Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2019 22:11:27 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2019 22:54:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Jul 26, 2019 3:15:18 GMT -5
Thanks for posting Paul - The Great Hack wasn't on my radar yet - that's weekend watching sorted 👍
|
|
|
|
Post by cliffs on Jul 26, 2019 6:15:28 GMT -5
For every article that says this was a disaster there are counter articles saying the opposite. I suggest everyone read the report themselves and make their OWN decision. This one sort of swings both ways... news.yahoo.com/whats-the-fallout-from-muellers-testimony-014209176.htmlPersonally, I am ready to move past "the report". It is what it is and only Congress can do something with it. Now the dem candidates should focus on how to beat DT or we will have another 4 years of his circus and the investigations won't stop. |
|
|
|
Post by ErixonStone on Jul 26, 2019 7:53:59 GMT -5
It's like there are two different worlds. What I don't understand is this:
Do we agree that the Trump campaign accepted help from Russia? Did the Trump Tower meeting happen? Did the President attempt to fire Mueller, and then purposely create a false paper trail to cover it up? Did the President fire James Comey? Did the President break campaign finance laws by knowingly paying off Stormy Daniels?
Democrats are basically pointing to these confirmed acts and saying that these are crimes.
Republicans are not even arguing that these events didn't happen or that they aren't even crimes. They're argument is basically that the evidence shouldn't count (not that it is invalid or doesn't exist) because:
- Peter Strzok and Lisa Page shared some texts before Mueller was appointed
- Some of the investigators are Democrats (Mueller, himself, is a registered Republican)
- The political report that corroborates much of these findings, and is dismissed by Mueller as "unverified" was funded by a group supportive of Clinton. Again, when Mueller says the Steele dossier is "unverified" he implies that his conclusions were made independent of that document.
It's like the Republicans don't care about whether the President actively sought the help of Russia or actively committed crimes - even ones that were committed in front of the entire USA. This is the part I don't understand.
|
|
|
|
Post by B.Smooth13 on Jul 26, 2019 8:09:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Jul 26, 2019 8:27:04 GMT -5
Do we agree that the Trump campaign accepted help from Russia? Did the Trump Tower meeting happen? Did the President attempt to fire Mueller, and then purposely create a false paper trail to cover it up? Did the President fire James Comey? Did the President break campaign finance laws by knowingly paying off Stormy Daniels? Democrats are basically pointing to these confirmed acts and saying that these are crimes. Republicans are not even arguing that these events didn't happen or that they aren't even crimes. They're argument is basically that the evidence shouldn't count (not that it is invalid or doesn't exist) because: - Peter Strzok and Lisa Page shared some texts before Mueller was appointed - Some of the investigators are Democrats (Mueller, himself, is a registered Republican) - The political report that corroborates much of these findings, and is dismissed by Mueller as "unverified" was funded by a group supportive of Clinton. Again, when Mueller says the Steele dossier is "unverified" he implies that his conclusions were made independent of that document. All of that is true. It's like the Republicans don't care about whether the President actively sought the help of Russia or actively committed crimes - even ones that were committed in front of the entire USA. And this is true too. This is the part I don't understand. It's just about the ends - that they have to give up some of the GOP's soul is a price worth paying, as long as they can continue to push their corporate driven agenda - the means to get there are just details. |
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Jul 26, 2019 8:38:02 GMT -5
For every article that says this was a disaster there are counter articles saying the opposite. I suggest everyone read the report themselves and make their OWN decision. This one sort of swings both ways... news.yahoo.com/whats-the-fallout-from-muellers-testimony-014209176.htmlPersonally, I am ready to move past "the report". It is what it is and only Congress can do something with it. Now the dem candidates should focus on how to beat DT or we will have another 4 years of his circus and the investigations won't stop. The Dems should have been focusing on beating Trump with idea's instead of personal attacks (failed), long ago. |
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Jul 26, 2019 8:59:07 GMT -5
Agreed Joe. Hillary's "deplorables" comment in the last campaign was so self-defeating...
|
|
|
|
Post by ErixonStone on Jul 26, 2019 9:59:43 GMT -5
The problem is that the centrist Democrat policy is not very different from the Republican policy. They can't win on policy because Republicans can always out-Republican them.
What was Hillary going to criticize Trump's policy on? Being pro-corporation? Hillary was backed by Goldman Sachs.
Affordable Healthcare? The ACA made premiums skyrocket and coverage got worse for most people.
Social issues affect small minorities of people. As noble as it is, GRSM (Gender, Romantic, Sexual Minority) rights only impact about 5% of the population.
Hillary would have been a better President than Trump, but she would not have been a particularly good president, either. Just more status-quo.
The candidates in 2020 that have the best chance of beating Trump are the ones that can counter his policies with policies that are truly for the people. In this regard, Bernie Sanders rises above all other Democratic candidates.
More than any other candidate - Democrat and Republican alike - Sanders understands that small business owners are not the same as large mega corporations. Small business owners are part of the consumer class, not the supplier class. The money needs to flow to them too.
