Trump the Autocrat.

[Cow Poke]

Yeah, I've not seen anybody on the left or right suggest he was a fool, just that he seemed confused and not in full possession of his faculties. This is in sharp contrast to the man with a razor sharp legal mind and laser like focus we were sold for the past two years.

And that's exactly the contrast they have been drawing.

[Cow Poke]

Perhaps, but that doesn't change the facts of what is in the report itself....

Tap your heels together three times while repeating "Trump is going down, Trump is going down, Trump....."

[Mountain Man]

...what is in the report, which Mueller affirmed, is that the President is guilty of much obstruction, witness tampering, etc.

There's Jimmy's desperate spin, and then there's the truth:

"As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime."
-Special Counsel Robert "Dirty Cop" Mueller

[JimL]

There's Jimmy's desperate spin, and then there's the truth:

"As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime."
-Special Counsel Robert "Dirty Cop" Mueller

Don't be a knucklehead, MM. That's been explained to you ad infinitum. What Mueller also made clear yesterday, contrary to Trumps constant and public lie, is that he could not and did not clear the President of crimes, or exonerate him, which if he could have done so, he would have. He left that to congress, which btw he also made clear to be the intent of the report.

[Mountain Man]

Don't be a knucklehead, MM. That's been explained to you ad infinitum. What Mueller also made clear yesterday, contrary to Trumps constant and public lie, is that he could not and did not clear the President of crimes, or exonerate him, which if he could have done so, he would have. He left that to congress, which btw he also made clear to be the intent of the report.

I guess you missed the part where two committee members challenged Mueller to name the legal code that gives a prosecutor the authority to "exonerate" the subject of an investigation, and Mueller couldn't answer! This ridiculous idea that it is a prosecutor's job to "exonerate" turns the entire notion of "innocent until proven guilty" on its head.

[Sparko]

Don't be a knucklehead, MM. That's been explained to you ad infinitum. What Mueller also made clear yesterday, contrary to Trumps constant and public lie, is that he could not and did not clear the President of crimes, or exonerate him, which if he could have done so, he would have. He left that to congress, which btw he also made clear to be the intent of the report.

You normally can't "exonerate" anyone in an investigation, since they are already innocent unless you can prove them guilty. They don't try to prove you innocent and exonerate you, since that is the default position. Now if you are accused of a crime and the investigation finds someone else did it instead of you, then you can be "exonerated" because someone else was guilty.

[Mountain Man]

mueller_testifies.jpg

[carpedm9587]

Oh I actually think you do listen to conservative sources. You just dismiss them.

Actually - no. I find that I nod "yes" to the conservative sources about 30-40% of the time (immigration, fiscal responsibility, etc.). I shake "no" the rest of the time. I nod "yes" to the left-leaning sources about 40-50% of the time. Then there are those positions in which I don't appear to align with either camp. So your characterization is wrong.

But as I said to CP, my experience is I will likely be told you know my mind better than I and your will stick to your perception, so I'll leave the last word on this to you.

[carpedm9587]

It was toward the end of the first testimony - and no one is spinning anything. It's not a point of evidence - I made that clear.

I'll look for it. Thanks.

ETA: Just did, and reviewed the audio. I'm seeing a man with a long career who served under six presidents being asked a question out of the blue about one of them and brain farting on it. It gets a big "yawn" from me. He laughed and apologized for misremembering. I don't know why it gets one iota of attention, except it can be spun into "confused, dazed, and onset dementia."

[Teallaura]

I'll look for it. Thanks.

ETA: Just did, and reviewed the audio. I'm seeing a man with a long career who served under six presidents being asked a question out of the blue about one of them and brain farting on it. It gets a big "yawn" from me. He laughed and apologized for misremembering. I don't know why it gets one iota of attention, except it can be spun into "confused, dazed, and onset dementia."

Okay, now you are being DELIBERATELY nasty. I ALREADY SAID anyone could have a bad day - I did NOT use the incident as evidence that Mueller was impaired - I simply noted that there MIGHT be a reason for that mistake and the overall poor performance.

READ THE WHOLE POST!

[carpedm9587]

Cause to be done isn't DO. The point stands.

They either do it now or it never happens - no one is gonna sit still for another round of 'lookie, we can't prove what we set out to prove' investigation of any sort. The time to put up or shut up has come.

I know many on the right want this to be true, but for many of us it simply is not. I want to know if our president is profiting from his decisions, and making them to inflate his wealth rather than improve our country. I want to know if the bizarre positions Trump has taken internationally are because he is laboring under the control of a foreign power. I want to know what OTHER (and more serious) lies Trump has told besides the bold-faced ones he tells day after day. I want to know if he compromised our national security in bypassing security credential approval processes. I want to know if he set out to obstruct the investigation about Russian interference in our elections. I (and many like me) would be VERY happy to see this fully investigated in public view.

Not gonna happen - far more likely to bury the Democrats and Pelosi knows it. She wants this whole fiasco dead and buried as fast as possible. Any further dragging out of the nonsense can only hurt Democrats - this is the second huge disappointment the Dems have hyped and I expect it will cost them in 2020 as it is.

We'll see.

[carpedm9587]

Yep - and the point stands - it's still a setback.

Umm...OK. I'd say it's pretty commonplace for some indictments/accusations to fall off the table as they work through the process. Focusing on the ones that have fallen off and ignoring the ones that are continuing through is the very definition of "cherry picking."

[Sparko]

Actually - no. I find that I nod "yes" to the conservative sources about 30-40% of the time (immigration, fiscal responsibility, etc.). I shake "no" the rest of the time. I nod "yes" to the left-leaning sources about 40-50% of the time. Then there are those positions in which I don't appear to align with either camp. So your characterization is wrong.

But as I said to CP, my experience is I will likely be told you know my mind better than I and your will stick to your perception, so I'll leave the last word on this to you.

You try so hard to present yourself as a reasonable centrist. Yet your posts here belie that claim. Especially the way you handwave away any conservative sources we present to you and completely dismiss them. And that isn't mind reading, it is just post reading. Your posts. I am not sure if you are just trying to fool us into thinking you are a moderate/centrist, or you have actually fooled yourself into believing it.

[carpedm9587]

Except it didn't fail, nor is it over. The only question now is whether or not to begin impeachment hearings now, or as Pelosi would prefer, to wait until all of the evidence is made public thereby putting the onus on the unprincipled, unpatriotic, Republican Senate to either oust Trump from office or face the wrath of a more informed public.. There are still investigations going on, as Mueller made clear yesterday, and there are many witnesses that still need to testify. Trump and his criminal cronies are still obstructing, still defying subpoenas.

Well - we'll have to disagree on "failed." I don't think anyone learned anything from those hearings that wasn't in the report and/or wasn't already known - and the Dems should have known that was what was going to happen. All they did was give the Reps a public forum to create a gazillion anti-Mueller soundbites and assemble cherry-picked videos like the one CP provided. The exercise was pointless and, if the Dem continue tripping over themselves like this, they will likely lose, IMO.

They should have simply used the Mueller report as the launching point for congressional investigations (which IS a function of Congress, despite claims to the contrary) to determine in an impeachment is warranted. Pelosi is making an error, IMO.

[Teallaura]

Umm...OK. I'd say it's pretty commonplace for some indictments/accusations to fall off the table as they work through the process. Focusing on the ones that have fallen off and ignoring the ones that are continuing through is the very definition of "cherry picking."

Not when the only point is 'this is a disappointment to Democrats' - sheesh, you are just trying to start a fight now.