MUELLER REPORT JUST DROPPED

[_Water Dog]

Hey, I’m just working from your corpus within this forum. These have been your issues.

And thanks for proving my point, yet again. I'll never understand why y'all do this. Why make up stuff? Is there some audience I'm unaware of that you're speaking to? I don't think I've hardly ever said a word, perhaps not even a single word, about these topics. They certainly aren't my issues. Also, I'm pretty sure my position is in agreement with the social liberals. I really don't care what bathroom you go into, nor do I think laws are needed to regulate it either way. Nor do I believe in Pizzagate, or have I ever. FYI, nobody does. I guess you didn't get the memo, but that whole thing was a 4chan joke. Pizzagate was never an actual thing beyond a prank. But you say it's my issue, one of my core concerns that drives my politics?

Based on what? All those times I didn't talk about it? You're funny. Checking out for good now. This is an example of why. Total waste of time. Honest discussions aren't possible.

[_canpakes]

Hey, I’m just working from your corpus within this forum. These have been your issues.

And thanks for proving my point, yet again. I'll never understand why y'all do this. Why make up stuff? Is there some audience I'm unaware of that you're speaking to? I don't think I've hardly ever said a word, perhaps not even a single word, about these topics. They certainly aren't my issues. Also, I'm pretty sure my position is in agreement with the social liberals. I really don't care what bathroom you go into, nor do I think laws are needed to regulate it either way. Nor do I believe in Pizzagate, or have I ever. FYI, nobody does. I guess you didn't get the memo, but that whole thing was a 4chan joke. Pizzagate was never an actual thing beyond a prank. But you say it's my issue, one of my core concerns that drives my politics?

Based on what? All those times I didn't talk about it? You're funny. Checking out for good now. This is an example of why. Total waste of time. Honest discussions aren't possible.

Well, to be honest, I did not specifically point to you as a purveyor of the Comet Ping Ping stupidity (you see that, right? Flip on those bifocals, Dog). But you’re right in there with what I did list about your past musings.

I know that you run a script every so often to erase your posts, but that script doesn’t erase the quoted portions within the replies of others. : )

If you need me to, I can just post links to some of those. Since you’re concerned about honesty, right?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I find it absolutely bizarre that Conservatives are crowing on and on about a memo written up by a crony, as if it exonerates the Trump crime family. :/

- Doc

eta: Wait. Aren't you still a Mormon, WD? If so, it makes this statement of yours all the more odd:

it, only demonstrates how you can take the man out of Mormonism, but taking the Mormonism out of the man is a different thing entirely

[_Res Ipsa]

Ah, the good old days. Why, I remember the great reckoning of 2016 after the FBI found insufficient evidence that Hillary Clinton did not commit a crime in the matter of her e-mail server. Right wingers all over America gave a giant shrug and said “well, that’s that.” At Trump’s campaign rallies, whenever he mentioned Clinton’s name, the crowds beamed and chanted IN-NO-CENT! IN-NO-CENT!

I still have a screenshot of the banner headlines at Breitbart: CLINTON COMPLETELY EXONERATED!! And who could forget the joint news conference by O’Reilly, Hannity, and Limbaugh, saying in perfect unison “We were wrong. Please forgive us!” I still tear up thinking about it.

And to this day, the right has unquestionably accepted the investigation’s results and has never talked about her e-mails again.

Good times. Good times.

[_Kevin Graham]

Mitch McConnell blocks attempt to make Mueller report public.

Because that's what we do with exonerating proof. We hide it.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/republic ... bfa1b56bc5

[_Jersey Girl]

Oh. You know I'm usually really nice to folks around here. Not always.

Hold. my. beer.

Hey, I’m just working from your corpus within this forum. These have been your issues.

And thanks for proving my point, yet again. I'll never understand why y'all do this. Why make up stuff? Is there some audience I'm unaware of that you're speaking to? I don't think I've hardly ever said a word, perhaps not even a single word, about these topics. They certainly aren't my issues.

You are by far the most intellectually dishonest, irresponsible, worst case of projection, denial and deflection that exists on this board. Top of the list. No contest.

Also, I'm pretty sure my position is in agreement with the social liberals. I really don't care what bathroom you go into, nor do I think laws are needed to regulate it either way. Nor do I believe in Pizzagate, or have I ever. FYI, nobody does. I guess you didn't get the memo, but that whole thing was a 4chan joke. Pizzagate was never an actual thing beyond a prank. But you say it's my issue, one of my core concerns that drives my politics?

No. Your issue is that you are by far the most intellectually dishonest, irresponsible, worst case of projection, denial and deflection that exists on this board. Top of the list. No contest.

Based on what? All those times I didn't talk about it? You're funny. Checking out for good now. This is an example of why. Total waste of time. Honest discussions aren't possible.

I see that in true WD fashion, you've decided to coward your way out.

Again.

[/not nice]

[_Kevin Graham]

This tweet is enough to piss me off. Was Mueller investigating a straw man this whole time? I think Seth Abramson is right. I don't recall ever hearing anyone argue, even jokingly, that Trump did this.

We are now being told that *Mueller never investigated* the collusion allegation Trump was facing—on a money-for-sanctions-relief quid pro quo—and *instead* investigated the allegation *as Trump saw it*, which was whether he struck an agreement with the IRA or Russian hackers.

For two years, as Trump's team defined the collusion allegation against him *falsely*—saying he'd been accused of striking a secret accord with the Internet Research Agency and/or Russian hackers before-the-fact—his critics shrugged and said, "Yeah, we're not looking at that."

On this collusion allegation no one was even making against Trump, the Special Counsel *didn't* find "no evidence"—which I would've been fine with, as I've never accused Trump of that type of collusion—he actually just found he didn't have 90%+ proof of that form of collusion.

This isn't backpedaling: *anyone* who reads this feed—or anyone else researching and reporting on collusion—will *know* that we did *not* accuse Trump of striking a *secret deal with the IRA or Russian hackers before-the-fact*, and that "collusion" has *never* been about that.

...So what's my reaction to today's news? Well, I thought there was *no* evidence Trump colluded *via secret agreement with the IRA or Russian hackers*—I always said that—so *now* I want to know why Mueller said he wasn't able to "exonerate" Trump on that allegation. I mean—wow.

[_canpakes]

U.S. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell on Monday blocked a second attempt by Democrats to pass a measure aimed at prodding the Justice Department to release to the public Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Lol. Now, what in this report could McConnell be so unwilling to let see the light of day? ; )

[_EAllusion]

I find it absolutely bizarre that Conservatives are crowing on and on about a memo written up by a crony, as if it exonerates the Trump crime family. :/

- Doc

It's reasonably clear from the Barr memo that Mueller didn't have sufficient evidence to bring criminal charges of a conspiracy consisting of a explicit or tacit agreement between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. That's good for Trump as far as it goes. Very good considering the alternative.

Watching this be spun into "Total Exoneration! No Evidence of Collusion!" and see huge swathes of the media go along is bad, but it is what is.

One would hope TV News anchors could take a second to explain 1) the difference between "not bringing charges" and "no evidence" and 2) all the myriad other things that fall under the non-legal term "collusion," why that may still be unacceptable conduct in a President, and what the evidence may or may not consist of. But hopes aren't always realized.

[_EAllusion]

On the obstruction piece, the Barr memo refers to further evidence we have yet to see. What we have seen is fairly damning. What remains hidden may be relatively insignificant or may be as damning or even worse than what we already know. In any case, I don't see how the coverage hasn't become desperately curious as to what it might be.