honorentheos wrote:EAllusion wrote:People have taken "not sufficient evidence to prosecute an agreement to conspire" with "no evidence of collusion!" which is really unfortunate in its inability to read.
This.
It's been eerie how the press and public has responded.
To use one example, David Brooks who appears on PBS's Newshour on Fridays and is a regular New York Times columnist, commented on Friday that the majority of beltway insiders in-the-know had been looking beyond the Mueller report to the SDNY's cases as where it was more likely something would be made public that would have serious implications for Donald Trump as the Mueller report was narrowly focused on the question of if Trump obstructed justice when he fired James Comey, and if the Trump campaign or members of it had knowingly and actively conspired with Russia in order to win the election. In that report, he made the comment he didn't think the latter could be proved due to the Trump "campaign" not really having existed as an organized campaign capable of engaging in something complicated like conspiracy in the way it is meant in this case. But following the release of the Barr memo, he shifted away from commentary on the content of the memo and what it revealed to basically questioning the degeneration of American politics into reliance on scandals rather than on doing the heavy lifting of making a case for one's political position in order to sway people to one's side. The irony here being his article is basically making a scandal out of the reliance on scandals rather than demonstrating the more excellent way he was claiming had been lost.
Links:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/shiel ... ppens-nexthttps://www.registerguard.com/opinion/2 ... es---againIt calls into question how people even read given the Barr memo raises so many questions it should have been an accelerant on the conversation rather than the out it's being presented as for Trump, in my opinion.
It calls into question how gullible people are given how many times before Trump declared, "NO COLLUSION!" and everyone saw it for what it was but now at X+1 it's suddenly turned into, "Yup. No collusion."
It calls into question what happened to journalistic standards and the willingness to let the evidence build the story rather than immediate reactions to events become truth that must be interpreted over and over again.
These are surreal times.
This and This and This.
Mueller's investigation had become more of an afterthought over the past year ever since more focus was placed on the other investigations in which Trump had no ability to protect himself from. The SDNY already said based on their investigations that he is an unindicted co conspirator who committed at least two felonies. The only reason hs is not indicted is because he's a sitting President.
For Trump and his propaganda machine to attack people for pointing out his crimes and character flaws, and to say that makes them unpatriotic, is nothing short of autocrat mentality. Once you can equate yourself with a nation and therefore patriotism = loyalty to a man, that's really the first steps in becoming a dictatorship. But Trump supporters are so far drunk on the kool aid that they just don't get it. Or don't want to.
Let's say Obama was accused of getting campaign support from a Muslim country. I seem to recall that actually happening, but imagine if Obama had
lied about his connections with said Muslim country.
Let's say Obama's campaign manager was caught lying, and then caught lying again after he was arrested, about his times to said Muslim country. Imagine if he pled guilty and was sentenced to serve time.
Let's say Obama's Attorney General lied to members of his own Senate about his connections with that Muslim country.
Let's say Obama's National Security Advisor lied about his connections with that Muslim country.
Let's say two more campaign aides were arrested and caught lying to the FBI about their connections with that Muslim country's officials.
Let's say the man Obama knew longer than anyone else in politics was arrested and caught lying to the FBI about his connections with that Muslim country's officials.
And just for fun, let's say Obama's personal attorney was also indicted and convicted.
Now if all of the above happened and the media had treated it like a witch hunt and a hoax as the Trump team insists should have been the case over the past two years ... we all know this probably would have led to a civil war started by Right Wing media figures.
It truly boggles my mind that the party of birtherism and Pizzagate have the audacity to call proper and responsible reporting on ongoing convictions a massive conspiracy theory and something that needs to be dealt with and punished accordingly.
The only real parallel I can think of is when Hilary Clinton's campaign manager's emails were illegally released and the Right Wing had a frenzy over comments Podesta made in a private email about Catholics. For them that was proof Democrats as a whole were two faced demons.
Trump's campaign manager goes to jail for defrauding Americans out of hundreds of millions and suddenly it doesn't matter because Trump says he barely knew the guy.
White privilege doesn't get much obvious than this.
Black President getting help from brown people from another country? That's all it take to get the conspiracy nuts in a frenzy for 8 years.
White President and a dozen of his closest associates busted for lying about their connections with people from another hostile country that has been actively attacking us in cyber warfare?
Well, rich white people are supposed to connect with other rich white people. It doesn't matter if they lie about it.