|
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 April 18 2019 23:37 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:26 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:16 Plansix wrote:
Just remember that all of this could have been avoided if the Trump campaign had just come to anyone in government and said “Man, all these Russians keep trying to meet with us and give dirt on Clinton. That seems really weird.” But they didn’t. They decided to take the meetings and then hide the fact they took those meetings from people. In hindsight would that have been the best option for him politically? Seems this kept him in the headlines and fed the "fake news" narrative like a Mogwai after midnight. Yes. It would have diffused this entire investigation and removed the suspicion from his campaign on a number of fronts. It was the fact that the campaign was taking these meetings and not disclosing them to anyone, even after taking office, that fueled suspicion. If they just tell people and say “Yeah, it was crazy and in hindsight we shouldn’t have taken those meetings,” it would have been a relatively minor problem. But instead he fired the FBI director and hid information from investigators during the entire process. This investigation did not help him in any way, only hurt him. I'd point to his favorability remaining constant and going up since he was elected and you'd point to 2018. The favorability argument is pretty straightforward, there's a lot that went into 2018 that didn't necessarily have anything whatsoever to do with Trump, let alone the constant investigation speculation. I'm of the opinion centrists that hadn't made up their mind months ago feel more legitimate supporting Trump after this than not. Doubly so for Republicans reflected in Danglars and xDaunt (more centrist folks like doodsmack too). I've yet to hear or see anything of this person who would vote Trump but a report failing to even recommend charges was going to solidify they wouldn't. This, in all due respect, sounds like a fiction of liberal media. Who cares about his failing favorability that hit rock bottom when he took office? He has never been able to improve it and he barely won his last election. The only way he accomplishes anything is through control of the republican base that votes in primaries and through abusing executive power.
He won an election for president with worse favorability, I think that makes it kinda important in at least 1 way. The rest seems like a non sequitur?
|
On April 18 2019 23:14 Nouar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:12 Danglars wrote:On April 18 2019 22:56 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 18 2019 22:51 Jockmcplop wrote:
Excellent. Now on to the real investigations, like why Trump gave high level security passes to people who were a massive risk to national security. Ever read that story 'The boy who cried Wolf' ? That is literally the dems and majority of the mainstream media the past two years. At least they've moved on from Stormy Daniels now her lawyer is facing 330 years in jail.It'd be hilarious all this if it wasn't so goddamn pathetic. It's about time to recognize that there will always be a next crime once the previous crime peters out. The last one was a fake investigation, this next one is a real investigation ... until I say it isn't a real investigation a few months from now, because then this other thing is the real investigation. It's just the character of the opposition, and one way they never have to reckon with their past conduct. Maybe if this president started to behave like a president, instead of giving the appearance of corruption and unfitness for office at ANY occasion he has (this includes recruiting non-idiots to official positions), things would not go that far. For reference, I believed Bush Jr to be an idiot (manipulated behind the scenes), but at least he tried to show some dignity and didn't look that obviously corrupt in every decision he took.
Naturally, one direction for you to take is to assert unique circumstances. Because you're fearful of his "appearance" of corruption and unfitness, you can carry on ignoring the past allegation forgotten, and the current allegation enjoying its one day to several months (2 years if Mueller) of fame. Poppycock. I don't care how grating you find his behavior, don't make yourselves out to be absolute fools in your passionate reactionary vigor. I think this is the heart of ignoring everything xDaunt was posting informing people: your critical faculties are never reached because you can't get over how unfit you feel he is and how much you dislike playboy billionaires.
|
United States41470 Posts
On April 18 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:02 Plansix wrote:
Well that clears on one thing: Barr disagreed with the analysis of the Mueller team on conclusion obstruction, but accepted their findings. And there was nothing technically illegal done by meeting with the Russians. So it is up to the voters to decide was un-American to seek aid from a foreign government to win an election and hide the fact that you did it. Think it clears up that the constant reporting, commentary, and conspiracy crafting was a huge waste of time and resources too. Democrats/The media are going to have to own that eventually.
