Jump to content
Nebraska

Now That Trump's President...

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Mesh Gear Fox said:

when you're completely hollow as a person and have nothing substantial to say, repetition is your best friend to fill in the gaps.

not saying there's some of that from people in this thread,

 

but there's some of that from people in this thread.*

 

*but i'm not gonna assume that it means any of you are hollow or having nothing substantial to say i think you're all probably good people :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, auxien said:

not saying there's some of that from people in this thread,

 

but there's some of that from people in this thread.*

 

*but i'm not gonna assume that it means any of you are hollow or having nothing substantial to say i think you're all probably good people :)

O, coming back to what people have said in this thread. Weren't you convinced Mueller said his research found nothing substantial, or something like that? You still believe that after his letter to Barr and the recent press conference? 

Not trying to lure you into an argument, btw. I just want to have an idea where people who thought the report was a nothingburger currently are. Especially given the fact that an impeachment process is a political one. And the outcome strongly depends on the ability to change the perspective of roughly half the country (if not more). So if you havent seen any reason to change your mind ( if my memory is correct, that is), it's fair to say the rest of the nay-sayers haven't either, I'm guessing.

Not saying you should, btw. Just trying to get a feel for how far the country is from people changing their minds on whats in the Mueller report. Thats all. Lets assume everyone has valid reasons to have a certain perspective on this, regardless of what it is. Always fair to be sceptical, I guess.

I'm only interested in the likely hood of people changing their opinion given what we currently know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2019 at 8:17 PM, Candiru said:

The two celestial bodies will merge and become Maroon, the dopest fuckin planet with all the cocaine and whooooeeeerrres

I volunteer, nay, demand, I be among the first to live there. I offer years of experience moderating watmm as my first (and only) leadership quality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mesh Gear Fox said:

 

he probably just learned his followers are too stupid to understand anything unless it's drilled into them, also when you're completely hollow as a person and have nothing substantial to say, repetition is your best friend to fill in the gaps.

this could be true as well. Though he said he'd rake forest floors all by himself to stop fires... then again maybe he's just really bored and daydreaming half the time he's doing his presidential duties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a radioactive shit blob that just happens to have the one-third zombie population of the country under mind control.

(Disregard most of my posts in this thread. More hot air than actual news updates.)

Edited by ambergonk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the house judiciary committee is doing hearings on the mueller report, today, and i think more are coming up. here's the live video scheduled to start at 2pm, new york time. john dean testifies today. 

 

 

in related news, the doj is caving to the house judiciary. that happened because tomorrow the house was scheduled to do the final vote on holding barr in contempt of congress for defying subpoena. 

 

mcgahn still may be found to be in contempt of congress, tomorrow.

 

 

 

Edited by very honest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

spacer.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, goDel said:

O, coming back to what people have said in this thread. Weren't you convinced Mueller said his research found nothing substantial, or something like that? You still believe that after his letter to Barr and the recent press conference? 

 Not trying to lure you into an argument, btw. I just want to have an idea where people who thought the report was a nothingburger currently are. Especially given the fact that an impeachment process is a political one. And the outcome strongly depends on the ability to change the perspective of roughly half the country (if not more). So if you havent seen any reason to change your mind ( if my memory is correct, that is), it's fair to say the rest of the nay-sayers haven't either, I'm guessing.

Not saying you should, btw. Just trying to get a feel for how far the country is from people changing their minds on whats in the Mueller report. Thats all. Lets assume everyone has valid reasons to have a certain perspective on this, regardless of what it is. Always fair to be sceptical, I guess.

 I'm only interested in the likely hood of people changing their opinion given what we currently know.

go read back (carefully) what i said concerning that if you're interested, then get back to me regarding now. not interested in any arguments either.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so my guess is you currently don't think the country (as a whole) is anywhere near changing their mind. And your own position on the report is most likely still the same as well. Meaning that Mueller (supposedly) showed it was all smoke and mirrors. ( I added the "supposedly", but from your perspective it should be dropped, I guess.)

Right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing to see here... 

