The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Rep Turner (R) trying to attack the word exonerate in the report. That's his entire shpeal. I'm not making this up. He stacked up a bunch of thick legal books to help make his point. Mueller stonewalled him because the whole thing is ridiculous, but I think it looked good to Trump.
What looks good to Trump and if it does the same in objective reality rarely if ever intersect. He think's a well done steak slathered in ketchup looks delicious.
I've been pleasantly surprised by the testimony thus far. I think dodging the term "impeachment" is the right call by Mueller, but even with out a response to the affirmative on it, there's been some nice soundbites that competent media can use to poke holes in the narrative Barr has been pushing since April.
Smart Reps know there is no way to substantially attack Mueller and the report. Thus, you ingratiate yourself to Trump because what Trump thinks is materially more important than reality, in some ways.
Has anyone bothered asking him why he thinks so many republicans are going to such great lengths to lie or misconstrue the truth about russia and the trump campaign?
"I can't agree with that. Not that its not true, but I can't agree with it"
Muller is very good at not officially saying things and saying a ton
I would rather he come right out and say things. Everybody knows what he would say if he didn’t feel irrationally constrained by DOJ partisans.
I get that he wants to appear to be neutral but by being cute about what he says and avoiding the “i” word he is in fact helping one side out more than another.
+4
Lord_AsmodeusgoeticSobriquet:Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered Userregular
Has anyone bothered asking him why he thinks so many republicans are going to such great lengths to lie or misconstrue the truth about russia and the trump campaign?
I doubt he'd answer because that's outside the scope of the investigation or something similar
Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
Has anyone bothered asking him why he thinks so many republicans are going to such great lengths to lie or misconstrue the truth about russia and the trump campaign?
Has anyone bothered asking him why he thinks so many republicans are going to such great lengths to lie or misconstrue the truth about russia and the trump campaign?
No, because it would be fruitless. It's speculation and Mueller is not going to that. We are left to draw our own conclusions based on what we see.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
Please see enlightenedbum's correction below my post.
Rep Quigley (D) makes the point that if a sitting President cannot be indicted, what do you do if they serve beyond term limits? Mueller of course does not answer. Quigley says something like other relevant ptions need to be considered.
If Trump's not impeached we are in deep shit, even if he's voted out next yesr.
Rep Quigley (D) makes the point that if a sitting President cannot be indicted, what do you do if they serve beyond term limits? Mueller of course does not answer. Quigley says something like other relevant ptions need to be considered.
If Trump's not impeached we are in deep shit, even if he's voted out next yesr.
Statute of limitations, not term limits.
Obstruction's statute of limitation runs out during the next presidential term.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
+4
SurfpossumA nonentitytrying to preserve the anonymity he so richly deserves.Registered Userregular
You're not going to get snappy from Mueller. He's a boring bureaucrat.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
Mueller lacks the courage to actually say what he wants to signal or to whom, but he wants it to be a signal to those of "us" who has responsibility in this area.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
That would have gotten the idiots with short attention spans and helped the other committee further fine tune their questions. At least the democrats, the republicans would still be flailing about, trying to discredit the idea that Congress should investigate their guy for possible wrong doing.
The appearance of impartiality is important for Mueller still, not to Republicans in Congress but to their constituents and independent voters. Of Mueller treats both Democrats and Republicans identically, there can be no real accusations of bias in his testimony at least. Suggesting impeachment by name would be red meat for Republicans to gnaw on and throw the scraps to their base. By simply acknowledging the existence of various constitutional avenues, but not suggesting any, he remains impartial.
As said previously, it's Congress that has to move the ball forward, and there's the closed-door hearing to consider later too.
Except this line of thinking doesn't work because it buys into the framing that actually pointing out the obvious is partisan.
Again, we've already seen how well this strategy has worked. The GOP has shit all over everything he's done, during the investigation and afterword. But he's still trying to pretend like he has to act as if he can never say anything directly.
We haven’t seen any evidence that the alternative would do any better, and instead plays directly into GOP messaging. They couldn’t ask for a better gift than something they could exploit to make Mueller look partisan to their low-information base. The only thing it does is provide emotional gratification for liberals.
No, it would provide actually information to the public. Which is literally the most important thing here.
Mueller's problem is he confuses vague and roundabout statements for impartiality when all it actually is is unclear and undescriptive. The extent to which he has allowed things like the Barr memo to dominate the perception of his work is very explicit proof of this.
He needs to stop pretending being direct and open about what he found is partisan.
+20
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Political process is supposed to be separate from the legal process.
I legit can't even follow some of this conspiracy theory rambling from some of these people. I thought I'd followed this whole thing pretty closely, and then they start dropping names that they say are key to the whole thing, and I have no idea who or what they are talking about.
These last few keep demanding why he hasn't interviewed Joseph Mifsud, and I had to google him to figure out who he is.
And the first thing I find is that he disappeared two years ago.
Maybe, that's why he wasn't interviewed you dummies! Why are you wasting out time with this!