Not really. The man still did it, the media were right to report on it.
|
On April 18 2019 23:42 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:37 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:26 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:16 Plansix wrote:
Just remember that all of this could have been avoided if the Trump campaign had just come to anyone in government and said “Man, all these Russians keep trying to meet with us and give dirt on Clinton. That seems really weird.” But they didn’t. They decided to take the meetings and then hide the fact they took those meetings from people. In hindsight would that have been the best option for him politically? Seems this kept him in the headlines and fed the "fake news" narrative like a Mogwai after midnight. Yes. It would have diffused this entire investigation and removed the suspicion from his campaign on a number of fronts. It was the fact that the campaign was taking these meetings and not disclosing them to anyone, even after taking office, that fueled suspicion. If they just tell people and say “Yeah, it was crazy and in hindsight we shouldn’t have taken those meetings,” it would have been a relatively minor problem. But instead he fired the FBI director and hid information from investigators during the entire process. This investigation did not help him in any way, only hurt him. I'd point to his favorability remaining constant and going up since he was elected and you'd point to 2018. The favorability argument is pretty straightforward, there's a lot that went into 2018 that didn't necessarily have anything whatsoever to do with Trump, let alone the constant investigation speculation. I'm of the opinion centrists that hadn't made up their mind months ago feel more legitimate supporting Trump after this than not. Doubly so for Republicans reflected in Danglars and xDaunt (more centrist folks like doodsmack too). I've yet to hear or see anything of this person who would vote Trump but a report failing to even recommend charges was going to solidify they wouldn't. This, in all due respect, sounds like a fiction of liberal media. Who cares about his failing favorability that hit rock bottom when he took office? He has never been able to improve it and he barely won his last election. The only way he accomplishes anything is through control of the republican base that votes in primaries and through abusing executive power. He won an election for president with worse favorability, I think that makes it kinda important in at least 1 way. The rest seems like a non sequitur?
And that only happened because he was running against a candidate with a negative approval rating that was also being investigated by the FBI for dumb things she did. And his ability to get things done in DC is directly related to his approval rating. There are so many people in congress who simply cannot work with the White House because a majority of people in their district strongly dislike the President. That is how approval ratings impact policy.
|
On April 18 2019 23:45 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:02 Plansix wrote:
Well that clears on one thing: Barr disagreed with the analysis of the Mueller team on conclusion obstruction, but accepted their findings. And there was nothing technically illegal done by meeting with the Russians. So it is up to the voters to decide was un-American to seek aid from a foreign government to win an election and hide the fact that you did it. Think it clears up that the constant reporting, commentary, and conspiracy crafting was a huge waste of time and resources too. Democrats/The media are going to have to own that eventually. Not really. The man still did it, the media were right to report on it.
I mean "report on it" and what the media did are two quite distinct things in my view. The media "reported on" US bombs being dropped on children by our allies with our help and their intent, they "reported on" Flint still not having clean water, they "reported on" wealth inequality.
What they did with "Russiagate" is somewhat unprecedented, particularly in light of the conclusion (as we arrive there)
On April 18 2019 23:46 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:37 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:26 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:16 Plansix wrote:
Just remember that all of this could have been avoided if the Trump campaign had just come to anyone in government and said “Man, all these Russians keep trying to meet with us and give dirt on Clinton. That seems really weird.” But they didn’t. They decided to take the meetings and then hide the fact they took those meetings from people. In hindsight would that have been the best option for him politically? Seems this kept him in the headlines and fed the "fake news" narrative like a Mogwai after midnight. Yes. It would have diffused this entire investigation and removed the suspicion from his campaign on a number of fronts. It was the fact that the campaign was taking these meetings and not disclosing them to anyone, even after taking office, that fueled suspicion. If they just tell people and say “Yeah, it was crazy and in hindsight we shouldn’t have taken those meetings,” it would have been a relatively minor problem. But instead he fired the FBI director and hid information from investigators during the entire process. This investigation did not help him in any way, only hurt him. I'd point to his favorability remaining constant and going up since he was elected and you'd point to 2018. The favorability argument is pretty straightforward, there's a lot that went into 2018 that didn't necessarily have anything whatsoever to do with Trump, let alone the constant investigation speculation. I'm of the opinion centrists that hadn't made up their mind months ago feel more legitimate supporting Trump after this than not. Doubly so for Republicans reflected in Danglars and xDaunt (more centrist folks like doodsmack too). I've yet to hear or see anything of this person who would vote Trump but a report failing to even recommend charges was going to solidify they wouldn't. This, in all due respect, sounds like a fiction of liberal media. Who cares about his failing favorability that hit rock bottom when he took office? He has never been able to improve it and he barely won his last election. The only way he accomplishes anything is through control of the republican base that votes in primaries and through abusing executive power. He won an election for president with worse favorability, I think that makes it kinda important in at least 1 way. The rest seems like a non sequitur? And that only happened because he was running against a candidate with a negative approval rating that was also being investigated by the FBI for dumb things she did. And his ability to get things done in DC is directly related to his approval rating. There are so many people in congress who simply cannot work with the White House because a majority of people in their district strongly dislike the President. That is how approval ratings impact policy.
