Update: Mueller to testify before House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees on July 24

[Anathema-]

Everyone here knows the actual 2018 blue wave wasn't won on anti-trump impeachment talk right? MSM may have abdicated their journalistic responsibilities in favor of sensationalism but there's no evidence that people are looking at the MSM and seeing the Democratic party despite how much the GOP wishes that was the case. The very thing that worked against Clinton (too much trust in the MSM) is keeping the public from conflating the two -- people want the MSM to be trustworthy and so the accusations of bias are just not working.

 

To say nothing of the fact that all this hand wringing is pathetic.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

14 minutes ago, Anathema- said:

there's no evidence that people are looking at the MSM and seeing the Democratic party despite how much the GOP wishes that was the case.

Projection, once again

[Jason]

 

[Anathema-]

15 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Projection, once again

 

Stone Cold's golden rule: the political party

[CayceG]

So then redact it. 

[Anathema-]

1 minute ago, CayceG said:

So then redact it. 

 

The response is obvious; Barr's memo is the redaction.

[Jason]

 

[Chairslinger]

Over dramatic despair from liberals and MSM over simplifying the exoneration is the best ammo Trump needs to keep the full report(and underlying evidence)secret.

 

The real reaction here should be that until the underlying evidence and report are made public, Trump is innocent of collusion and obstruction in about the same way that OJ is innocent of murder.

[Jason]

 

[MarSolo]

"McConnell should have died of polio." - Mar Solo.

 

That should be on his tombstone after someone finally drives the wooden stake into his heart.

[Greatoneshere]

43 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

 

FUCK HIM.

 

Seriously, what a sack of shit. HE'S the reason they partly couldn't prepare more. 

[MarSolo]

Well, here's some grifter tweets that have aged well:

 

 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Dunking on grifters is hard work but someone has to do it

[PaladinSolo]

 

[Jason]

 

[marioandsonic]

7 minutes ago, PaladinSolo said:

 

Come to think of it, have they appeared in the same room together?

[Jason]

"If we run more bullshit headlines claiming the Barr letter is the Mueller report and that it totally exonerates Trump, will he finally be nice to us maybe?" 

 

 

[Jason]

 

[atom631]

19 hours ago, Jason said:

 

Wild speculation? Jr. tweeted out his own emails showing that he thought he was meeting with a Russian government official to get dirt on Hillary. Manafort handed over campaign data to Kilimnik while still part of the campaign. Even if it's somehow true that they were ultimately too incompetent to pull it off, there was clearly active intent to conspire with the Russian government.

 

Beyond that though, Barr is simply wrong that it doesn't count if they were technically private Russian citizens and not Russian government officials.

 

..and yet none of that seemed to indicate there was collusion. why? 

 

as for wild speculation - it was all over the place. every MSM outlet had article upon article of Trump being a Russian agent, hes compromised, Putin is his handler etc... 

 

I have to be honest, while I thought nothing would come of it in the way of impeachment, I really thought Mueller was going to find something that was undeniable that would both change right-wing public perception of him and prove that MSM wasn't just out to get him.  In the end,  the worst thing is it sucks that to a degree he was right. 

[SaysWho?]

28 minutes ago, atom631 said:

 

..and yet none of that seemed to indicate there was collusion. why? 

 

as for wild speculation - it was all over the place. every MSM outlet had article upon article of Trump being a Russian agent, hes compromised, Putin is his handler etc... 

 

I have to be honest, while I thought nothing would come of it in the way of impeachment, I really thought Mueller was going to find something that was undeniable that would both change right-wing public perception of him and prove that MSM wasn't just out to get him.  In the end,  the worst thing is it sucks that to a degree he was right. 

 

Gonna need receipts on this.

[atom631]

6 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

Gonna need receipts on this.

 

http://bfy.tw/MvUs

[CayceG]

2 minutes ago, atom631 said:

 

http://bfy.tw/MvUs

 

Not how this works, chief. 

[SaysWho?]

3 minutes ago, atom631 said:

 

http://bfy.tw/MvUs

 

You said every single "MSM" (lol @ the Republican talking point there) news outlet had articles accusing Trump to have colluded and being a Russian agent. You gave me a link that shows me nothing and didn't back up your claim. Show me where NBC Nightly News opened with a story accusing Trump of being a Russian agent. Show me where ABC This Week opened with a story stating emphatically that Putin is Trump's handler.

