Mueller says Trump was not exonerated but Trump declares victory

[JHolmesJr]

If you were to call someone on here a mfkr...they would hit the report button and you would be instantly banned.

 

So I dont how its ok for a first time rookie idiot US lawmaker to talk like that and not be disciplined by

party leadership. 

 

And it's perfectly ok for Trump to say what he did....he did NOT literally say go back to where you came from...thats a 

media fake news story....he said go back to Somalia, Palestine etc....fix things there , then come back and show us

how to run this country...whats racist about that?

 

Same with the Elijah Cummings comment....he just spoke the truth about what a sh&^hole Baltimore is.

More race card nonsense from the Dems.

[sirineou]

5 hours ago, mogandave said:

But I thought he was a dictator, no?

No! he is a wannabe

 

5 hours ago, mogandave said:

You guys compare home to Hitler regularly, but he can’t do anything because someone called him a mother f’r.

???????

 

5 hours ago, mogandave said:

If only someone had thought to call Hitler a mother f’r think of all the lives that would have been saved.

 it would had being a start in the right direction

5 hours ago, mogandave said:

“Profanity is the effort of a feeble brain to express itself forcibly."

Unless it is not profanity but a reasonable observation, 

Are you not the guys who constantly complain about PC?

" Former porn star Stormy Daniels says she had an affair with President Donald Trump in 2006, a year after he married Melania Trump and just months after the first lady gave birth to Barron." 

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-melania-stormy-daniels-affairs-marriages-timeline-2018-3

Literally, this and other instances make him a "a mother... " so not profanity but an accurate  Non PC observation. 

[sirineou]

25 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

If you were to call someone on here a mfkr...they would hit the report button and you would be instantly banned.

 

So I dont how its ok for a first time rookie idiot US lawmaker to talk like that and not be disciplined by

party leadership. 

 

And it's perfectly ok for Trump to say what he did....he did NOT literally say go back to where you came from...thats a 

media fake news story....he said go back to Somalia, Palestine etc....fix things there , then come back and show us

how to run this country...whats racist about that?

 

Same with the Elijah Cummings comment....he just spoke the truth about what a sh&^hole Baltimore is.

More race card nonsense from the Dems.

"Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. "

[Misty]

11 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

Yes, well my question was why didn’t Mueller testify that but for Trump’s obstruction they would have proven he had colluded with the Russians to interfere with the election, not whether or not it was in the report.

That said, it’s not int the report either, so again, rather than call you a liar I will assume you are just regurgitating something you read or heard someplace other than the “report”.

I do find it amusing the number of people that claimed to have read it that resort to making things up.

No, that was not the question you wrote. Rather than call you a liar, I'll refresh your memory.  You asked "well why didn't he say so" in response to my post.  You did not specify anything more than this.  I had no idea you were talking about oral testimony.  

 

That's fascinating that you admit to projecting on people assumptions you've made about them. I read the report, parts of it multiple times.  And the executive summary.  I have professional and personal reasons to do so.  *I did not watch Mueller's oral testimony.

 

Did you read either report?

[Misty]

13 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

What the Ruskies did was basically mind f@(k Americans, or so the smart folks claim. Between social media, tv ads, instigating demonstrations and so on and so on, all the while pretending all this crap was done by Americans. But, is this really any different than what our candidates do to each other. The only thought I can have on this is that "Is their any way to stop it?

My other thought is "hey these Ruskies are some clever MFers".

 

So, yeah you can say they interfered, but we have no way of knowing to what degree it had an effect on the presidential outcome. 

 

 

There are some things that cannot be measured, yet the outcome is still observable.

 

The impact of Russian interference was obvious in the case of Jade Helm 15.  Remember that?  During the midst of it I received many emails, messages, and posts from concerned folks in the US. Some Texas residents (and others) were convinced that the US federal government was launching a military operation to take over the state.  Texas governor Greg Abbott ended up calling out his state military to "observe" what was in fact a routine military exercise. 

 

We later find out that Texas residents were victims of a successful Russian social media bot attack (more in "Assault on Intelligence" by Michael Hayden).  It may have been a test case to see how effective this type of attack would be. 

 

I would not dismiss the effectiveness of Russian disinformation. Many of us from the US may have anecdotal stories from friends and relatives about disinformation they received. Being from two of the swing states, I know I do.  Some of it was clearly pro-Russian, some of it was poorly constructed, and some of it was quite disturbing.  At the time, I didn't understand where the disinfo was coming from, but it did have the desired impact on the recipients.