For the last 22 months the big reason he won was Russia, now it's (as her supporters were told the whole time they refused to accept it) that she was a uniquely bad candidate for 2016 and the FBI (the same FBI/Comey on which the obstruction narrative turned).
No one works "with Trump" you work around Trump and when it goes well he praises you for it and when it doesn't he throws you under the bus. Congress and the Senate are useless without removing at least half of them which is something neither party is going to do. It's something that's going to have to be led and done by the masses against the urging of both parties.
|
Barr is rightfully getting chewed up, including by conservatives, for coming off as a shill of the President.
It's also worth pointing out the joke that is Barr giving the WH the report last night, thus allowing them to get the first narrative out there before everyone else can read it.
Even the most fervent Trump/Barr supporters must realize why the way Barr has done this serves only increase people's concerns about the report being fairly treated. Guy sounds and acts like a member of Trumps PR team.
|
Northern Ireland22770 Posts
On April 18 2019 23:45 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:02 Plansix wrote:
Well that clears on one thing: Barr disagreed with the analysis of the Mueller team on conclusion obstruction, but accepted their findings. And there was nothing technically illegal done by meeting with the Russians. So it is up to the voters to decide was un-American to seek aid from a foreign government to win an election and hide the fact that you did it. Think it clears up that the constant reporting, commentary, and conspiracy crafting was a huge waste of time and resources too. Democrats/The media are going to have to own that eventually. Not really. The man still did it, the media were right to report on it.
Report on it sure, there’s such a thing as too much focus and speculation though, sometimes it can push out other important stuff, sometimes story fatigue can set in
|
I’m still waiting for an apology for the breathless coverage of the minor Ebola outbreak in the US, while they give one tenth of the coverage to the opioid crises.
|
On April 18 2019 23:16 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:12 Danglars wrote:On April 18 2019 22:56 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 18 2019 22:51 Jockmcplop wrote:
Excellent. Now on to the real investigations, like why Trump gave high level security passes to people who were a massive risk to national security. Ever read that story 'The boy who cried Wolf' ? That is literally the dems and majority of the mainstream media the past two years. At least they've moved on from Stormy Daniels now her lawyer is facing 330 years in jail.It'd be hilarious all this if it wasn't so goddamn pathetic. It's about time to recognize that there will always be a next crime once the previous crime peters out. The last one was a fake investigation, this next one is a real investigation ... until I say it isn't a real investigation a few months from now, because then this other thing is the real investigation. It's just the character of the opposition, and one way they never have to reckon with their past conduct. Yeah poor innocent Trump, victimized by the evil democrats even though he has literally done nothing wrong.
I would think you'd have an easier time with investigations, if you really think you have a point here. Our justice department is not designed around the accused proving the last holdout that he has "literally done nothing wrong," otherwise you get to wail about how much he's gotten away with. Beria said "Show me the man and I'll show you the crime," and I suggest you adopt that mode of justice to provide foundation for your quips here.
|
On April 18 2019 23:54 On_Slaught wrote:
Barr is rightfully getting chewed up, including by conservatives, for coming off as a shill of the President.
It's also worth pointing out the joke that is Barr giving the WH the report last night, thus allowing them to get the first narrative out there before everyone else can read it.
Even the most fervent Trump/Barr supporters must realize why the way Barr has done this serves only increase people's concerns about the report being fairly treated. Guy sounds and acts like a member of Trumps PR team.
The media seems to be handling it at least a bit better than I thought they would. I was concerned they would just run with whatever he said, but that doesn't seem to be the case. There is an appropriate amount of skepticism I've seen so far from most of the major outlets. Maybe they're finally learning how to deal with all the nonsense this administration puts out.
But yes, Barr seems to be getting ripped apart over this, as he rightfully should be.
On a separate note, as a reminder to everyone, be extra skeptical of social media today, even more so than normal. Events like this are a common place for Russian (and other) disinformation campaigns.
|
I'm sure that if Putin read this thread he'd be laughing to himself with satisfied glee.
|
On April 19 2019 00:02 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:16 Jockmcplop wrote:On April 18 2019 23:12 Danglars wrote:On April 18 2019 22:56 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 18 2019 22:51 Jockmcplop wrote:
Excellent. Now on to the real investigations, like why Trump gave high level security passes to people who were a massive risk to national security. Ever read that story 'The boy who cried Wolf' ? That is literally the dems and majority of the mainstream media the past two years. At least they've moved on from Stormy Daniels now her lawyer is facing 330 years in jail.It'd be hilarious all this if it wasn't so goddamn pathetic. It's about time to recognize that there will always be a next crime once the previous crime peters out. The last one was a fake investigation, this next one is a real investigation ... until I say it isn't a real investigation a few months from now, because then this other thing is the real investigation. It's just the character of the opposition, and one way they never have to reckon with their past conduct. Yeah poor innocent Trump, victimized by the evil democrats even though he has literally done nothing wrong. I would think you'd have an easier time with investigations, if you really think you have a point here. Our justice department is not designed around the accused proving the last holdout that he has "literally done nothing wrong," otherwise you get to wail about how much he's gotten away with. Beria said "Show me the man and I'll show you the crime," and I suggest you adopt that mode of justice to provide foundation for your quips here.
