reddogblitz Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 5 hours ago, Tiberius said: No, but if you told the employee to hide evidence of a crime, it would be Even if they didn't do it?
Tiberius Posted June 5, 2019 Author Posted June 5, 2019 8 hours ago, reddogblitz said: Even if they didn't do it? Good question. I'll admit I've totally focused on the first column of Muellers report, the Russian attack section, and I still believe it's by far the most important. But the obstruction is there and demonstratable. True, the order here was not followed out. The intent was clear, though. To obstruct If that had been the only thing this wouldn't be such a big deal but it's part of a larger patter. Mueller lays out ten instances of obstruction most of which are more serious than the order to fire Mueller. He did fire Comey. So that was carried out. Why? This "Russia thing" Pardons to Manafort and Flynn were held out...that's why Manafort is on his way to NY, for a state trial. President Trump argues he is above the law. A thousand prosecutors say he's wrong The special counsel’s report and Wednesday’s remarks indicate that Mueller reached the same conclusion as the prosecutors who signed the statement: Trump obstructed justice. However, Mueller explained in both his report and his remarks that he could not criminally indict the ... 1
4merper4mer Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 25 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Good question. I'll admit I've totally focused on the first column of Muellers report, the Russian attack section, and I still believe it's by far the most important. But the obstruction is there and demonstratable. True, the order here was not followed out. The intent was clear, though. To obstruct If that had been the only thing this wouldn't be such a big deal but it's part of a larger patter. Mueller lays out ten instances of obstruction most of which are more serious than the order to fire Mueller. He did fire Comey. So that was carried out. Why? This "Russia thing" Pardons to Manafort and Flynn were held out...that's why Manafort is on his way to NY, for a state trial. President Trump argues he is above the law. A thousand prosecutors say he's wrong The special counsel’s report and Wednesday’s remarks indicate that Mueller reached the same conclusion as the prosecutors who signed the statement: Trump obstructed justice. However, Mueller explained in both his report and his remarks that he could not criminally indict the ... Good post. To summarize: 1. The political class should be allowed to make up BS about people they don't want to have certain roles. This is better for us all. 2. If the subject of the BS gets pissed that can be used as a backup plan once the BS is discovered to be BS. This holds true even if the subject simply rants about it and takes no action. 3 2
Nanker Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 Will Nadler or Waters open up and investigation about President Trump's plagiarizing FDR's speech when Trump addressed an audience in the UK today? IMPEACH the plagiarizer!
Tiberius Posted June 5, 2019 Author Posted June 5, 2019 1 hour ago, 4merper4mer said: Good post. To summarize: 1. The political class should be allowed to make up BS about people they don't want to have certain roles. This is better for us all. 2. If the subject of the BS gets pissed that can be used as a backup plan once the BS is discovered to be BS. This holds true even if the subject simply rants about it and takes no action. You do agree that the Russian attack on our election was serious, right? Or not? I get that partisan consideration want some people to say so what? At least Hillary lost and so what if murderous Putin got his man elected. If you do think the situation was serious, then interfering in an investigation looking into the attack was criminal. 1
SoCal Deek Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 Tibs...and others: Russia did not attack our election! I can’t stand how that has become the talking point. They may have been attempting to mess around with CAMPAIGN propaganda but they didn’t do one darn thing on the first Tuesday in November. 4 1
Buffalo_Gal Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 Just now, SoCal Deek said: Tibs...and others: Russia did not attack our election! I can’t stand how that has become the talking point. They may have been attempting to mess around with CAMPAIGN propaganda but they didn’t do one darn thing on the first Tuesday in November. You and me both. When I hear people testifying that "Russia interfered in our election" like $10K in Facebook ads swayed any votes, I simply shake my head. They all say it, even Barr. "Interference" has a pretty low bar if that is the definition. 3
SoCal Deek Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 Just now, Buffalo_Gal said: You and me both. When I hear people testifying that "Russia interfered in our election" like $10K in Facebook ads swayed any votes, I simply shake my head. They all say it, even Barr. "Interference" has a pretty low bar if that is the definition. Exactly. Heck your local public employee unions interfere a thousand times more in your school board races, and those are your tax dollars being used to buy raises in their own paychecks! 1
Tiberius Posted June 5, 2019 Author Posted June 5, 2019 12 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Tibs...and others: Russia did not attack our election! I can’t stand how that has become the talking point. They may have been attempting to mess around with CAMPAIGN propaganda but they didn’t do one darn thing on the first Tuesday in November. Read first section of Mueller report. Listen to what Mueller said. I won't post anymore facts because what's the point? 13 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: You and me both. When I hear people testifying that "Russia interfered in our election" like $10K in Facebook ads swayed any votes, I simply shake my head. They all say it, even Barr. "Interference" has a pretty low bar if that is the definition. Pure ignorance here. Misinformation 11 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Exactly. Heck your local public employee unions interfere a thousand times more in your school board races, and those are your tax dollars being used to buy raises in their own paychecks! Nope. You should educate yourself
SoCal Deek Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: Read first section of Mueller report. Listen to what Mueller said. I won't post anymore facts because what's the point? Pure ignorance here. Misinformation Tibs, where in the Mueller Report does it say that Russia attacked our ELECTION? It doesn’t. Heck your own self proclaimed savior Obama told us all that it was impossible on national TV! But then again he was asleep on his watch...like usual.
