• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

MindzEye said:
You realize that trying to parse out potential meddling in an election is inherently political, right?

I also notice that you didn't answer his questions.
Click to expand...

I was sitting in front of my kids school when I posted. I’ll answer them now even though I’ve answered similar questions many times.
 
Wayward DP said:
we've been over this more than once. the origins of the investigation are not questionable. they are not obscure. they come from US intelligence agencies unanimously agreeing that the Russians interfered in your election. you've long stopped caring about this and seem to have forgotten what has happened, but this idea that the origins Mueller investigation are questionable is total bunk. we know what the origins are, and why this came about.

you can argue till you're blue in the face about the scope of the investigation, but unless you think that your country should simply sit back and say, 'ya, go for it Vlad. we know you meddled, we ain't gonna do anythin' about it though' I'm not sure why you keep arguing this point.

if you're upset about the scope, fine. but do not conflate that with how and why the investigation was started.

and, for clarity:
(a) do you think the Russians interfered in your 2016 elections?
(b) if the answer to (a) is yes, on what grounds do you oppose an investigation into the above noted Russian meddling?
Click to expand...

A) yes

B) the fact that you think this investigation is about Russian meddling is cute. There is a reason Muellers mandate was so broad, Russia meddling was the pretext, not the goal. This will be evidenced when it’s all said and done.

Sure Mueller’s report will be chock full of circumstantial evidence that the left and some of you will masturbate to profusely but in the end? Nothing. As I’ve always maintained, they won’t get Trump on conspiracy and ancillary people will go down for process crimes or crimes unrelated to Russian meddling.

This was all orchestrated to handcuff Trump and his agenda and to a large extent it worked.

Politically motivated and not for the reason MindzEye mentioned.
 
I should add that I do believe they should have looked into meddling. That’s a no brainer. Mueller should have been constrained to that mandate and an actual crime, which was never stated and is actually statutorily required, should have been stated in the filings.

I’ll ask a question back, do you believe there was no animus nor any highly questionable moves made by a few highly placed people in the FBI and DOJ in propagating this investigation and do you believe there was no potential FISA abuse?

I ask because that is the root of the issue for me. People entrusted to uphold the laws bent the **** out of them if not broke them.
 
BeLeafer said:
Just about anything that can be independently verified showing the Russian government did anything out of the oridinary to affect the outcome of the election (e.g., hacking the count). There is currently exactly no such evidence, just wild conjecture based largely on anti-Russian xenophobia and steadfast denial that the DNC ****ed up an easy win election.

So far what we have is a lot of fabrication and hysteria. For instance, the claim that Assange worked with the Russians and supported Trump is based on demonstrable fabrications published in the Guardian. These claims were made in this thread just a few weeks ago.

My skepticism will never be "wrong," however.
Click to expand...

It’s mob mentality to me and I’ve never been one to go with the mob. I’d rather be considered an ahole than a sheep.
 
I’ll also remind people that Comey leaked to start all this. The information leaked was uncorroborated but it’s apparently ok that he leaked because something something Trump something ends justify means something.

It’s a bullshit double standard and condones leaking.
 
Habsy said:
I ask because that is the root of the issue for me. People entrusted to uphold the laws bent the **** out of them if not broke them.
Click to expand...

This is where you confuse me. It appears that your President made a living out of doing that...and possibly gained the presidency doing it...but you rarely seem as upset about that.
 
Habsy said:
I should add that I do believe they should have looked into meddling. That’s a no brainer. Mueller should have been constrained to that mandate and an actual crime, which was never stated and is actually statutorily required, should have been stated in the filings.

I’ll ask a question back, do you believe there was no animus nor any highly questionable moves made by a few highly placed people in the FBI and DOJ in propagating this investigation and do you believe there was no potential FISA abuse?

I ask because that is the root of the issue for me. People entrusted to uphold the laws bent the **** out of them if not broke them.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they absolutely had to investigate Russian influence on the election, from the clear evidence of some level of meddling, stolen documents & emails, Facebook propaganda, evidence of money laundering, weird shenanigans at several international banks including Deutsche Bank, back-channel dealings and meetings with many people in the Trump sphere, and on and on and on.

It was a no-brainer, and still a worthwhile and necessary thing to do even if they come back with nothing. Which is impossible because we know they've already come back with quite a bit through the little info publicly available so far, including the Russians named and all the Manafort, Cohen, Flynn stuff etc.

I've given up on trying to speculate on the end result, it's pretty clear that Trump is shady and corrupt, but also insulated through the power of the White House and complicity of the Republican Party. Also pretty clear he is guilty of Obstruction of Justice but he gets away with so much due to sheer volume and idiocy, he may get away with this in the end other than as fodder for impeachment as Habsy has stated.

Mueller's reputation and investigation team appears to be rock-solid. All we can do now is wait to see the end result.
 
Bleedsblue&white said:
This is where you confuse me. It appears that your President made a living out of doing that...and possibly gained the presidency doing it...but you rarely seem as upset about that.
Click to expand...

My level of anger/disappointment is irrelevant to the matter. I am not one that believes the ends justify the means. It’s really quite simple.The country has laws, trump likely (highly) broke some. That doesn’t mean the law establishment can do so in the pursuit. You’re talking about fundamental rights here.