Meh, it was a shitpost.
The Democrats and large section of the media got things wrong in going for Trump over the Russia collusion. I said as much years ago when this started.
Inferring that that means that they shouldn't go after Trump for more realistic breaches of protocol or massive errors in judgement is just bad logic though.
Just because he didn't collude with Russia, it doesn't mean that he can give security passes to whoever he wants.
|
On April 19 2019 00:03 Ben... wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:54 On_Slaught wrote:
Barr is rightfully getting chewed up, including by conservatives, for coming off as a shill of the President.
It's also worth pointing out the joke that is Barr giving the WH the report last night, thus allowing them to get the first narrative out there before everyone else can read it.
Even the most fervent Trump/Barr supporters must realize why the way Barr has done this serves only increase people's concerns about the report being fairly treated. Guy sounds and acts like a member of Trumps PR team. The media seems to be handling it at least a bit better than I thought they would. I was concerned they would just run with whatever he said, but that doesn't seem to be the case. There is an appropriate amount of skepticism I've seen so far from most of the major outlets. Maybe they're finally learning how to deal with all the nonsense this administration puts out. But yes, Barr seems to be getting ripped apart over this, as he rightfully should be. On a separate note, as a reminder to everyone, be extra skeptical of social media today, even more so than normal. Events like this are a common place for Russian (and other) disinformation campaigns.
I loved the reporter at the end who asked if it was inappropriate for the AG to hold a press conference before anyone has had the ability to read the report. Barr just says “No” and ends the press conference.
|
Northern Ireland22770 Posts
On April 18 2019 23:44 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:14 Nouar wrote:On April 18 2019 23:12 Danglars wrote:On April 18 2019 22:56 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 18 2019 22:51 Jockmcplop wrote:
Excellent. Now on to the real investigations, like why Trump gave high level security passes to people who were a massive risk to national security. Ever read that story 'The boy who cried Wolf' ? That is literally the dems and majority of the mainstream media the past two years. At least they've moved on from Stormy Daniels now her lawyer is facing 330 years in jail.It'd be hilarious all this if it wasn't so goddamn pathetic. It's about time to recognize that there will always be a next crime once the previous crime peters out. The last one was a fake investigation, this next one is a real investigation ... until I say it isn't a real investigation a few months from now, because then this other thing is the real investigation. It's just the character of the opposition, and one way they never have to reckon with their past conduct. Maybe if this president started to behave like a president, instead of giving the appearance of corruption and unfitness for office at ANY occasion he has (this includes recruiting non-idiots to official positions), things would not go that far. For reference, I believed Bush Jr to be an idiot (manipulated behind the scenes), but at least he tried to show some dignity and didn't look that obviously corrupt in every decision he took. Naturally, one direction for you to take is to assert unique circumstances. Because you're fearful of his "appearance" of corruption and unfitness, you can carry on ignoring the past allegation forgotten, and the current allegation enjoying its one day to several months (2 years if Mueller) of fame. Poppycock. I don't care how grating you find his behavior, don't make yourselves out to be absolute fools in your passionate reactionary vigor. I think this is the heart of ignoring everything xDaunt was posting informing people: your critical faculties are never reached because you can't get over how unfit you feel he is and how much you dislike playboy billionaires.
Does one even need particularly developed critical faculties to accurately figure out Trump though?
In hypothetical land where Trump says ‘I think this is politically motivated and I shall be shown exonerated, but we have to trust in our rule of law and institutions.’ and largely left it at that, vs how he behaves in actuality, there’s a world of difference there.