 

Receipts please.

[atom631]

1 minute ago, SaysWho? said:

 

You said every single news outlet had articles accusing Trump to have colluded and being a Russian agent. You gave me a link that shows me nothing and didn't back up your claim.

 

So second time: receipts please.

 

really? this shit was everywhere. 

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+compromised&rlz=1C1GGRV_enUS793US793&oq=trump+compromised&aqs=chrome..69i57.2806j1j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+russian+asset&rlz=1C1GGRV_enUS793US793&oq=trump+russian+asset&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60.4214j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

 

[SaysWho?]

Just now, atom631 said:

 

really? this shit was everywhere. 

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+compromised&rlz=1C1GGRV_enUS793US793&oq=trump+compromised&aqs=chrome..69i57.2806j1j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+russian+asset&rlz=1C1GGRV_enUS793US793&oq=trump+russian+asset&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60.4214j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

 

 

Where? All I see are articles saying that Democrats say Trump may have been compromised and stuff like Chelsea Handler. That's clearly not what you're talking about.

 

It doesn't sound like you thought your opinion through, but in an effort to sound moderate, you have to give Trump credit for being right "to a degree" without actually doing the research yourself.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Until the report is out, you're taking a bold assumption that AG Barr isn't a partisan actor making his own determination on collusion/obstruction because Muller may have left that decision to the political process, which includes Congress and the public.

 

Not that anything will happen politically by releasing the information(specifically regarding impeachment), but shouting "no collusion! Complete exoneration!" Doesn't make it so.

 

I won't say this is the biggest failure of the media, but here's the point I'm making:

 

[atom631]

1 minute ago, SaysWho? said:

 

Where? All I see are articles saying that Democrats say Trump may have been compromised and stuff like Chelsea Handler. That's clearly not what you're talking about.

 

It doesn't sound like you thought your opinion through, but in an effort to sound moderate, you have to give Trump credit for being right "to a degree" without actually doing the research yourself.

lol. you want specifics. cmon man - here is a few in just a few seconds search. 

 

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/leading-dems-highlight-how-trump-was-compromised-the-kremlin

 

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/141545/true-cnn-report-russia-destroy-trumps-presidency

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/29/opinion/cohen-trump-putin-russia-mueller.html

 

[SaysWho?]

8 minutes ago, atom631 said:

lol. you want specifics. cmon man - here is a few in just a few seconds search. 

 

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/leading-dems-highlight-how-trump-was-compromised-the-kremlin

 

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/141545/true-cnn-report-russia-destroy-trumps-presidency

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/29/opinion/cohen-trump-putin-russia-mueller.html

 

 

Your first link quotes from Republicans and Democrats giving their takes about Russia. You're saying not to quote lawmakers? Nowhere did they say Putin was handling Trump.

 

The second link talks about a CNN story quoting from an official who said Trump's associates may have coordinated with Russia. Roger Stone was indicted in the Russia investigation by Mueller which looked into Russian interference. Did you miss that story?

 

The third is an editorial suggesting Russia has leverage over Trump but isn't sure if they used leverage. That's quite a bit different than a news report condemning Trump.

 

You have no idea what you're talking about and are a victim of quick Google searches of things you didn't read. You're suggesting the media shouldn't report on a special counsel investigation that could implicate a sitting president. That is insane.

[RedSoxFan9]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/25/us/politics/mueller-report-disappointment.html

 

mueller, she wrote

[atom631]

10 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

Your first link quotes from Republicans and Democrats giving their takes about Russia. You're saying not to quote lawmakers? Nowhere did they say Putin was handling Trump.

 

The second link talks about a CNN story quoting from an official who said Trump's associates may have coordinated with Russia. Roger Stone was indicted in the Russia investigation by Mueller which looked into Russian interference. Did you miss that story?

 

The third is an editorial. That's quite a bit different than a news report condemning Trump.