If they get Trump legally I’ll applaud. So far to date a lot of shenanigans on the side of the DOJ and FBI have occurred.
 
Habsy said:
It’s mob mentality to me and I’ve never been one to go with the mob. I’d rather be considered an ahole than a sheep.
Click to expand...

Yep, agreed.

Mob comes at me being a 'Russian agent' because I've expressed skepticism of this evidence-free conspiracy. :lol
 
axlsalinger said:
Yeah, they absolutely had to investigate Russian influence on the election, from the clear evidence of some level of meddling, stolen documents & emails, Facebook propaganda, evidence of money laundering, weird shenanigans at several international banks including Deutsche Bank, back-channel dealings and meetings with many people in the Trump sphere, and on and on and on.

It was a no-brainer, and still a worthwhile and necessary thing to do even if they come back with nothing. Which is impossible because we know they've already come back with quite a bit through the little info publicly available so far, including the Russians named and all the Manafort, Cohen, Flynn stuff etc.

I've given up on trying to speculate on the end result, it's pretty clear that Trump is shady and corrupt, but also insulated through the power of the White House and complicity of the Republican Party. Also pretty clear he is guilty of Obstruction of Justice but he gets away with so much due to sheer volume and idiocy, he may get away with this in the end other than as fodder for impeachment as Habsy has stated.

Mueller's reputation and investigation team appears to be rock-solid. All we can do now is wait to see the end result.
Click to expand...

The bolded is what I’ve always maintained. I don’t think Trump is innocent of crimes. Far from it. I believe he’s insulated, just like every other former President was. I’ve said many times there’s no justice in Washington. Trump hasn’t changed that, he’s made it worse.
 
Habsy said:
Right up zeke’s alley. Dem Ted Lieu admits he’d “love to be able to regulate speech”. This is what’s going on at campuses everywhere. These progressives want the end of free speech and free thought. The only opinions that matter are their own.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...n-keeps-would-be-tyrants-like-myself-in-check


Curious that zeke never posts stuff like this eh?
Click to expand...

Well, because the spin you're putting on it is horseshit maybe?

He added, “I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech. The First Amendment prevents me from doing so, and that's simply a function of the First Amendment, but I think over the long run, it's better that the government does not regulate the content of speech." The congressman reiterated this same point later on social media, responding to one fan by saying, “I agree there are serious issues, but the speech issues are protected by the First Amendment. Would I like to regulate Fox News? Yes, but I can't because the First Amendment stops me. And that's ultimately a good thing in the long run.”
Click to expand...

So it appears that Lieu is aware that there is blatant attempts at pumping untrue propaganda into American homes going on and he kind of wishes he could do something about it, but recognizes that the 1st is there for a good reason and is worth abiding by.

I really don't see the problem with that take. Speech is already regulated, there's all sorts of shit you're not allowed to say. Where the line on regulating speech should be, is a worthwhile public conversation to have. You seem to have your panties in a bunch that his view is nuanced instead of some stupid blind adherence to the utter sanctity of unfettered free speech (which again, does not exist...speech is regulated already)
 
Plus, that's a very selective quote you took there. Here's the whole thing: “I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech. The First Amendment prevents me from doing so, and that's simply a function of the First Amendment, but I think over the long run, it's better that the government does not regulate the content of speech."
 
WOW!

Bernie is the guy who should be president. Talk about getting shit done.

Bernie Sanders
‏Verified account @SenSanders

HISTORIC VICTORY: The Senate has voted to stop U.S. military support for the Saudi-led coalition fighting in Yemen. This is the first time ever that the Senate has voted to end an unauthorized war.
Click to expand...

Senate votes to end US military support for Saudis in Yemen

Resolution to curb military aid passes by 56 votes to 41
Measure reflects lack of confidence in Trump over Yemen

Julian Borger in Washington

Thu 13 Dec 2018 15.50 EST
Last modified on Thu 13 Dec 2018 18.19 EST

The Senate has passed a resolution calling for an end to US military support to the Saudi-led coalition in the Yemen war, and asserting Congress’s right to decide on matters of war and peace.

The measure, which passed by 56 votes to 41, marked the first time the Senate had invoked the 1973 War Powers Resolution to seek to curb the power of the president to take the US into an armed conflict. It marked a significant bipartisan rebuke to the Trump administration, which lobbied intensively against it.
Yemen: ceasefire agreed for port city of Hodeidah
Read more

The independent senator Bernie Sanders who had pushed the resolution persistently throughout the year, called it “a historic moment”.

He said: “Today we declare we will not long participate in the Saudi-led intervention in Yemen which has caused the worst humanitarian crisis on earth, with 85,000 children starving to death. Today we tell the despotic regime in Saudi Arabia that we will no longer be part of their military adventurism.”

Sanders went on: “The War Powers Act was passed 45 years ago. Today for the first time we are going to go forward utilising that legislation, and tell the president of the United States that the constitutional responsibility for making war rests with the United States Congress, not the White House.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/13/senate-yemen-saudis-trump-resolution
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top