I legit can't even follow some of this conspiracy theory rambling from some of these people. I thought I'd followed this whole thing pretty closely, and then they start dropping names that they say are key to the whole thing, and I have no idea who or what they are talking about.
These last few keep demanding why he hasn't interviewed Joseph Mifsud, and I had to google him to figure out who he is.
And the first thing I find is that he disappeared two years ago.
Maybe, that's why he wasn't interviewed you dummies! Why are you wasting out time with this!
They don’t need to be accurate or argue in good faith when casting doubt on Mueller and his investigation will do more than enough. The people they are showboating for just need a little whataboutism to turn their brains off and accept the party line.
I legit can't even follow some of this conspiracy theory rambling from some of these people. I thought I'd followed this whole thing pretty closely, and then they start dropping names that they say are key to the whole thing, and I have no idea who or what they are talking about.
These last few keep demanding why he hasn't interviewed Joseph Mifsud, and I had to google him to figure out who he is.
And the first thing I find is that he disappeared two years ago.
Maybe, that's why he wasn't interviewed you dummies! Why are you wasting out time with this!
Because most people aren't going to do what you did and accept at face value that Joseph Mysid is an important person. Therefore the lack of questioning him makes Mueller less credible, if that clip gets airtime.
+6
KoopahTroopahThe koopas, the troopas.Philadelphia, PARegistered Userregular
"Do you think the Russians hacking was a single attempt or that it would be an ongoing thing?"
"Not at all a single attempt, in fact they're doing it as we sit here and will likely continue doing it during the 2020 campaign."
Why was it more important to close the investigation quickly than get Trump's testimony?
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
Posts
Smart Reps know there is no way to substantially attack Mueller and the report. Thus, you ingratiate yourself to Trump because what Trump thinks is materially more important than reality, in some ways.
I would rather he come right out and say things. Everybody knows what he would say if he didn’t feel irrationally constrained by DOJ partisans.
I get that he wants to appear to be neutral but by being cute about what he says and avoiding the “i” word he is in fact helping one side out more than another.
I doubt he'd answer because that's outside the scope of the investigation or something similar
I couldn't speculate on something like that.
Or similar
No, because it would be fruitless. It's speculation and Mueller is not going to that. We are left to draw our own conclusions based on what we see.
Yea, that scares me too.
Natasha is the National Security Correspondent with Politico.
Do we have a clip of that, yet?
Because if the news leads with that...
Because That gets Trump's attention.
Like folders full of blank paper.
And token black people who don't get to speak.
I think so.
Rep Quigley (D) makes the point that if a sitting President cannot be indicted, what do you do if they serve beyond term limits? Mueller of course does not answer. Quigley says something like other relevant ptions need to be considered.
If Trump's not impeached we are in deep shit, even if he's voted out next yesr.
Statute of limitations, not term limits.
Obstruction's statute of limitation runs out during the next presidential term.
"Rep. Adam Schiff: The Trump campaign officials built their messaging strategy around those stolen documents?
Mueller: Generally, that's true.
Schiff: And then they lied to cover it up?
Mueller: Generally, that's true."
Which is, uh, much less snappy. Trying to comb through C-SPAN to see if it's somewhere else.
which is why you have to phrase your question in such a way to get the absolute most from what will essentially be a "yes" or "no" answer.
I think the Dems have done a fairly good job of that so far.
After asking about anyone on the Trump campaign calling the FBI after outreach from the Russian operation, at 24:06
I just mean that those phrases were presented like quotes but don't appear to be.
That's not sticking to the report, I don't think, to respond to that at all. I could be wrong, but I think he went off-script there for a little bit.
Mueller lacks the courage to actually say what he wants to signal or to whom, but he wants it to be a signal to those of "us" who has responsibility in this area.
(CBS news is a tv network news department)
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
No, it would provide actually information to the public. Which is literally the most important thing here.
Mueller's problem is he confuses vague and roundabout statements for impartiality when all it actually is is unclear and undescriptive. The extent to which he has allowed things like the Barr memo to dominate the perception of his work is very explicit proof of this.
He needs to stop pretending being direct and open about what he found is partisan.
These last few keep demanding why he hasn't interviewed Joseph Mifsud, and I had to google him to figure out who he is.
And the first thing I find is that he disappeared two years ago.
Maybe, that's why he wasn't interviewed you dummies! Why are you wasting out time with this!
Not in the US justice system as we've built it. That's why the President can pardon at will and why he heads the Department of Justice.
US politicians have placed the wheels of Federal justice into the hands of voters, for better or worse.
They don’t need to be accurate or argue in good faith when casting doubt on Mueller and his investigation will do more than enough. The people they are showboating for just need a little whataboutism to turn their brains off and accept the party line.
Because most people aren't going to do what you did and accept at face value that Joseph Mysid is an important person. Therefore the lack of questioning him makes Mueller less credible, if that clip gets airtime.
"Not at all a single attempt, in fact they're doing it as we sit here and will likely continue doing it during the 2020 campaign."
Not new, but yikes on that.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
Yeah. Marcy Wheeler was saying something similar a few days ago.
Also, i'd say this shouldn't have all been on the same day.
Dang Schiff.