Comrade Trump

[SeattleUte]

These days SU=Sean Hannity, but with a bigger vocabularly and a greater love for the ballet.

So I'm like Sean Hannity why? Because I find it offensive that democrats have criminalized politics by appointing a special prosecutor to investigate Russian collusion for obviously political reasons while it has been obvious (it was obvious at least to me) that there is no evidence of such collusion? Here is Frank Ryan's and Josef Stalin's reasoning: these peoples' politics are bad for our country, so let's prosecute them for treason we know that they didn't commit. Some of us who dislike Trump dislike democrats' totalitarian solutions even more.

The other thing I said was that this would backlash on democrats. That remains to be seen. But I think a sense of fairness on the part of a majority of Americans will make this Mueller investigation a gift for Trump.

I bet my liberal bona fides stand up well against yours. I subscribe to the New Yorker, the New York Review of Books, The New York Times, the local NPR affiliate, I voted for Hillary, and I represent death row inmates pro bono (which makes it especially offensive to me that democrats want to prosecute people for crimes they didn't commit for political reasons).

[SeattleUte]

The problem with this approach is Trump probably knew they wouldn't find anything to corroborate collusion with Russia, but he probably did know that enough of his buddies had shady business dealings that some people were going to get in trouble if the investigation continued.

So all of his cries about ending the investigation weren't about trying to avoid them finding Russian collusion. They were more about not having more of his buddies like Manafort found to have broken other random laws at other random times completely unrelated to anything Russia collusion related.

Let me make this simpler for you. If you were being investigated for treason because certain people in government simply didn't like you would you be pissed off?

[CardiacCoug]

I bet my liberal bona fides stand up well against yours. I subscribe to the New Yorker, the New York Review of Books, The New York Times, the local NPR affiliate, I voted for Hillary, and I represent death row inmates pro bono (which makes it especially offensive to me that democrats want to prosecute people for crimes they didn't commit for political reasons).

I freaking love The New Yorker, have subscribed to it for over 20 years, and subscribe to NYTimes but I think that just means I like to read interesting and well-written articles. It’s not part of “liberal bona fides” in any way.

[SeattleUte]

I freaking love The New Yorker, have subscribed to it for over 20 years, and subscribe to NYTimes but I think that just means I like to read interesting and well-written articles. It’s not part of “liberal bona fides” in any way.

They have actually gone off the rails since Trump. The front page of The NY Times is full of opinion and only left leaning or leftist opinion. There is not even a pretense old divide between opinion and news. I find this super offensive; how stupid do they think we are? I generally find the New Yorker offputting for similar reasons except for Toobin. They are like highbrow Fox News of the left. I still read them. I consider all points of view. The most objective news is the front pages of the Wall Street Journal.

[CardiacCoug]

Yep I agree that WSJ news is very good and tends to be more objective since Trump. I pay for that too.

[frank ryan]

Mueller didn’t clear Trump of obstruction, Barr did. That’s in line with the memo Barr prior to be appointment that a sitting president can’t be appointed. Interesting the investigation finished without a sit down with Trump or further interviews with his dishonest children.

[creekster]

Mueller didn’t clear Trump of obstruction, Barr did. That’s in line with the memo Barr prior to be appointment that a sitting president can’t be appointed. Interesting the investigation finished without a sit down with Trump or further interviews with his dishonest children.

Is it interesting? I don't think it is very interesting at all. And what obstruction do you think is out there? The obstruction with the Mueller/Russia investigation which turned up nothing? It's over.

[wapiti]

Mueller didn’t clear Trump of obstruction, Barr did. That’s in line with the memo Barr prior to be appointment that a sitting president can’t be appointed. Interesting the investigation finished without a sit down with Trump or further interviews with his dishonest children.

[Commando]

Mueller didn’t clear Trump of obstruction, Barr did. That’s in line with the memo Barr prior to be appointment that a sitting president can’t be appointed. Interesting the investigation finished without a sit down with Trump or further interviews with his dishonest children.

Why would they need to interview them when there is/was an open FBI investigation and surveillance on them? They don't need an interview b/c they had intel on them in real time.

[Commando]

Is it interesting? I don't think it is very interesting at all. And what obstruction do you think is out there? The obstruction with the Mueller/Russia investigation which turned up nothing? It's over.

You sure about that?

[wapiti]

I think the Russia stuff is a nothingburger.

Question:

Is it a nothingburger because you believe nothing happened, or because you don't think it matters if it did?

Because I think the numerous lies from him and those around him about his and his campaign's actions around Russia are not in dispute at this point.

The Mueller Report will be a big disappointment. This is playing out predictably. Investigation drags on for a long time, a few Trumpians get twisted up and charged with perjury and/or obstruction. They find some tax violations and maybe some obscure campaign finance issues. But a smoking gun on Trump himself? Nope. Nothingburger.

His campaign's actions around Russia are not in dispute? Do you only read CNN and the Huffington Post?

Swish!

[Uncle Ted]

Is it interesting? I don't think it is very interesting at all. And what obstruction do you think is out there? The obstruction with the Mueller/Russia investigation which turned up nothing? It's over.

Yeah, are you sure about that? It seems the actual investigation is just starting.

Embedded Tweet

Embedded Tweet

[creekster]

You sure about that?

About what? That Mueller is over? Yes.

I think all the noise from the GOP about investigating Obama and so forth is just noise meant to make the democrats moderate their own political demands for more investigation. The fact is that Mueller was the standard, the ensign for the anti-Trump nations, if only he would be allowed to complete his work!! Well, he did complete his work, finding no collusion He did find that the Russians wanted to interfere, just as they likely have done for every election during my lifetime. As you know, russian nationals comprise the bulk of those indicted. He also found some shenanigans by Manafort and a couple of others, showing they are crooks. Is this the outcome that was predicted and hoped for by so many? Not really. It looks a lot more like nothing than it does like something.

[SeattleUte]

Yep I agree that WSJ news is very good and tends to be more objective since Trump. I pay for that too.

There are scores of examples of mainstream media bias every day. One that comes to mind now is the long and fawning New Yorker article about the now totally discredited Steele dossier and its creator.

Why is Buzzfeed still even drawing a breath?

[Commando]

Yeah how dare they accuse of Trump approaching James Comey to curtail his investigation of Manafort and then firing him because of the "Russia thing."

Interesting how Trump is now on Team Mueller now that *phew* he didn't find anything. Why so nervous? Get this crazy person out of the White House is the takeaway here.