Not interested in the IG report. How is the jurisdiction broken up? Park Police/Secret Service/MPD? This report doesn’t wash.
As Trump sees the streets being cleared, he decides that this is a good time to walk over and hoist the Bible?
If your derangement is that far gone, can't help you either.If you believe that the clearing and the hoisting are not related, I can’t help you. The Interior Department is only on part of the equation, Trump appointee, notwithstanding……
Have a nice life………If your derangement is that far gone, can't help you either.
The news breathlessly televises violent protesters attempt to burn down the Church literally across the street from the White House, and televises the rioters violently attack the Park Police. And you find it odd that the Park police would move back the perimeter and the the President would have a photo op to show that they were in control, not the protestors.
Back atchaHave a nice life………
Kavanaugh1. lafayette park
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/police-clear-lafayette-park-area-trump-hold-bible/story?id=78171712
2. Russian bounties
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...as-apparently-fake-news-all-along/ar-BB1fGUwy
https://news.yahoo.com/russian-bounty-story-falls-apart-192123174.html
3. covid origins /wuhan lab - we've all heard about this one.
https://www.foxnews.com/health/damning-science-shows-covid-19-likely-engineered-in-lab-experts
4. vaccines by 2020 - he was correct
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-coronavirus-vaccine-074712144.html
5. hunter Biden - is under investigation
https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/09/politics/hunter-biden-tax-investigtation/index.html
anyone want to add more?
Judging from their posts, apparently a good many of Trump's followers are anarchists. What they got with Trump was more government intrusion, not less.anyone want to add more?
Trump used the DOJ to attack the free press. Will this concern Trump's followers? Hell, no. They avoid unpleasant realities such as this. They prefer ignorance. They don't know, and they don't want to know. Don't expect to hear from any of them.In some of the most chilling exposés yet of Trump's autocratic tendencies, The New York Times late Thursday unveiled a secret scheme by prosecutors against members of Congress conducting presidential oversight.
I deal in today's reality, not yesterday's trivia and lies.1. lafayette park
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/police-clear-lafayette-park-area-trump-hold-bible/story?id=78171712
2. Russian bounties
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...as-apparently-fake-news-all-along/ar-BB1fGUwy
https://news.yahoo.com/russian-bounty-story-falls-apart-192123174.html
3. covid origins /wuhan lab - we've all heard about this one.
https://www.foxnews.com/health/damning-science-shows-covid-19-likely-engineered-in-lab-experts
4. vaccines by 2020 - he was correct
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-coronavirus-vaccine-074712144.html
5. hunter Biden - is under investigation
https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/09/politics/hunter-biden-tax-investigtation/index.html
Well...that's how correction works. To correct something, you first have to have gotten it wrong, and then do what you can to make it right.
Not in evidence. To prove this, you'd have to gather up all the stories about the Trump administration published by the MSM and show that they're all false...well, actually I suppose if you could show something like 80% of them false you'd have a good case for this claim.
I'm not sure what you're on about here. Russian collusion was proven correct. Rosenstein and Barr decided not to prosecute for the reason that the crime that would most likely underlie that collusion require a number of elements, all of which Trump and his advisors tried to commit, but were in cases too incompetent (or that was their official reasoning, anyway--I for one think that they'd probably have gotten a conviction). However, the major claim of the Russian collusion narrative--that the Trump campaign was working in concert with Russian government officials to win the 2016 Presidential election--is correct.
All of them. You made the claim that statistically, the MSM gets it wrong most of the time...but you only provided five dubious examples. So for you to be statistically correct, you would need to show how many stories the MSM gets right in order to make a valid claim on how much they get wrong. So if you claim that the MSM got five stories wrong then statistically all the other billions of stories must be right....unless of course, you can prove otherwise....which you can't. Your hesitancy to prove your claim suggests that you know the MSM gets it right more often than not.
Btw...if you're still butthurt over Trump....then you have TDS.
If you've read it, then you've surely read page 110 and following of volume 1, describing the Trump Tower meeting. The reason that meeting wasn't charged as a crime is because, as Mueller testified, he could not prove willfulness, which would require that the campaign officials in on it had the intent to break the law, and he couldn't prove that they knew what the law was. Nevertheless, it's clear that the Trump campaign cooperated with Russian officials for the purpose of receiving "dirt" on Hillary Clinton. As I said, I suspect the DOJ would have gotten a conviction at a jury trial, but Barr and Rosenstein (admittedly, on Mueller's recommendation) thought otherwise.unbelievable someone still thinks this.
the Mueller report: (and I quote from the INTRODUCTION to volume 1, PAGE 2)
"... ,the investigation did NOT establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
I have read the damn thing and have a saved copy, so lets not try to rewrite the findings ok?
WOW, what a bunch of mumbo jumbo.If you've read it, then you've surely read page 110 and following of volume 1, describing the Trump Tower meeting. The reason that meeting wasn't charged as a crime is because, as Mueller testified, he could not prove willfulness, which would require that the campaign officials in on it had the intent to break the law, and he couldn't prove that they knew what the law was. Nevertheless, it's clear that the Trump campaign cooperated with Russian officials for the purpose of receiving "dirt" on Hillary Clinton. As I said, I suspect the DOJ would have gotten a conviction at a jury trial, but Barr and Rosenstein (admittedly, on Mueller's recommendation) thought otherwise.
