think the obstruction thing is going away anytime soon. I dont think anyone would be surprised to find out that the guy who doesnt think the president can obstruct justice would go easy on the president charged with that very thing.
Let's wait and see what Mueller actually found on obstruction.
|
On March 25 2019 06:30 Introvert wrote:
Barr specifically says that his opinion is not based on that.
"Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president."
But it's his opinion that's the issue. He believes in how to interpret the law, that will shade what he would count as worth pursuit. He may fully believe that what Muller has brought isn't enough to do anything. That very well may be the case overall but when concerning a president the people bringing an impeachment would be Congress, not him. With the Senate ruling, which is a weird thing in itself.
In other words house dems might want to start articles of impeachment just to bring things out to the public eye if they won't be published by the justice department. Which they would prefer to avoid as the bungled forced though impeachment of Clinton raised his popularity.
|
Trump won,no evidence of collusion.
For 2 years the democrats and cable news media (cnn) have been wasting their time persuing this.
Now they never going to win the next elections.
|
United States43673 Posts
On March 25 2019 09:03 pmh wrote:
Trump won,no evidence of collusion.
For 2 years the democrats and cable news media (cnn) have been wasting their time persuing this.
Now they never going to win the next elections.
No
|
On March 25 2019 09:03 pmh wrote:
Trump won,no evidence of collusion.
For 2 years the democrats and cable news media (cnn) have been wasting their time persuing this.
Now they never going to win the next elections.
Thats kinda silly at this point. Not recommending further indictments isn't the same as zero evidence of collusion. Especially considering all the other people who were indicted for collusion in his campaign. Not to mention it is a decent argument to say that the justice department can't indict the president himself.
Its a pretty decent victory for trump that none of his family got indicted and the investigation is finally over.
|
On March 25 2019 09:03 pmh wrote:
Trump won,no evidence of collusion.
For 2 years the democrats and cable news media (cnn) have been wasting their time persuing this.
Now they never going to win the next elections.
That's a complete non sequitur; whether or not there is any evidence of Trump colluding with Russia has no implication whatsoever that Democrats can't win the next election(s).
|
On March 25 2019 09:03 pmh wrote:
Trump won,no evidence of collusion.
For 2 years the democrats and cable news media (cnn) have been wasting their time persuing this.
Now they never going to win the next elections.
All we have is Barr's thoughts. We'll get a better idea in the coming days as Congress goes bananas
|
On March 25 2019 09:03 pmh wrote:
Trump won,no evidence of collusion.
For 2 years the democrats and cable news media (cnn) have been wasting their time persuing this.
Now they never going to win the next elections.
Even if everything else was true, Benghazi and Her Emails didn't stop the last election from tipping and that was more hot hair for, afaik, literally nothing. I wouldn't count your sheeple yet.
|
Off course this is going to have an effect on the elections.
2 years of campaigning against trump invalidated. Trump said witch hunt all the time,and now many people will think it was indeed that,a witch hunt. People will dislike cnn and the likes (and any critizism about the president)even more because they hammerd this so hard and then in the end it fizzles.
This campaign has done huge damage to the democrats and their changes for 2020. I really think they have zero change if the elections would be held today.
But yes still 1.5 years to go,things can happen and lessons could be learned.
|
On March 25 2019 09:38 pmh wrote:
Off course this is going to have an effect on the elections.
2 years of campaigning against trump invalidated. Trump said witch hunt all the time,and now many people will think it was indeed that,a witch hunt. People will dislike cnn and the likes (and any critizism about the president)even more because they hammerd this so hard and then in the end it fizzles.
This campaign has done huge damage to the democrats and their changes for 2020. I really think they have zero change if the elections would be held today.
But yes still 1.5 years to go,things can happen and lessons could be learned.
Things can happen, such as seeing what's in the actual report, and other investigations/charges concluding.
|
United States43673 Posts
On March 25 2019 09:38 pmh wrote:
Off course this is going to have an effect on the elections.
2 years of campaigning against trump invalidated. Trump said witch hunt all the time,and now many people will think it was indeed that,a witch hunt. People will dislike cnn and the likes (and any critizism about the president)even more because they hammerd this so hard and then in the end it fizzles.
This campaign has done huge damage to the democrats and their changes for 2020. I really think they have zero change if the elections would be held today.
But yes still 1.5 years to go,things can happen and lessons could be learned.
still no
|
On March 25 2019 09:45 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2019 09:38 pmh wrote:
Off course this is going to have an effect on the elections.
2 years of campaigning against trump invalidated. Trump said witch hunt all the time,and now many people will think it was indeed that,a witch hunt. People will dislike cnn and the likes (and any critizism about the president)even more because they hammerd this so hard and then in the end it fizzles.
This campaign has done huge damage to the democrats and their changes for 2020. I really think they have zero change if the elections would be held today.
But yes still 1.5 years to go,things can happen and lessons could be learned. Things can happen, such as seeing what's in the actual report, and other investigations/charges concluding.