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/mcconnell-blocking-plans-to-prevent-russian-election-attack.html

Quote

McConnell Is Blocking Any Plan to Prevent a Russian Election Attack in 2020: There actually are a lot of bills to safeguard the 2020 elections from the next Russian attack. Mitch McConnell is blocking all of them.

didn't Obama ask mcconnell for help when intelligence services became aware of the russia stuff back in the day (way back in like 2014 or whatever??)??

moscow mitch.. lol 

https://www.politifact.com/facebook-fact-checks/statements/2019/feb/14/facebook-posts/fact-checking-claim-mitch-mcconnells-biggest-donor/

maybe the $200 million mill factors in somewhere?

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/15/business/rusal-russia-kentucky-aluminum-mill/index.html

what a shit show this shit show is becoming. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it’s all nothing, you’d have to explain away all the stuff we’ve learned about in the last few years, which so far has been the peak of corruption in American politics and part of a larger global threat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Candiru said:

If it’s all nothing, you’d have to explain away all the stuff we’ve learned about in the last few years, which so far has been the peak of corruption in American politics and part of a larger global threat. 

that reporter who broke the panama papers story got killed. i think all the russian and trump stuff was probably in there.. surely some russians. 

i think pelosi is right "i don't want to see him impeached, i want to see him in jail"

but i hope she's a woman who can do both.  he's a disgrace.  bush was bad enough w/how he and his crew steamrolled into iraq and it's probably the biggest on purpose blunder i can think of in my life... there's others but the game they started has/is playing out in some fucked up ways. 

but trump is a cleptocracy in the making. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignatius, the politifact came to the conclusion the story was mostly false. Whats the deal? 

Apart from McCnnl, or politicians in the US, having huge donors and making shady decisions, that is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ignatius, the politifact came to the conclusion the story was mostly false. Whats the deal? 

Apart from McCnnl, or politicians in the US, having huge donors and making shady decisions, that is. 

“Mostly false” but really just semantics. If the “attack on McConnell” was worded differently it’d be “mostly true”. The truth is there’s shitloads of foreign money coming into US elections. I’m guessing most of it is untraceable?

 

US Billionaires donate to election campaigns in every state. Look at Susan Collins of Maine. The bulk of her campaign finances come from a few people who don’t live in her state. Funneling money from outside the US happens in the same way.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donors tend to be traceable. As politifact have shown in their article. 

Instead of guessing, https://www.opensecrets.org/ will give some insight. It's more transparent than you seem to think. 

And the politifact story was more than just semantics. It showed how poor the 'reporting' is. They flagged it as fake news.

Given the politifact article, Blavatnik wouldn't even be considered a foreign donor, btw. (US-UK passport, in the US since 70s, has a couple of US companies)

I agree with you that there are issues with campaign financing and all that. But this article doesn't do any good. So I'm having a hard time understanding why you're jumping into this rabbithole with a politifact article labelling it as fake news. I just don't understand.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, goDel said:

Ok, so my guess is you currently don't think the country (as a whole) is anywhere near changing their mind. And your own position on the report is most likely still the same as well. Meaning that Mueller (supposedly) showed it was all smoke and mirrors. ( I added the "supposedly", but from your perspective it should be dropped, I guess.)

Right? 

it's not a matter of whether i think the country is anywhere near changing their mind, look at the polls. 

assuming my position is a mistake on your part. for the 4th or 5th time, Mueller showed no direct evidence for Russian collusion or conspiracy. you (supposedly) read the report, you should know that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, auxien said:

for the 4th or 5th time, Mueller showed no direct evidence for Russian collusion or conspiracy. you (supposedly) read the report, you should know that. 

he actually did present evidence of conspiracy. look at this, from the intro to volume 1:

Quote

A statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.

the phrase he is referring to, "did not establish," is the phrase he uses a couple paragraphs earlier, here:

Quote

The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

 

also, in mueller's may 29 public statement, he says

Quote

This volume includes a discussion of the Trump campaign’s response to this activity, as well as our conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.

"insufficient evidence" is not "no evidence"

basically all they were missing was evidence of  an agreement.

 

i should also point out that you are using the word collusion, and mueller is talking about conspiracy. however, the definition of conspiracy mueller is using is actually very narrow and very difficult to prove. evidence of conspiracy he lays out is also evidence of collusion.

 

for anyone who doesn't want to crunch the 448 pages of partially redacted fbi work product (it's actually not that bad), i recommend wittes' notes on the mueller report. available for free on that page or you can buy an audiobook here

Edited by very honest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you sure wasted a lot of words and time saying exactly what I already said

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, goDel said:

Donors tend to be traceable. As politifact have shown in their article. 

