-
The best guy to follow throughout this whole thing has been Andrew McCarthy. He's hardly a Trump partisan and he's a former high profile prosecutor.. unfortunately his writing style is about as interesting as you'd expect from a lawyer:
The next step is an investigation into the investigation. Some will claim that's hyper divisive, however I think it's important.
Any suggestion that a sitting administration used the power of the security agencies to undermine a political opponent is incredibly serious. It's banana republic level shit.
If it didn't happen, clear peoples names. If it did happen, put people in jail -
The “best guy” has always been Justin Raimondo, the editorial director at Antiwar.com, who has been able to smoke out every American national security hoax since the Bosnian War (at least) and had this one nailed the day it started. Unfortunately Raimondo has been poleaxed by cancer the past year and is very close to death and his commentaries have been intermittent, but he’s been on top of all of it, to the degree that Antiwar.com wanted to release him b/c supposedly his hard-hitting commentaries exposing the scam have driven down contributions. That’s how pathetic and widespread the mass delusion has been. For his sake I’m happy he’s lived long enough to see the outcome.
Raimondo was also likely the first internet columnist, going right back to the very beginning of the public internet, who employed hyperlinks throughout his commentaries, so that everything he wrote could be sourced, which has always made him invaluable, to the degree that he’s a hard-hiting libertarian, but has routinely been a source for the left-wingers I named above, Greewald, Blumenthal, etc. Those guys mix it up on twitter all the time back & forth, they don’t blike his ideology, and yet they respect him enormously because he’s typically well ahead of the curve and has his facts nailed down with an encyclopedia photographic memory.
-
Adding, and even though he’s a fire-breathing right-wing hawkish nutcase in most instances, Mark Levin has nailed this one from Day One as well. He’s warning that the full report cannot be released to the public, arguing a Grand Jury is impanelled by the prosecutor (Mueller) with subpoenaed witnesses interviewed without lawyers present, and that they’ve been given assurances that their testimony cannot be made public. Expect Democrat conspiracy wackos to use this fact as a cudgel to beat down the report as a cover-up and demand MORE investigations, for the same reason you’ll never be able to tell Tom Cruise that Xenu isn’t real.
-
“Historically bad.”
Jimmy Dore has always made the point about the mass delusion lunacy for the past two years that if you didn’t believe their tinfoil hat fever dream, if you were even so much as mildly skeptical, then YOU were the one who got dismissed as a fringe “conspiracy theorist.”
-
@Duluth said in US Politics:
....The next step is an investigation into the investigation. Some will claim that's hyper divisive, however I think it's important.
Any suggestion that a sitting administration used the power of the security agencies to undermine a political opponent is incredibly serious. It's banana republic level shit.
If it didn't happen, clear peoples names. If it did happen, put people in jailThat’s a very good point. Anything that has such potential for serious repercussions needs to be investigated. I see this as the main point of the investigation, the possibility of foreign interference in the US elections has far reaching ramifications and rightly IMO had to be investigated, both carry a similar degree of importance. Neither should be ignored.
-
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
I see this as the main point of the investigation, the possibility of foreign interference in the US elections has far reaching ramifications and rightly IMO had to be investigated, both carry a similar degree of importance. Neither should be ignored.
Law enforcement is tasked with investigations of crimes, not “possibilities” of crimes, or else you can use that lame excuse as a banana republic tool to investigate everybody, anywhere, on any charge, an Orwellian nightmare. This exercise was a snipe-hunt in search of a crime. What it really was, was a manufactured pretext for a soft coup attempt to overturn a legitimate election result.
-
@Salacious-Crumb That’s certainly one viewpoint and if the investigation of the investigation does go ahead, maybe we’ll find out.
-
Barrs letter is out. Trump completely and utterly exonerated.
The media is in tatters. -
@Baron-Silas-Greenback Though they (in the letter) were at pains to say that "While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
I have to say I find that wording strange and I'm not really comfortable with it.
-
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback Though they (in the letter) were at pains to say that "While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
I have to say I find that wording strange and I'm not really comfortable with it.
You are referring to the obstruction? Because it certainly did not say that about collusion. He was 100% completely and utterly exonerated form collusion.
As for obstruction, he was exonerated the prosecutors just cannot bring themsleves to say it, so they punted it to the AG.
Dont forget this is prosecutors document, not a judgment, the case has to be significantly weak to not even charge. All this was done with the defence having no input. For the prosecutors to decide they have no case... that is an exoneration. If some women said you raped her, and even the prosecuting lawyers said... nah'.. there is no evidence for that and we cannot even fight that case. Would you consider yourself exonerated of her allegation? That goes beyond even the court trial going your way. The case was so weak it didnt make it to court... -
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback I think we're agreeing with each other, strange as that seems.
-
Classic Trump.
Lets his Democrat opponents and his "enemy of the people" media wind themselves up until they start believing conspiracy theories. When pet conspiracy theory turns out to be just that, he goads them into making bigger fools of themselves with their reaction.
He may be bombastic and his policies flawed but a fool he ain't.
-
Ok.... I need help. I have been watching CNN for the last 2 hours. They have jumped soooo many sharks ... they have run out of sharks and run of of fonzies.
Bizarre
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
I have been watching CNN
That's the first time I've heard someone say that phrase in a long time...!
-
@Catogrande said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback Though they (in the letter) were at pains to say that "While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
That’s the Democratic cultists’ spin, certainly, but it’s ridiculous.
The prosecutor is not tasked with “exoneration.” It’s his job to find evidence of a crime and then indict. The prosecutor found exactly ZERO evidence to indict. That’s why there are ZERO indictments and ZERO recommendations for indictments.
And besides, all they’re doing is giving Trump another advantage, where he can 1) legitimately argue that it’s idiotic to “obstruct” an investigation of a crime that never happened; and 2) insist that defending oneself against false accusations is not obstruction, and he would have to have been an idiot to remain silent for almost 3 years of unrelenting false accusatuions spat at him by the Democrats and their media cohort.
The Dems can push this idiotic propaganda all they like, but it’s only going to boomerang on them and make Trump look even more vindicated. People understand now that this was indeed a “witch-hunt,” exactly as described by Trump.
US Politics