You can’t divorce how he generally behaves from an investigation into him when he himself drags them together.
|
United States41470 Posts
On April 18 2019 23:51 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:45 KwarK wrote:On April 18 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:02 Plansix wrote:
Well that clears on one thing: Barr disagreed with the analysis of the Mueller team on conclusion obstruction, but accepted their findings. And there was nothing technically illegal done by meeting with the Russians. So it is up to the voters to decide was un-American to seek aid from a foreign government to win an election and hide the fact that you did it. Think it clears up that the constant reporting, commentary, and conspiracy crafting was a huge waste of time and resources too. Democrats/The media are going to have to own that eventually. Not really. The man still did it, the media were right to report on it. I mean "report on it" and what the media did are two quite distinct things in my view. The media "reported on" US bombs being dropped on children by our allies with our help and their intent, they "reported on" Flint still not having clean water, they "reported on" wealth inequality. What they did with "Russiagate" is somewhat unprecedented, particularly in light of the conclusion (as we arrive there) Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:46 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:37 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:26 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:16 Plansix wrote:
Just remember that all of this could have been avoided if the Trump campaign had just come to anyone in government and said “Man, all these Russians keep trying to meet with us and give dirt on Clinton. That seems really weird.” But they didn’t. They decided to take the meetings and then hide the fact they took those meetings from people. In hindsight would that have been the best option for him politically? Seems this kept him in the headlines and fed the "fake news" narrative like a Mogwai after midnight. Yes. It would have diffused this entire investigation and removed the suspicion from his campaign on a number of fronts. It was the fact that the campaign was taking these meetings and not disclosing them to anyone, even after taking office, that fueled suspicion. If they just tell people and say “Yeah, it was crazy and in hindsight we shouldn’t have taken those meetings,” it would have been a relatively minor problem. But instead he fired the FBI director and hid information from investigators during the entire process. This investigation did not help him in any way, only hurt him. I'd point to his favorability remaining constant and going up since he was elected and you'd point to 2018. The favorability argument is pretty straightforward, there's a lot that went into 2018 that didn't necessarily have anything whatsoever to do with Trump, let alone the constant investigation speculation. I'm of the opinion centrists that hadn't made up their mind months ago feel more legitimate supporting Trump after this than not. Doubly so for Republicans reflected in Danglars and xDaunt (more centrist folks like doodsmack too). I've yet to hear or see anything of this person who would vote Trump but a report failing to even recommend charges was going to solidify they wouldn't. This, in all due respect, sounds like a fiction of liberal media. Who cares about his failing favorability that hit rock bottom when he took office? He has never been able to improve it and he barely won his last election. The only way he accomplishes anything is through control of the republican base that votes in primaries and through abusing executive power. He won an election for president with worse favorability, I think that makes it kinda important in at least 1 way. The rest seems like a non sequitur? And that only happened because he was running against a candidate with a negative approval rating that was also being investigated by the FBI for dumb things she did. And his ability to get things done in DC is directly related to his approval rating. There are so many people in congress who simply cannot work with the White House because a majority of people in their district strongly dislike the President. That is how approval ratings impact policy. For the last 22 months the big reason he won was Russia, now it's (as her supporters were told the whole time they refused to accept it) that she was a uniquely bad candidate for 2016 and the FBI (the same FBI/Comey on which the obstruction narrative turned). No one works "with Trump" you work around Trump and when it goes well he praises you for it and when it doesn't he throws you under the bus. Congress and the Senate are useless without removing at least half of them which is something neither party is going to do. It's something that's going to have to be led and done by the masses against the urging of both parties.
I don’t know if you can give too much attention to a foreign power intervening in your election and the President actively courting their support and sending members of his campaign team to accept their illegally obtained information on his opponent. All of which did actually happen. Trump did ask for Russian intelligence to release the emails, in fact he did so on tv. Russian agents did contact his campaign team to offer information from those emails, and his campaign team did accept the meeting. They confessed to that much on Twitter. And Trump did have knowledge of the planned Russian psyops campaign focusing on the emails, he tweeted their attack just 30 mins after the meeting with Russian operatives took place. His strategy changed in the minutes after that meeting to align with the new information he had obtained.
It’s all super newsworthy.