Barr already told you what’s in the report: nothing worthy of prosecution. This is further corroborated by the utter lack of any charges related to the Trump/Russia conspiracy narrative. The idea that Barr is hiding something is truly preposterous.
|
On March 25 2019 10:01 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2019 09:45 NewSunshine wrote:On March 25 2019 09:38 pmh wrote:
Off course this is going to have an effect on the elections.
2 years of campaigning against trump invalidated. Trump said witch hunt all the time,and now many people will think it was indeed that,a witch hunt. People will dislike cnn and the likes (and any critizism about the president)even more because they hammerd this so hard and then in the end it fizzles.
This campaign has done huge damage to the democrats and their changes for 2020. I really think they have zero change if the elections would be held today.
But yes still 1.5 years to go,things can happen and lessons could be learned. Things can happen, such as seeing what's in the actual report, and other investigations/charges concluding. Barr already told you what’s in the report: nothing worthy of prosecution. This is further corroborated by the utter lack of any charges related to the Trump/Russia conspiracy narrative. The idea that Barr is hiding something is truly preposterous.
Barr is providing his opinion based on a set of facts. Given his known bias against charging a President, it makes sense to wait and see how strongly founded his opinion is before declaring it ironclad (not that it would change the fact he isnt being indicted, but it could change how Congress reacts).
|
On March 25 2019 09:38 pmh wrote:
Off course this is going to have an effect on the elections.
2 years of campaigning against trump invalidated. Trump said witch hunt all the time,and now many people will think it was indeed that,a witch hunt. People will dislike cnn and the likes (and any critizism about the president)even more because they hammerd this so hard and then in the end it fizzles.
This campaign has done huge damage to the democrats and their changes for 2020. I really think they have zero change if the elections would be held today.
But yes still 1.5 years to go,things can happen and lessons could be learned.
Yeah, that is totally how elections work and people totally take the word of the FBI when they say they couldn’t find suffice to evidence to charge.
|
On March 25 2019 10:12 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2019 10:01 xDaunt wrote:On March 25 2019 09:45 NewSunshine wrote:On March 25 2019 09:38 pmh wrote:
Off course this is going to have an effect on the elections.
2 years of campaigning against trump invalidated. Trump said witch hunt all the time,and now many people will think it was indeed that,a witch hunt. People will dislike cnn and the likes (and any critizism about the president)even more because they hammerd this so hard and then in the end it fizzles.
This campaign has done huge damage to the democrats and their changes for 2020. I really think they have zero change if the elections would be held today.
But yes still 1.5 years to go,things can happen and lessons could be learned. Things can happen, such as seeing what's in the actual report, and other investigations/charges concluding. Barr already told you what’s in the report: nothing worthy of prosecution. This is further corroborated by the utter lack of any charges related to the Trump/Russia conspiracy narrative. The idea that Barr is hiding something is truly preposterous. Barr is providing his opinion based on a set of facts. Given his known bias against charging a President, it makes sense to wait and see how strongly founded his opinion is before declaring it ironclad (not that it would change the fact he isnt being indicted, but it could change how Congress reacts).
It is not just Barr’s opinion. It is also Rosenstein’s. In fact, it is also Mueller’s. Mueller chose not to indict Trump, his son, and everyone else who was not indicted. No one reasonable believes that Mueller would have held back if he had the goods. He had no trouble indicting people for all sorts of petty process shit such as with Flynn and Papadopoulos.
|
On March 25 2019 09:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2019 09:03 pmh wrote:
Trump won,no evidence of collusion.
For 2 years the democrats and cable news media (cnn) have been wasting their time persuing this.
Now they never going to win the next elections. That's a complete non sequitur; whether or not there is any evidence of Trump colluding with Russia has no implication whatsoever that Democrats can't win the next election(s).
Only to the extent that it further erodes public trust in the media and the media is 90% anti Trump.
|
On March 25 2019 10:01 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2019 09:45 NewSunshine wrote:On March 25 2019 09:38 pmh wrote:
Off course this is going to have an effect on the elections.
2 years of campaigning against trump invalidated. Trump said witch hunt all the time,and now many people will think it was indeed that,a witch hunt. People will dislike cnn and the likes (and any critizism about the president)even more because they hammerd this so hard and then in the end it fizzles.
This campaign has done huge damage to the democrats and their changes for 2020. I really think they have zero change if the elections would be held today.
But yes still 1.5 years to go,things can happen and lessons could be learned. Things can happen, such as seeing what's in the actual report, and other investigations/charges concluding. Barr already told you what’s in the report: nothing worthy of prosecution. This is further corroborated by the utter lack of any charges related to the Trump/Russia conspiracy narrative. The idea that Barr is hiding something is truly preposterous.
Flip this situation on around. Obama's still president and there's a Special Counsel investigation into his conduct. At the end of the investigation, Eric Holder gets the report, and rather than releasing it, he puts out a letter saying that essentially there's nothing to see here, though there was some stuff that didn't necessarily exonerate Obama's conduct, but based on Holder's opinion, it shouldn't be pursued. How would you feel? Would you trust what Holder's judgment on the unknown matter in which there might be evidence of wrongdoing was correct?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