 

The sophistication of this game has only been increased since then, and there are more players now.

 

 

 

[Tug]

And we have no protection Mitch McConnell is blocking any protection wonder why

[Cryingdick]

3 minutes ago, Tug said:

And we have no protection Mitch McConnell is blocking any protection wonder why

 

Because it's over.

[Tug]

12 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Because it's over.

I was referring to the 2 bills submitted to congress to protect our elections and making it illegal to accept and not report foreign help in rigging an election and its far from over Donald will be indicted in 2020 he is exposed for what he is

[mogandave]

 
It isn't, and it ought to be condemned.
But taking the political discourse to the gutter, making it infantile, abusive, fact light and generally, low - this is to a large extent something the current president revels in. He sets the tone, he dictates the style. Opposition and supporters following suit is regrettable. Pretty much the same can be seen on this forum and on these discussions. Wasn't all that great to begin with, but the last 2-3 years are the worst I recall.

He sets the tone?

How many times and for how long has he been called a dictator, compared to Hitler, called an anti-Semite?

The left sets the tone. How often we here the left applaud when some morons calls him an MF or says F Trump?

[EVENKEEL]

2 hours ago, Misty said:

There are some things that cannot be measured, yet the outcome is still observable.

 

The impact of Russian interference was obvious in the case of Jade Helm 15.  Remember that?  During the midst of it I received many emails, messages, and posts from concerned folks in the US. Some Texas residents (and others) were convinced that the US federal government was launching a military operation to take over the state.  Texas governor Greg Abbott ended up calling out his state military to "observe" what was in fact a routine military exercise. 

 

We later find out that Texas residents were victims of a successful Russian social media bot attack (more in "Assault on Intelligence" by Michael Hayden).  It may have been a test case to see how effective this type of attack would be. 

 

I would not dismiss the effectiveness of Russian disinformation. Many of us from the US may have anecdotal stories from friends and relatives about disinformation they received. Being from two of the swing states, I know I do.  Some of it was clearly pro-Russian, some of it was poorly constructed, and some of it was quite disturbing.  At the time, I didn't understand where the disinfo was coming from, but it did have the desired impact on the recipients.

 

The sophistication of this game has only been increased since then, and there are more players now.

 

 

 

But, were votes changed at the booth, did the ruskies hack into the voting system and alter tallies. OR are you saying the US is so simple and stupid that their votes could be swayed by bogus internet stories.

[mogandave]

No, that was not the question you wrote. Rather than call you a liar, I'll refresh your memory.  You asked "well why didn't he say so" in response to my post.  You did not specify anything more than this.  I had no idea you were talking about oral testimony.  
 
That's fascinating that you admit to projecting on people assumptions you've made about them. I read the report, parts of it multiple times.  And the executive summary.  I have professional and personal reasons to do so.  *I did not watch Mueller's oral testimony.
 
Did you read either report?

I’m sorry my question confused you, but as we were discussing the testimony, I thought it was clear. I was unclear. Again, my apologies.

After I understood your confusion I addressed your response and went in to clarify my originally unclear question, again I apologize if I hurt you feelings in the process, it was not my intent.

Yes, I read the report and listened to the testimony, I didn’t watch it.

I really do not understand what you mean by “projecting on people assumptions”, can you explain it? Also, if I am doing something, why would you be fascinated that I would admit to doing it?

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, EVENKEEL said:

But, were votes changed at the booth, did the ruskies hack into the voting system and alter tallies. OR are you saying the US is so simple and stupid that their votes could be swayed by bogus internet stories.

"OR are you saying the US is so simple and stupid that their votes could be swayed by bogus internet stories."

Of course they are, all over the world people are swayed easily. Think alone about Hillary Clinton running a pedo porn site from the basement of a pizzeria story.

[mogandave]

"OR are you saying the US is so simple and stupid that their votes could be swayed by bogus internet stories."
Of course they are, all over the world people are swayed easily. Think alone about Hillary Clinton running a pedo porn site from the basement of a pizzeria story.

And a fair number of people think Elvis is still alive. I think the number of people that believed Hillary Clinton was running a pedo porn sight from the basement of a pizzeria is pretty small, certainly not enough to have any real impact on an election.

I wonder what percentage of people believed and continue to believe Trump is a Russian agent working in collusion with Putin to undermine democracy in the US.