|
On April 19 2019 00:09 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:44 Danglars wrote:On April 18 2019 23:14 Nouar wrote:On April 18 2019 23:12 Danglars wrote:On April 18 2019 22:56 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 18 2019 22:51 Jockmcplop wrote:
Excellent. Now on to the real investigations, like why Trump gave high level security passes to people who were a massive risk to national security. Ever read that story 'The boy who cried Wolf' ? That is literally the dems and majority of the mainstream media the past two years. At least they've moved on from Stormy Daniels now her lawyer is facing 330 years in jail.It'd be hilarious all this if it wasn't so goddamn pathetic. It's about time to recognize that there will always be a next crime once the previous crime peters out. The last one was a fake investigation, this next one is a real investigation ... until I say it isn't a real investigation a few months from now, because then this other thing is the real investigation. It's just the character of the opposition, and one way they never have to reckon with their past conduct. Maybe if this president started to behave like a president, instead of giving the appearance of corruption and unfitness for office at ANY occasion he has (this includes recruiting non-idiots to official positions), things would not go that far. For reference, I believed Bush Jr to be an idiot (manipulated behind the scenes), but at least he tried to show some dignity and didn't look that obviously corrupt in every decision he took. Naturally, one direction for you to take is to assert unique circumstances. Because you're fearful of his "appearance" of corruption and unfitness, you can carry on ignoring the past allegation forgotten, and the current allegation enjoying its one day to several months (2 years if Mueller) of fame. Poppycock. I don't care how grating you find his behavior, don't make yourselves out to be absolute fools in your passionate reactionary vigor. I think this is the heart of ignoring everything xDaunt was posting informing people: your critical faculties are never reached because you can't get over how unfit you feel he is and how much you dislike playboy billionaires. Does one even need particularly developed critical faculties to accurately figure out Trump though? In hypothetical land where Trump says ‘I think this is politically motivated and I shall be shown exonerated, but we have to trust in our rule of law and institutions.’ and largely left it at that, vs how he behaves in actuality, there’s a world of difference there. You can’t divorce how he generally behaves from an investigation into him when he himself drags them together.
To consider if what he's saying is wholly or partially right, you must first get past the hurdles of how he says things, who he's insulted recently, the breaking of norms, all the imputed racism and sexism, and your own opinion. I think that's what's shortcutting people that would otherwise actually be interested in whether or not Trump has fully legitimate ire at enemies within the government that used their positions of power against him out of animus. Your theory goes, you can't neglect that the person you're dealing with sold weed to kids when you go to see if he murdered someone, or was robbed and beaten. I say you're letting your dislike permeate your consideration and won't therefore reach accurate conclusions.
|
Northern Ireland22770 Posts
On April 19 2019 00:13 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:45 KwarK wrote:On April 18 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:02 Plansix wrote:
Well that clears on one thing: Barr disagreed with the analysis of the Mueller team on conclusion obstruction, but accepted their findings. And there was nothing technically illegal done by meeting with the Russians. So it is up to the voters to decide was un-American to seek aid from a foreign government to win an election and hide the fact that you did it. Think it clears up that the constant reporting, commentary, and conspiracy crafting was a huge waste of time and resources too. Democrats/The media are going to have to own that eventually. Not really. The man still did it, the media were right to report on it. I mean "report on it" and what the media did are two quite distinct things in my view. The media "reported on" US bombs being dropped on children by our allies with our help and their intent, they "reported on" Flint still not having clean water, they "reported on" wealth inequality. What they did with "Russiagate" is somewhat unprecedented, particularly in light of the conclusion (as we arrive there) On April 18 2019 23:46 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:37 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:26 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:16 Plansix wrote:
Just remember that all of this could have been avoided if the Trump campaign had just come to anyone in government and said “Man, all these Russians keep trying to meet with us and give dirt on Clinton. That seems really weird.” But they didn’t. They decided to take the meetings and then hide the fact they took those meetings from people. In hindsight would that have been the best option for him politically? Seems this kept him in the headlines and fed the "fake news" narrative like a Mogwai after midnight. Yes. It would have diffused this entire investigation and removed the suspicion from his campaign on a number of fronts. It was the fact that the campaign was taking these meetings and not disclosing them to anyone, even after taking office, that fueled suspicion. If they just tell people and say “Yeah, it was crazy and in hindsight we shouldn’t have taken those meetings,” it would have been a relatively minor problem. But instead he fired the FBI director and hid information from investigators during the entire process. This investigation did not help him in any way, only hurt him. I'd point to his favorability remaining constant and going up since he was elected and you'd point to 2018. The favorability argument is pretty straightforward, there's a lot that went into 2018 that didn't necessarily have anything whatsoever to do with Trump, let alone the constant investigation speculation. I'm of the opinion centrists that hadn't made up their mind months ago feel more legitimate supporting Trump after this than not. Doubly so for Republicans reflected in Danglars and xDaunt (more centrist folks like doodsmack too). I've yet to hear or see anything of this person who would vote Trump but a report failing to even recommend charges was going to solidify they wouldn't. This, in all due respect, sounds like a fiction of liberal media. Who cares about his failing favorability that hit rock bottom when he took office? He has never been able to improve it and he barely won his last election. The only way he accomplishes anything is through control of the republican base that votes in primaries and through abusing executive power. He won an election for president with worse favorability, I think that makes it kinda important in at least 1 way. The rest seems like a non sequitur? And that only happened because he was running against a candidate with a negative approval rating that was also being investigated by the FBI for dumb things she did. And his ability to get things done in DC is directly related to his approval rating. There are so many people in congress who simply cannot work with the White House because a majority of people in their district strongly dislike the President. That is how approval ratings impact policy. For the last 22 months the big reason he won was Russia, now it's (as her supporters were told the whole time they refused to accept it) that she was a uniquely bad candidate for 2016 and the FBI (the same FBI/Comey on which the obstruction narrative turned). No one works "with Trump" you work around Trump and when it goes well he praises you for it and when it doesn't he throws you under the bus. Congress and the Senate are useless without removing at least half of them which is something neither party is going to do. It's something that's going to have to be led and done by the masses against the urging of both parties. I don’t know if you can give too much attention to a foreign power intervening in your election and the President actively courting their support and sending members of his campaign team to accept their illegally obtained information on his opponent. All of which did actually happen. Trump did ask for Russian intelligence to release the emails, in fact he did so on tv. Russian agents did contact his campaign team to offer information from those emails, and his campaign team did accept the meeting. They confessed to that much on Twitter. And Trump did have knowledge of the planned Russian psyops campaign focusing on the emails, he tweeted their attack just 30 mins after the meeting with Russian operatives took place. His strategy changed in the minutes after that meeting to align with the new information he had obtained. It’s all super newsworthy.