 

You have no idea what you're talking about and are a victim of quick Google searches of things you didn't read. You're suggesting the media shouldn't report on a special counsel investigation that could implicate a sitting president. That is insane.

the very simple and obvious point im making is the MSM pushed a narrative that turned out to not exist. Look at this headline in the first article "Leading Dems highlight how Trump was compromised by the Kremlin". 

 

how is that unbiased and not misleading at all? Why didn't it state " ...how Trump could possibly be compromised by the Kremlin" . The article is now total nonsense. This is the point Im making...and this happened a lot by most (feel better now?) MSM media outlets. They framed the stories in a way that basically assured Trump was everything Mueller found out he isnt. 

[Guest]

I’m getting an eye twitch every time I read “MSM media”...

[Chairslinger]

I would highly recommend today's episode of the Opening Arguments podcasts ep 264 The Barr Summary of the Mueller Report.

 

Andrew, as a lawyer, goes through all the weasel words and hedging that Barr, also as a lawyer, does. And how what he didn't say was as important at times as what he did.

 

He covers all of the issues that are already popping up on the pushback to the initial reaction, along with some others.

 

@SaysWho?

 

The problem with having this argument with atom is that at it's heart there is a conflict between what one can realistically say about Trump, and what Mueller ultimately thought he could prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

For example....Trump was compromised by Russia. By any reasonable standard, you can say that. The fact that Russia knew Trump was trying to build a 100 million dollar tower in Russia, during the campaign, and Trump lied over and over and over about it meant that Russia had kompromat on him. This is exactly what Flynn was fired for.

 

Whether Mueller could prove Trump was compromised beyond a reasonable doubt, or even if that would be covered under a specific crime, is a different matter. Russia knew Trump was doing something that Trump made explicitly clear he wanted to keep secret. That's what we mean when we say someone has been compromised!

[SaysWho?]

8 minutes ago, atom631 said:

the very simple and obvious point im making is the MSM pushed a narrative that turned out to not exist. Look at this headline in the first article "Leading Dems highlight how Trump was compromised by the Kremlin". 

 

how is that unbiased and not misleading at all? Why didn't it state " ...how Trump could possibly be compromised by the Kremlin" . The article is now total nonsense. This is the point Im making...and this happened a lot by most (feel better now?) MSM media outlets. They framed the stories in a way that basically assured Trump was everything Mueller found out he isnt. 

 

First, nothing in Barr's letter indicates Trump was not compromised. It talked about collusion.

 

Second, because it's Rachel Maddow's blog. You don't get what MSM is: it stands for Mainstream Media (saying MSM media gives people strokes), and conservatives have been veeerrrrryyy vocal that mainstream media = nightly news, hard news stuff, not opinion hosts. That's why they wave away Fox News or radio hosts like Limbaugh as an example of conservative bias: their thing is, "The New York Times is putting opinions in their news articles! Everybody knows Hannity is biased but he's not a reporter!"

 

You have yet to back up your point whatsoever besides Google links, and considering your argument is that Trump is correct, everybody fucked up, you should be able to easily find 100s of articles, videos, etc.

[SaysWho?]

5 minutes ago, Chairslinger said:

 

@SaysWho?

 

The problem with having this argument with atom is that at it's heart there is a conflict between what one can realistically say about Trump, and what Mueller ultimately thought he could prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

For example....Trump was compromised by Russia. By any reasonable standard, you can say that. The fact that Russia knew Trump was trying to build a 100 million dollar tower in Russia, during the campaign, and Trump lied over and over and over about it meant that Russia had kompromat on him. This is exactly what Flynn was fired for.

 

Whether Mueller could prove Trump was compromised beyond a reasonable doubt, or even if that would be covered under a specific crime, is a different matter. Russia knew Trump was doing something that Trump made explicitly clear he wanted to keep secret. That's what we mean when we say someone has been compromised!

 

Correct, collusion =/= compromised.

 

Many Trump associates were indicted, including Roger Stone, around the Russia investigation. They weren't indicted for no reason; they have ties to Russia and contacts with Russia. Atom is linking to articles talking about how Trump's associates have ties with Russia and going, "See?! The media got it wrong," when those articles are true and backed by indictments from the same FBI Atom is saying cleared Trump of everything (which they didn't, nor do we have the full report with all the actual information).

 

It's better to speak in facts than to give opinions you think sound moderate or well-reasoned.