Since then, it's also come out that Manafort gave Konstantin Kilimnik internal voter data, presumably for the purpose of helping Russia coordinate their social media efforts. So yeah, the Trump campaign coordinated and cooperated with Russia.
The quote to which you refer in the intro to volume I merely says what I said in my previous post--that in the judgement of the prosecutors, they couldn't prove all the elements of a crime that would underlie cooperation (in this instance, conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws). That does not mean that the Trump campaign didn't work with Russia. They did; there's evidence they did, and no doubt had not so many Trump officials not obstructed the investigation, more evidence would have been found. As the Mueller report also details, there were numerous links between the Trump campaign and Russia, about which (when you dig into the details of the report) those campaign officials memories' got conveniently fuzzy and vague.
I am not claiming there is a crime--only that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. Collusion itself is not a crime--neither is cooperation. Trump's campaign officials escaped prosecution in part due to technicalities in the relevant laws, and in part because they were just too incompetent to execute a conspiracy as the law is currently written. I doubt lawmakers ever contemplated the notion that a national campaign would do what Trump's campaign did. However, what the Mueller report describes fits the definition of what the MSM were reporting--which is the relevant point for the purpose of this thread. The MSM didn't get it wrong. Unless you've got some links where multiple mainstream media news agencies were reporting that the Trump campaign actually committed a crime through collusion. Do you have such links?WOW, what a bunch of mumbo jumbo.
well if he couldn't prove "willfulness" then as he says in summary, he could not prove there was coordination or conspiracy. if you can;t PROVE a crime then there is no crime.
so no , Trump did not coordinate with Russia. you can write pages of your opinions about what he said all you want, but at the end of the day, the report states what I quoted.
I am not claiming there is a crime--only that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. Collusion itself is not a crime--neither is cooperation. Trump's campaign officials escaped prosecution in part due to technicalities in the relevant laws, and in part because they were just too incompetent to execute a conspiracy as the law is currently written. I doubt lawmakers ever contemplated the notion that a national campaign would do what Trump's campaign did. However, what the Mueller report describes fits the definition of what the MSM were reporting--which is the relevant point for the purpose of this thread. The MSM didn't get it wrong. Unless you've got some links where multiple mainstream media news agencies were reporting that the Trump campaign actually committed a crime through collusion. Do you have such links?
What do you mean it has no meaning in the given context? The context is the MSM communicating with the general public. The specific charge leveled by the MSM was collusion with Russia to win the election against Hillary Clinton.collusion is never actually mentioned in the mueller report. its a non issue, it has no actual meaning in the given context,
No, it would not. Only communication intended to coordinate efforts to win the 2016 election (where any such effort is illegal on Russia's side).defined that way to allow one to cast a bad light on ANY form of communication with the Russians at all by that administration.
No, they do not together cover any possible wrongdoing that could have gone on. The law is not perfect. It's not written to cover every contingency. People come up with new ways to be unduly nasty on an almost daily basis. The law has to catch up.on the other hand, conspiracy and coordination are. if there was no conspiracy or coordination , which together cover any wrong doing that could have gone on, there was no issue with them talking to the Russians.
All of what you've said above, including this, misses the point anyway. The MSM claimed that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. Your claim is that they were wrong. But, they weren't wrong--that is exactly what happened.Muller stated the investigation could not find ant conspiracy or coordination with the Russians, end of story.
1. as we have seen , the MSM is stupid. I rarely frame an issue based on what the idiots at the MSM think, for good reason. Mueller stated there was no conspiracy or coordination, that covers everything I can think of., done.What do you mean it has no meaning in the given context? The context is the MSM communicating with the general public. The specific charge leveled by the MSM was collusion with Russia to win the election against Hillary Clinton.
No, it would not. Only communication intended to coordinate efforts to win the 2016 election (where any such effort is illegal on Russia's side).
No, they do not together cover any possible wrongdoing that could have gone on. The law is not perfect. It's not written to cover every contingency. People come up with new ways to be unduly nasty on an almost daily basis. The law has to catch up.
All of what you've said above, including this, misses the point anyway. The MSM claimed that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. Your claim is that they were wrong. But, they weren't wrong--that is exactly what happened.
My oh my how quickly their selective amnesia kicks in."“He’s not a war hero. He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.”
I don't think you are qualified to discuss the truthfulness of anything.
Coming from a person who swallowed over twenty thousand lies.The Russian bounty story was NEVER properly sources, and was never legitimate.
Otherwise, you're response is that you do not care that you were fed, and swallowed whole, a bunch of lies.
Even more for consideration.
- the oldest and biggest: Trump colluded with Russia to win in 2016 and might be a Russian agent. That scam involved crooked FBI agents and led to the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who took two years to conclude there was no evidence to back the charge.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?