Russiagate is this era's WMD

[Trill Clinton]

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1109523920804347904?s=19

[hater]

Disagree with title tbh
WMDs hoax targeted anoil rich country


Russiahoax targeted a sitting US presidente :lol

[Winehole23]

Comparison is a little off.

The WMD lies led to hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of people displaced and a region that is destabilized to this day.



(American empire so we don't like to mention that.)

[Trill Clinton]

Comparison is a little off.

The WMD lies led to hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of people displaced and a region that is destabilized to this day.



(American empire so we don't like to mention that.)

Gotta see the bigger picture

https://twitter.com/thekarami/status/1109949035941511168?s=19

[Winehole23]

Gotta see the bigger picture

https://twitter.com/thekarami/status/1109949035941511168?s=19Yep.

Same was true of Iran Contra, Clinton perjury, and the 2008-9 financial crisis: total impunity for responsible elites and their stenographers in the commentariat.

[hater]

We don't know the total damage of the Russia hoax nigas we do now it polarized or county further, damaged Russia US relations immensely props to Russia for keeping the cool head after the unbased accusations and sanctions, definitely obliterated the mainstream media and many fake journalists careers are in jeopardy, also many freshman politicians entire careers have been related to Russia hoax that will have repercussions for years to come

[Winehole23]

what do you mean when you say "the Russia hoax?"

what, in your view, was fabricated or otherwise made up?

[Spurs Homer]

Still

people taking barrs report as gospel

suckers!

[hater]

what do you mean when you say "the Russia hoax?"

what, in your view, was fabricated or otherwise made up?

The hoax that Trump colluded with Russia to win election. That was fabricated and regurgitated by mainstream media daily for 2 years. That hoax

[CosmicCowboy]

Still

people taking barrs report as gospel

suckers!

:lmao

Another TDS sheeple.

[spurraider21]

The hoax that Trump colluded with Russia to win election. That was fabricated and regurgitated by mainstream media daily for 2 years. That hoax
well there was an ongoing FBI investigation over the matter. the media isn't irresponsible for reporting on the investigation or the events within it (x was arrested, investigators are looking into y)... to the extent that they reported trump's downfall was imminent, or that he in fact did collude (i dont watch enough tv news to know which outlets did say those things definitively), then yes they should be shunned. but if they just reported on the investigation itself? the president and his campaign being investigated for federal crimes is certainly newsworthy

we'd get the best sense of this when mueller's full report is released. for example, mcclatchy doubled/tripled down on the cohen-prague stuff.

[Winehole23]

The hoax that Trump colluded with Russia to win election. That was fabricated and regurgitated by mainstream media daily for 2 years. That hoaxConspiracy with Russia. Right.

Who fabricated what now?

Be as specific as you can.

[Spurs Homer]

Damn - that tricky media!

They completely programmed my eyes and ears (and YOURS TOO!) to believe we heard Trump's treasonous behavior in this video!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-Xw0_2eMJg

[boutons_deux]

Trash is compromised by, loves to suck off Pootin, who bought Trash like a cheap backstreet whore.

Russian-money-laundering NRA, venal "hyper partriot", is in on the compromise by Russia

Plain as fucking day.

Pootin is laughing his ass off as he has corrupted, duped, soft, naive America into fucking itself.

[Ball Buster]

More like the Dems version of “Benghazi”

[Chris]

well there was an ongoing FBI investigation over the matter. the media isn't irresponsible for reporting on the investigation or the events within it (x was arrested, investigators are looking into y)... to the extent that they reported trump's downfall was imminent, or that he in fact did collude (i dont watch enough tv news to know which outlets did say those things definitively), then yes they should be shunned. but if they just reported on the investigation itself? the president and his campaign being investigated for federal crimes is certainly newsworthy

we'd get the best sense of this when mueller's full report is released. for example, mcclatchy doubled/tripled down on the cohen-prague stuff.

Wow you are so full of shit. Remind me NEVER to take any of your posts seriously if I make the mistake of conversing with you again. Disingenuous dirt bag.

[spurraider21]

Wow you are so full of shit. Remind me NEVER to take any of your posts seriously if I make the mistake of conversing with you again. Disingenuous dirt bag.
uh, ok...?

if you want to spell out exactly what you're taking offense to, that's one thing. but you do you.

