Trump/Russia 2016 election investigation (continued)

#1285

No, it’s not the same. It’s troubling that you don’t see the difference.

0 Likes

#1286

You’re so cute sometimes…

0 Likes

#1287

Deliberately promoting or implementing policies destructive to the commonwealth isn’t treason. It can be a lot worse than treason, because many acts of treason have less severe consequences.

0 Likes

#1288

Very, very true.

0 Likes

#1289

But if Barr’s attitude on this speaks toward his general mindset on executive power and privilege, that to me is worrisome when it inevitably intersects with Mueller’s report and the DoJ’s approach.

0 Likes

#1290

Yet…

0 Likes

#1291

I just get the feeling that there are two distinct groups of folks in Trump’s administration. There are folks who are working with him, but still believe in America. They may have ideals that differ dramatically from those of folks here, but they still love the country, and believe in fundamental concepts like freedom and democracy. Someone like Kelly probably falls into this category. Someone like Mattis certainly does.

But then there are folks like Steven Miller, or Trump himself, who literally have zero regard for anything we would traditionally consider as an American value, or really values at all. They are motivated entirely by really terrible things. They don’t simply have ideas about how to make the world better that differ from yours, but they actually want bad stuff to happen. Like, for Trump, he would love it if he could just be king and get away with any level of corruption, and it literally doesn’t matter what happens after that. The whole world could be destroyed. He doesn’t care.

Those two groups are very different in my mind. The former might be doing stuff that’s bad, but it’s a different kind of bad, at least to me. I think that Barr would fall into the former, rather than the latter. I just don’t see him totally casting aside everything to support Trump’s corruption.

0 Likes

#1292

An effing AOL account by a National Security Advisor? You gotta be effing kidding me.

Cummings also told Cipollone that the committee obtained a document showing that McFarland was using an AOL.com account to conduct official White House business. Cummings said the document shows that McFarland was in communication with Tom Barrack, a longtime Trump confidant and the chairman of the president’s Inaugural Committee, about transferring “sensitive U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia.”

0 Likes

#1293
0 Likes

#1294

My favorite “word cloud”, regarding coverage of the 2016 presidential election…

Main, mainstream media certainly take information security best practices seriously, don’t they?

Narrator: They don’t.

0 Likes

#1295

Looks to me like Trump wants to “Make People support Obama”

0 Likes

#1296

Looking at that makes me angry. Again. I wish we could print out a copy and tape it in every cubicle at the NYT, CNN and NBC as they approach 2020.

0 Likes

#1297

Wait, why make it easier them by giving them a nice printed list of what to type? Make them dredge up their old crap on their own if they’re going to just repeat it. I’m getting really worried we’re definitely getting Trump 2.0 next year if the Mueller report doesn’t come up with anything 100% conclusive.

0 Likes

#1298

Sadly, it’s not Mueller’s job to preserve the American electorate from its own idiocy.

0 Likes

#1299

Yeah, it wouldn’t surprise me if Trump didn’t collude, at least actively. I suspect he’s guilty of many financial crimes but like any crime boss he has his lackeys do things so he’s somewhat shielded.

The sad thing is Mueller may show that there was collusion, that the Russians did try (and succeed) in swinging the election, but if the evidence falls short of harming Trump, people will see it as an exoneration of Trump and the Republicans and move past it.

0 Likes

#1300

Except he colluded openly in a nationally televised speech. If I went on TV and said Jimmy the Toucan and Louis the Weasel if you’re listening, I hope you whack Lucky DeVitti and Lucky DeVitti ends up with two in the head, I think I’m probably in some trouble.

0 Likes

#1301

This is a terrible analogy. For one thing, DeVitti never got whacked (Russia never got Hillary’s emails). For another, outside a provable relationship with Jimmy or Louis, what you say about them on TV wouldn’t be evidence of a conspiracy.

0 Likes

#1302

If there was actually no willful collusion somehow then a lot of people have done an awful lot of lying for no reason.

0 Likes

#1303

You have to remember that for the people involved, lying is akin to breathing. They don’t need a reason to do it, and often don’t realize they are doing it.

0 Likes

#1304

Yet they tried, and they tried immediately after he asked them to.

The relationship is proven, isn’t it?

0 Likes