Apparently you can? As to where it is exactly, there is something of a sweet spot before either fatigue or people flipping the other way around.
Plus hitching oneself to that mast, that closely you leave some wriggle room in favourability. I mean all that stuff was and is true, didn’t stop Trump getting a bump when Mueller cleated him of collusion.
|
On April 19 2019 00:13 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2019 23:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:45 KwarK wrote:On April 18 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:02 Plansix wrote:
Well that clears on one thing: Barr disagreed with the analysis of the Mueller team on conclusion obstruction, but accepted their findings. And there was nothing technically illegal done by meeting with the Russians. So it is up to the voters to decide was un-American to seek aid from a foreign government to win an election and hide the fact that you did it. Think it clears up that the constant reporting, commentary, and conspiracy crafting was a huge waste of time and resources too. Democrats/The media are going to have to own that eventually. Not really. The man still did it, the media were right to report on it. I mean "report on it" and what the media did are two quite distinct things in my view. The media "reported on" US bombs being dropped on children by our allies with our help and their intent, they "reported on" Flint still not having clean water, they "reported on" wealth inequality. What they did with "Russiagate" is somewhat unprecedented, particularly in light of the conclusion (as we arrive there) On April 18 2019 23:46 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:37 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:26 Plansix wrote:On April 18 2019 23:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 18 2019 23:16 Plansix wrote:
Just remember that all of this could have been avoided if the Trump campaign had just come to anyone in government and said “Man, all these Russians keep trying to meet with us and give dirt on Clinton. That seems really weird.” But they didn’t. They decided to take the meetings and then hide the fact they took those meetings from people. In hindsight would that have been the best option for him politically? Seems this kept him in the headlines and fed the "fake news" narrative like a Mogwai after midnight. Yes. It would have diffused this entire investigation and removed the suspicion from his campaign on a number of fronts. It was the fact that the campaign was taking these meetings and not disclosing them to anyone, even after taking office, that fueled suspicion. If they just tell people and say “Yeah, it was crazy and in hindsight we shouldn’t have taken those meetings,” it would have been a relatively minor problem. But instead he fired the FBI director and hid information from investigators during the entire process. This investigation did not help him in any way, only hurt him. I'd point to his favorability remaining constant and going up since he was elected and you'd point to 2018. The favorability argument is pretty straightforward, there's a lot that went into 2018 that didn't necessarily have anything whatsoever to do with Trump, let alone the constant investigation speculation. I'm of the opinion centrists that hadn't made up their mind months ago feel more legitimate supporting Trump after this than not. Doubly so for Republicans reflected in Danglars and xDaunt (more centrist folks like doodsmack too). I've yet to hear or see anything of this person who would vote Trump but a report failing to even recommend charges was going to solidify they wouldn't. This, in all due respect, sounds like a fiction of liberal media. Who cares about his failing favorability that hit rock bottom when he took office? He has never been able to improve it and he barely won his last election. The only way he accomplishes anything is through control of the republican base that votes in primaries and through abusing executive power. He won an election for president with worse favorability, I think that makes it kinda important in at least 1 way. The rest seems like a non sequitur? And that only happened because he was running against a candidate with a negative approval rating that was also being investigated by the FBI for dumb things she did. And his ability to get things done in DC is directly related to his approval rating. There are so many people in congress who simply cannot work with the White House because a majority of people in their district strongly dislike the President. That is how approval ratings impact policy. For the last 22 months the big reason he won was Russia, now it's (as her supporters were told the whole time they refused to accept it) that she was a uniquely bad candidate for 2016 and the FBI (the same FBI/Comey on which the obstruction narrative turned). No one works "with Trump" you work around Trump and when it goes well he praises you for it and when it doesn't he throws you under the bus. Congress and the Senate are useless without removing at least half of them which is something neither party is going to do. It's something that's going to have to be led and done by the masses against the urging of both parties. I don’t know if you can give too much attention to a foreign power intervening in your election and the President actively courting their support and sending members of his campaign team to accept their illegally obtained information on his opponent. All of which did actually happen. Trump did ask for Russian intelligence to release the emails, in fact he did so on tv. Russian agents did contact his campaign team to offer information from those emails, and his campaign team did accept the meeting. They confessed to that much on Twitter. And Trump did have knowledge of the planned Russian psyops campaign focusing on the emails, he tweeted their attack just 30 mins after the meeting with Russian operatives took place. His strategy changed in the minutes after that meeting to align with the new information he had obtained. It’s all super newsworthy.