Tiberius Posted June 5, 2019 Author Posted June 5, 2019 1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said: Tibs, where in the Mueller Report does it say that Russia attacked our ELECTION? It doesn’t. Heck your own self proclaimed savior Obama told us all that it was impossible on national TV! But then again he was asleep on his watch...like usual. The first section, volume 1
4merper4mer Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 17 minutes ago, Tiberius said: You do agree that the Russian attack on our election was serious, right? Or not? I get that partisan consideration want some people to say so what? At least Hillary lost and so what if murderous Putin got his man elected. If you do think the situation was serious, then interfering in an investigation looking into the attack was criminal. It depends on how you define serious. Was it unique to Russia? No. Was it unique to 2016? No. Do similar efforts go on every day in every walk of life from individual, commercial, criminal and governmental sources? Yes. Did it alter a single vote? Unknown with certainty but it hasn't been demonstrated. Were their efforts more sophisticated than the movie that got blamed for Benghazi? Not by much. Did Facebook profit from it? Yes. Both directly and from the huffing and puffing which ensued. Is it desirable that this sort of thing happened? No. So I guess I consider it serious based on the last bullet point an to an extent the penultimate one as well. What I find more serious is that although it was rife with ineptitude and clearly inconsequential, that it has turned into a historical moment to some people. Worse yet, it has turned into that because we were told that it should and nothing more. That was in turn used to try to unseat an elected President. I would not be shocked if similar efforts, still unpublicized, had been made by Finland and Peru. Trump's homeland sec leader was named Kirsten which sounds Finnish to me. Investigate! 6
Tiberius Posted June 5, 2019 Author Posted June 5, 2019 18 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: It depends on how you define serious. Was it unique to Russia? No. Was it unique to 2016? No. Do similar efforts go on every day in every walk of life from individual, commercial, criminal and governmental sources? Yes. Did it alter a single vote? Unknown with certainty but it hasn't been demonstrated. Were their efforts more sophisticated than the movie that got blamed for Benghazi? Not by much. Did Facebook profit from it? Yes. Both directly and from the huffing and puffing which ensued. Is it desirable that this sort of thing happened? No. So I guess I consider it serious based on the last bullet point an to an extent the penultimate one as well. What I find more serious is that although it was rife with ineptitude and clearly inconsequential, that it has turned into a historical moment to some people. Worse yet, it has turned into that because we were told that it should and nothing more. That was in turn used to try to unseat an elected President. I would not be shocked if similar efforts, still unpublicized, had been made by Finland and Peru. Trump's homeland sec leader was named Kirsten which sounds Finnish to me. Investigate! Have we ever had an election marked by hacked information that was weaponized and used against a candidate by a foreign power before? Mr Secret Trump went against a candidate who had all her information--private information--hacked and weaponized against her. That was an attack on our system like no other. And almost certainly changed votes or suppressed some. The Russuans also at the very least tried hacking voting systems, voting machine companies and election officials. That deserved investigation free of obstruction, do you agree?
RochesterRob Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 4 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Have we ever had an election marked by hacked information that was weaponized and used against a candidate by a foreign power before? Mr Secret Trump went against a candidate who had all her information--private information--hacked and weaponized against her. That was an attack on our system like no other. And almost certainly changed votes or suppressed some. The Russuans also at the very least tried hacking voting systems, voting machine companies and election officials. That deserved investigation free of obstruction, do you agree? Come on. There was information gathering and strategic dispersal before the computer age. There was also blatant story fabrication. Let's not pretend the concept is brand new. If a big left wing apparatus was found would you be so gun ho to seek retribution? 1
Chef Jim Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 So are you saying it was the release of Hilary’s emails that is a big reason why we have a President Trump?
B-Man Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 23 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said: ? House Judiciary Committee calls as its first witness . . . John Dean.........
Tiberius Posted June 5, 2019 Author Posted June 5, 2019 13 minutes ago, RochesterRob said: Come on. There was information gathering and strategic dispersal before the computer age. There was also blatant story fabrication. Let's not pretend the concept is brand new. If a big left wing apparatus was found would you be so gun ho to seek retribution? I'd sure as hell would want to know the truth of what happened. On top of the foreign attack on our elections, Trump then buddies up to the monster that committed the attack, holding secret meetings with him. Come on Rob, if a Dem was doing that you'd be going nuts screaming about it
RochesterRob Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 7 minutes ago, Tiberius said: I'd sure as hell would want to know the truth of what happened. On top of the foreign attack on our elections, Trump then buddies up to the monster that committed the attack, holding secret meetings with him. Come on Rob, if a Dem was doing that you'd be going nuts screaming about it I honestly doubt you would face the truth. You as many other leftist would shrug your shoulders and say that it needed to be done in the name of progress if the left was caught red handed. There is no open evidence to suggest a foreign attack. Just hypothesis and hearsay. Back during the 1970's the Republicans were willing to clean house after Watergate. In the current era much fog surrounds Hillary Clinton with the Democrats unwilling to fan the fog aside to show transparency.
Tiberius Posted June 5, 2019 Author Posted June 5, 2019 7 minutes ago, RochesterRob said: I honestly doubt you would face the truth. You as many other leftist would shrug your shoulders and say that it needed to be done in the name of progress if the left was caught red handed. There is no open evidence to suggest a foreign attack. Just hypothesis and hearsay. Back during the 1970's the Republicans were willing to clean house after Watergate. In the current era much fog surrounds Hillary Clinton with the Democrats unwilling to fan the fog aside to show transparency. Mueller's report documents what they found. A far reaching and sustained attack...
SoCal Deek Posted June 5, 2019 Posted June 5, 2019 42 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Mueller's report documents what they found. A far reaching and sustained attack... That’s impossible! Obama told Romney that the Russians were so 1970s. WOKE UP DUDE
Recommended Posts