Instead of guessing, https://www.opensecrets.org/ will give some insight. It's more transparent than you seem to think. 

And the politifact story was more than just semantics. It showed how poor the 'reporting' is. They flagged it as fake news.

Given the politifact article, Blavatnik wouldn't even be considered a foreign donor, btw. (US-UK passport, in the US since 70s, has a couple of US companies)

I agree with you that there are issues with campaign financing and all that. But this article doesn't do any good. So I'm having a hard time understanding why you're jumping into this rabbithole with a politifact article labelling it as fake news. I just don't understand.

 

yeah.. true. the connections raise eyebrows for me but i guess it's really quite normal. what's hilarious is the donations are dwarfed by Adelson's donations that were $25 million or something.  

as for foreign money i think it goes through PACs right? the super pacs get the 'dark' money and don't have to report any of it. it's quite laughable. direct contributions to campaigns are one thing but the PAC money is a separate thing entirely and for the most part those people don't have to reveal where the money comes from. i remember Colbert did a thing on it one season when he was still doing The Colbert Report. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, auxien said:

it's not a matter of whether i think the country is anywhere near changing their mind, look at the polls. 

assuming my position is a mistake on your part. for the 4th or 5th time, Mueller showed no direct evidence for Russian collusion or conspiracy. you (supposedly) read the report, you should know that. 

not sure where i went wrong in my assumptions? i can repeat your words and still get a response i don't understand.

Here:

Quote

At first it looks really shady but there's not much behind the curtain as Mueller detailed....it's (almost) all smoke and mirrors.

Looks the same to me.

 So we're saying the same. Can we actually on something? Not rocket science, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2019 at 1:58 PM, auxien said:

 

goDel i didn't misread you. 

this is obvious attacking/trolling. 'admit to have not read the report' is condescending, as is 'parroting.' don't play coy.

 

if there's any misreading it's you focusing on one aspect of what I was saying instead of the larger point: 

Quote

Trump's lying seems to be more to protect his image and to keep division/his supporters loyal than because of any actual shit to hide, really. At first it looks really shady but there's not much behind the curtain as Mueller detailed....it's (almost) all smoke and mirrors.

there's not much actual shit (Russian conspiracy) to hide. that's what Mueller said.

maybe? the ones from a few years back that Maddow got in 2017? 18? those weren't anything special, tho it was the 'simplified' tax returns. we'll probably see the full load at some point, but i'm starting to wonder if it's just more smoke and mirrors and he doesn't have anything seriously hiding in there.

^how many times i gotta explain this to you goDel

 

anyway

 

polls show most Americans are against impeaching Trump as of right now, since after the Mueller report. that's not likely going to be swayed towards impeachment now, months after the Mueller report's been out. simple as that. if they're not interested, Congress almost certainly won't push it. end of story, really. cuss and raise hell all you want but it won't matter.

my position doesn't line up really. i think Trump likely should be impeached, perhaps for attempted conspiracy or at least for the attempted coverup/lies/misc stuff that Mueller basically handed over to Congress in his report. Congress should do their job and seriously (in a non-partisan way, lol) look at these things and make the president answer for them. but if you haven't guessed it yet, that's likely NOT going to happen, certainly not in any non-partisan way....which is really the only way to do it and it mean anything at all. 

Edited by auxien

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aux, I hope we're not going back to having an argument we already said we didn't want to have. I just wanted to make sure I didn't misrepresent your statement, while still being succinct. Still not sure what went wrong there, but here we are. Lets leave it there.

Wrt the partisan approach of congress, the comparison with watergate is interesting. I tend to look at that history and see a lot of similarities. So that leaves me more hopeful, even if it currently looks hopeless. To a degree it was hopeless back then as well. 

But it's also the case that the media nowadays is mostly a shit-filter. With more  focus on the shit and less on the good stuff. Moreso than back then, I believe. The political side was always nasty. Which is basically proven by the actual watergate event itself, I'd argue. So I'm a bit weary following the coverage. Especially the shit thats labelled as 'breaking news'. That's the McDonalds of news. The media also plays a role in framing a hopeless reality. (As is my own psychology, btw)

So as far as I'm concerned, we're still in the middle of watergate where public opinion was still divided. And events could unfold similarly. Even if it doesn't look that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New polls show Trump tanking to the Dems in 2020 election.  God, let this be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...