Not nearly as newsworthy as the complete lack of interest even among Democrats to do anything legislatively about it if that's the argument we're going with to substantiate the clear (imo) supersaturation of Russiagate speculation (that couldn't qualify under any definition of "reporting") from my perspective.
There's also a notable incongruity between what people said when I asked them what they would do/conclude the value of the constant focus/investigation on Russiagate when this happened ~year ago.
|
NPR has a link to the report for everyone's viewing pleasure. Doc is 448 pages.
|
On April 19 2019 00:20 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2019 00:09 Wombat_NI wrote:On April 18 2019 23:44 Danglars wrote:On April 18 2019 23:14 Nouar wrote:On April 18 2019 23:12 Danglars wrote:On April 18 2019 22:56 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 18 2019 22:51 Jockmcplop wrote:
Excellent. Now on to the real investigations, like why Trump gave high level security passes to people who were a massive risk to national security. Ever read that story 'The boy who cried Wolf' ? That is literally the dems and majority of the mainstream media the past two years. At least they've moved on from Stormy Daniels now her lawyer is facing 330 years in jail.It'd be hilarious all this if it wasn't so goddamn pathetic. It's about time to recognize that there will always be a next crime once the previous crime peters out. The last one was a fake investigation, this next one is a real investigation ... until I say it isn't a real investigation a few months from now, because then this other thing is the real investigation. It's just the character of the opposition, and one way they never have to reckon with their past conduct. Maybe if this president started to behave like a president, instead of giving the appearance of corruption and unfitness for office at ANY occasion he has (this includes recruiting non-idiots to official positions), things would not go that far. For reference, I believed Bush Jr to be an idiot (manipulated behind the scenes), but at least he tried to show some dignity and didn't look that obviously corrupt in every decision he took. Naturally, one direction for you to take is to assert unique circumstances. Because you're fearful of his "appearance" of corruption and unfitness, you can carry on ignoring the past allegation forgotten, and the current allegation enjoying its one day to several months (2 years if Mueller) of fame. Poppycock. I don't care how grating you find his behavior, don't make yourselves out to be absolute fools in your passionate reactionary vigor. I think this is the heart of ignoring everything xDaunt was posting informing people: your critical faculties are never reached because you can't get over how unfit you feel he is and how much you dislike playboy billionaires. Does one even need particularly developed critical faculties to accurately figure out Trump though? In hypothetical land where Trump says ‘I think this is politically motivated and I shall be shown exonerated, but we have to trust in our rule of law and institutions.’ and largely left it at that, vs how he behaves in actuality, there’s a world of difference there. You can’t divorce how he generally behaves from an investigation into him when he himself drags them together. To consider if what he's saying is wholly or partially right, you must first get past the hurdles of how he says things, who he's insulted recently, the breaking of norms, all the imputed racism and sexism, and your own opinion. I think that's what's shortcutting people that would otherwise actually be interested in whether or not Trump has fully legitimate ire at enemies within the government that used their positions of power against him out of animus. Your theory goes, you can't neglect that the person you're dealing with sold weed to kids when you go to see if he murdered someone, or was robbed and beaten. I say you're letting your dislike permeate your consideration and won't therefore reach accurate conclusions.
Only Trump isn't some "Dr House" type that is "an asshole, but a brilliant asshole who does great work", he repeatedly lies and says outright stupid stuff, courts dictators like Putin and Kim, handwaved the Saudis chopping a journalist to pieces in an embassy, and has a history of shady business practices, among other things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