You do, yes?

[xylophone]

Morch said: But taking the political discourse to the gutter, making it infantile, abusive, fact light and generally, low - this is to a large extent something the current president revels in.

 

This applies to Trump I'm afraid...........and he has proven time and time again that he is stupid, so it is no wonder he utters the things he does. And it isn't going to end soon cos you can't fix stupid.

 

[stevenl]

24 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

And a fair number of people think Elvis is still alive. I think the number of people that believed Hillary Clinton was running a pedo porn sight from the basement of a pizzeria is pretty small, certainly not enough to have any real impact on an election.

I wonder what percentage of people believed and continue to believe Trump is a Russian agent working in collusion with Putin to undermine democracy in the US.

You do, yes?

 

So you agree with me but feel the need to make this about me.

Sorry, no go.

[marcusarelus]

18 hours ago, Slip said:

Oh, you silly, silly boy.

So, what do we know?  Facebook sold data to a British firm who may or may not have sold it to the Russians.  Yup.  I'd agree with that.  Time to put those Brits in the witness stand and find out what they knew and who they told.  That makes sense because we know they did influence the election.  

 

Many folks influenced the American election.  It was only illegal if they were British or Russian or some other foreign country.  The Brits left a much clearer trail with Steele and Cambridge.  Go get em Robert.  

[mogandave]

So you agree with me but feel the need to make this about me.
Sorry, no go.

I agree with you that people are gullible, but that gullibility only goes so far.

Not sure how I’m making it about you, I was just asking you a question. If you’re embarrassed to answer don’t, but clearly there are people that believe it.

How about the “golden showers” story, do you believe that as well?

I wonder what percentage of guys enjoy being peed on anyway. If I were making up a story, I would have said he was peeing on the hookers, that’s at least a little more believable given his demeanor...

[Misty]

3 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

But, were votes changed at the booth, did the ruskies hack into the voting system and alter tallies. OR are you saying the US is so simple and stupid that their votes could be swayed by bogus internet stories.

No, I said neither of these things.  Simply stating that there are incidents where false stories shared on the internet have had an observable impact on opinions.  I gave an example, but this is not limited to the US.

[mogandave]

In general historians consider that a mistake made by fdr. But an off topic mention of wwII, and at the same time flaming another poster?

Yeah, a lot of things he did historians consider a mistake but they don’t get much press.

In any event, I believe most everything he did, he did with what he thought was the country’s best interest at heart.

[marcusarelus]

22 minutes ago, stevenl said:

In general historians consider that a mistake made by fdr. But an off topic mention of wwII, and at the same time flaming another poster?

The poster said another President had never done anything like Trump I was telling him what another President did with aliens that was much worse than anything Trump did.  

 

I think historians will say much of what Trump has done was a mistake.  So?  

 

 The other poster wrote, "I don't remember a president ever telling american citizens, people born here, members of congress, thay if they disagree with him should go back to the countries they or their parents came from??"

 

He said it would be the end of democracy and since it's been 70 years since FDR interned the Japanese that's obviously not the case.  

 

 

 

[marcusarelus]

Take Facebook out of the equation and no other country has even a remote chance to effect the election.  As I understand it - it is not the ads but the data points of the people and their geographic concentrations that enabled susceptible people to be targeted for real or fake messages which decided the election. 

 

I realize this will upset those who are not concerned about what was done as opposed to what might have been done but really murder is more important than thinking about murder.    

 

This is how Trump won.  He went after the people who would change their vote based on information purchased from Facebook and Mark Z ain't talking about it.

 

Based on the fact that the Trump campaign bought the information from a British company I believe he broke the law and could be impeached on buying information from a British company.  It would't take me and 300 lawyers 2 years to prove it either.  Put me in a room with Mark Z and Cambridge Analytics for a couple of hours.    

 

Am I the only one or does it bother anyone else that both Trump and Mueller think we are all to stupid to figure this out?  

[Morch]

6 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

He sets the tone?

How many times and for how long has he been called a dictator, compared to Hitler, called an anti-Semite?

The left sets the tone. How often we here the left applaud when some morons calls him an MF or says F Trump?
 

 

 

Yes. Trump sets the tone and style. If you wish to claim he doesn't get way more exposure than any of his detractors, guess you're willing to claim whatever.

 

And cry me a river. Trump gets harshly criticized for things he does, things he says, and the way he says or does them. You want to claim it's all a "reaction" on Trump's part - enjoy to your fantasy. It's not like he's been a whole lot different before becoming president, though.