Sanders understands that Medicare for All helps small businesses because they can hire a full time worker and not have to provide health insurance at insurmountable cost. This helps them compete with larger corporations.
Money in the hands of the consumers drives the economy.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Jul 26, 2019 11:17:45 GMT -5
Correct Patrick - the Dems rigged the primaries to favour Hillary - and in doing so, cost themselves any hope of winning the election. Sanders had a fighting chance of contesting.... "more of the same" did not...
|
|
|
|
Post by cliffs on Jul 26, 2019 12:22:35 GMT -5
This is what repubs are denying to the American public and it scares me that his cult doesn't care.
|
|
|
|
Post by midway07 on Jul 26, 2019 18:03:07 GMT -5
It's like there are two different worlds. What I don't understand is this: Do we agree that the Trump campaign accepted help from Russia? Did the Trump Tower meeting happen? Did the President attempt to fire Mueller, and then purposely create a false paper trail to cover it up? Did the President fire James Comey? Did the President break campaign finance laws by knowingly paying off Stormy Daniels? Democrats are basically pointing to these confirmed acts and saying that these are crimes. Republicans are not even arguing that these events didn't happen or that they aren't even crimes. They're argument is basically that the evidence shouldn't count (not that it is invalid or doesn't exist) because: - Peter Strzok and Lisa Page shared some texts before Mueller was appointed - Some of the investigators are Democrats (Mueller, himself, is a registered Republican) - The political report that corroborates much of these findings, and is dismissed by Mueller as "unverified" was funded by a group supportive of Clinton. Again, when Mueller says the Steele dossier is "unverified" he implies that his conclusions were made independent of that document. It's like the Republicans don't care about whether the President actively sought the help of Russia or actively committed crimes - even ones that were committed in front of the entire USA. This is the part I don't understand. It's muddy...the Clinton campaign hired Fusion GPS and the owner Glenn Simpson, who met with the Russian woman from the Trump tower meeting multiple times, to get dirt on Trump. Simpson contracted Steele, a foreigner, to get dirt and Steele either made it up or contacted his known contacts in the Kremlin who made stuff up because he was paying them. So, both parties and candidates are "guilty" of basically doing similar things. The Clinton's had significant Russian contacts and financial interests as well...a Kremlin backed bank paid Bill 500k for a speech, while Sec of State Clinton lobbied for the same bank to avoid sanctions. Politics are dirty these days, which is why people on all sides are fed up with business as usual. No one is clean. In other words, Dems focus on the evils of the GOP and vice versa, while each are pretending they are as pure as the fresh snow. |
|
|
|
Post by cliffs on Jul 26, 2019 19:33:06 GMT -5
Funny thing about all the evidence dealing with Russian interference. It all points at DT not Hillary as to the guilty party. Let's just move on and vote. If DT gets reelected, then we have a circus for 4 more years, any of the others, 4 years of fence mending and deal making/fixing.
Not one repub in Congress has stood up and said what DT is doing has helped our country tremendously, not 1.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Jul 26, 2019 21:03:50 GMT -5
It's like there are two different worlds. What I don't understand is this: Do we agree that the Trump campaign accepted help from Russia? Did the Trump Tower meeting happen? Did the President attempt to fire Mueller, and then purposely create a false paper trail to cover it up? Did the President fire James Comey? Did the President break campaign finance laws by knowingly paying off Stormy Daniels? Democrats are basically pointing to these confirmed acts and saying that these are crimes. Republicans are not even arguing that these events didn't happen or that they aren't even crimes. They're argument is basically that the evidence shouldn't count (not that it is invalid or doesn't exist) because: - Peter Strzok and Lisa Page shared some texts before Mueller was appointed - Some of the investigators are Democrats (Mueller, himself, is a registered Republican) - The political report that corroborates much of these findings, and is dismissed by Mueller as "unverified" was funded by a group supportive of Clinton. Again, when Mueller says the Steele dossier is "unverified" he implies that his conclusions were made independent of that document. It's like the Republicans don't care about whether the President actively sought the help of Russia or actively committed crimes - even ones that were committed in front of the entire USA. This is the part I don't understand. It's muddy...the Clinton campaign hired Fusion GPS and the owner Glenn Simpson, who met with the Russian woman from the Trump tower meeting multiple times, to get dirt on Trump. Simpson contracted Steele, a foreigner, to get dirt and Steele either made it up or contacted his known contacts in the Kremlin who made stuff up because he was paying them. So, both parties and candidates are "guilty" of basically doing similar things. The Clinton's had significant Russian contacts and financial interests as well...a Kremlin backed bank paid Bill 500k for a speech, while Sec of State Clinton lobbied for the same bank to avoid sanctions. Politics are dirty these days, which is why people on all sides are fed up with business as usual. No one is clean. In other words, Dems focus on the evils of the GOP and vice versa, while each are pretending they are as pure as the fresh snow. Other than “what Hannity says” - what sources corroborate / provide evidence for this? I’ll give them some credit, Fox News have found a new level.... baseless whataboutism. |
|
International Record: 7-0-0