 

To be clear, again (since you'll probably try the spin anyway) - I'm not condoning the profanity used, or them over the top comparisons. I thing they detract from the force of the criticism, and instead promote populist notions - which is pretty much what Trump is all about. I do see the President as having more of a responsibility for the current political discourse (or lack of, rather). You're free to disagree.

 

[mogandave]

 
Yes. Trump sets the tone and style. If you wish to claim he doesn't get way more exposure than any of his detractors, guess you're willing to claim whatever.
 
And cry me a river. Trump gets harshly criticized for things he does, things he says, and the way he says or does them. You want to claim it's all a "reaction" on Trump's part - enjoy to your fantasy. It's not like he's been a whole lot different before becoming president, though.
 
To be clear, again (since you'll probably try the spin anyway) - I'm not condoning the profanity used, or them over the top comparisons. I thing they detract from the force of the criticism, and instead promote populist notions - which is pretty much what Trump is all about. I do see the President as having more of a responsibility for the current political discourse (or lack of, rather). You're free to disagree.
 

I’m not claiming anything but that it’s not Trump setting the tone.

I remember President Bush being called a nazi and whatnot by the left years ago, so claiming the tone is a result of Trump’s idiocy I think is a stretch.

The vulgarity has increased, but only because Trump (unlike President Bush, et al...) pushes back. Lefty doesn’t like push-back...

I generally agree with your second paragraph, I think the way he says much of what he says is hideous, but I generally agree with the spirit of what he says. I understand that you don’t.

I don’t think the squad’s race had anything to do with what he said, and the left’s whole racist thing is getting to the cry-wolf point. I think people are starting to see it, at least I hope so.

Funny that at least one of the four had called for Trump’s deportation before he said anything about them....

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

I’m not claiming anything but that it’s not Trump setting the tone.

I remember President Bush being called a nazi and whatnot by the left years ago, so claiming the tone is a result of Trump’s idiocy I think is a stretch.

The vulgarity has increased, but only because Trump (unlike President Bush, et al...) pushes back. Lefty doesn’t like push-back...

I generally agree with your second paragraph, I think the way he says much of what he says is hideous, but I generally agree with the spirit of what he says. I understand that you don’t.

I don’t think the squad’s race had anything to do with what he said, and the left’s whole racist thing is getting to the cry-wolf point. I think people are starting to see it, at least I hope so.

Funny that at least one of the four had called for Trump’s deportation before he said anything about them....


 

 

 

Yeah, right. Trump only reacts, Trump only pushes back. I doubt you truly believe that.

Spin it however you like - the President gets way more airtime than any other person on this planet. So yes, he does set the tone - even if accepting the notion that he only responds and never initiates.

[JHolmesJr]

17 hours ago, sirineou said:

"Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. "

..."Then come back and show us how it's done"

[mogandave]

 
Yeah, right. Trump only reacts, Trump only pushes back. I doubt you truly believe that.
Spin it however you like - the President gets way more airtime than any other person on this planet. So yes, he does set the tone - even if accepting the notion that he only responds and never initiates.

I never said Trump only reacts. You’re just making that up to discount what I actually said.

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

I never said Trump only reacts. You’re just making that up to discount what I actually said.

 

 

You post repeatedly in a manner portraying Trump's words as reaction to criticism. If you want to quibble over that, go right ahead. I'm discounting what you said (and with good reason) - that much is true.

[rabas]

34 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

No, it was Republicans that hired Fussion GPS. Hillary and the dems had nothing to do with it.

 

No. The dossier was a Clinton Special

 

The opposition research conducted by Fusion GPS on Donald Trump was in two distinct operations, each with a different client. The first research operation, from October 2015 to May 2016, was domestic research funded by The Washington Free Beacon. The second operation, from April 2016 to December 2016, was funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign. Only the second operation involved the foreign research that produced the dossier.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Russia_dossier

 

It's murky, as is most covert activity.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed along with replies.  

 

[Ramen087]

Not exonerated... a non event, a non entity, in the world of law in the USA. It's simply the rhetoric of a desperate group of people attacking a man who lawfully won an election. They simply refuse to accept the fact Ms. Clinton played under the same rules as Mr. Trump, and was bested. Hanging on to this imaginary, unfair result will fail them in 15 months time; they better find something based in reality to challenge the incumbent.