[Spurs Homer]

uh, ok...?

if you want to spell out exactly what you're taking offense to, that's one thing. but you do you.

How dare you speak ill of dear leader!

[CitizenDwayne]

I agree, the media should not have reported on an investigation into a sitting president

[hater]

well there was an ongoing FBI investigation over the matter. the media isn't irresponsible for reporting on the investigation or the events within it (x was arrested, investigators are looking into y)... to the extent that they reported trump's downfall was imminent, or that he in fact did collude (i dont watch enough tv news to know which outlets did say those things definitively), then yes they should be shunned. but if they just reported on the investigation itself? the president and his campaign being investigated for federal crimes is certainly newsworthy

we'd get the best sense of this when mueller's full report is released. for example, mcclatchy doubled/tripled down on the cohen-prague stuff.

Yeah having teams of "experts" every hour, every day for 2 years to discuss the latest Russia collusion tidbit leaked slowly by anonymous "sources" is business as usual :lmao

Let's take a look :lmao

[hater]

:lmao

https://twitter.com/fuctupmind/status/1086463597457403906?s=21

[TSA]

“the walls are closing in”
“the beginning of the end”

:lmao

[Spurs Homer]

Comes with the territory;

The media focusing 24/7 on Trump gave him a better chance to become president
(Russia carried him over the goal line)

Now the media -will report whatever it sees 24/7 -

Stop committing treason and committing crimes and the media will report whatever Trump does for the country -

So far - 2 trillion for the rich is his ONLY "accomplishment"

and helping Russia become relevant again.

:clap

[Spurs Homer]

“the walls are closing in”
“the beginning of the end”

:lmao


It will be funnier soon!

[spurraider21]

cable news has long been an embarrassment tbh. jon stewart made a living doing nothing but crapping on cable news. but yeah, those people deserve egg on their face and will certainly have more credibility issues going forward.

[ChumpDumper]

Damn - that tricky media!

They completely programmed my eyes and ears (and YOURS TOO!) to believe we heard Trump's treasonous behavior in this video!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-Xw0_2eMJgSo what is the explanation for Trump's bending over for Putin and Kim now?

It made sense if he were somehow beholden to Putin -- but now the only explanation is Trump is just a fucking weakling.

[Spurs Homer]

cable news has long been an embarrassment tbh. jon stewart made a living doing nothing but crapping on cable news. but yeah, those people deserve egg on their face and will certainly have more credibility issues going forward.

So - YOU

have seen the full Mueller report?

Enlighten us.

How can the media be at fault for reporting the obvious - before our eyes - corruption?

Maybe Mueller was directed by Barr to finish early?
Maybe Mueller documented crimes and Barr mischaracterized Muellers conclusions - or directed Mueller to AVOID drawing conclusions?

[Spurs Homer]

So what is the explanation for Trump's bending over for Putin and Kim now?

It made sense if he were somehow beholden to Putin -- but now the only explanation is Trump is just a fucking weakling.

Or something else?

Maybe he IS beholden to Putin - but BARR - spun it otherwise?


Why did McConnell block a vote to release the Mueller report?

Finally, why won't Trump call out Russia now since Barr says Mueller confirmed russia's attack?

[ChumpDumper]

Or something else?

Maybe he IS beholden to Putin - but BARR - spun it otherwise?


Why did McConnell block a vote to release the Mueller report?

Finally, why won't Trump call out Russia now since Barr says Mueller confirmed russia's attack?Who knows?

I'll accept that he's a weakling.

[Spurs Homer]

Who knows?

I'll accept that he's a weakling.

Yes -

the Mueller report will explain more

[boutons_deux]

No, the Media Didn’t Over-Hype ‘Russiagate’

No human being on Earth has done more to keep the Trump-Russia narrative in the news than Donald Trump.

Those who have long contended (https://www.thenation.com/article/russia-mueller-investigation-trump/#39;s%20an%20overlooked%20point.%20Democrats%20beg an%20desperately%20trying%20to%20blame%20anyone%20 but%20themselves%20for%20losing%20the%20presidency %20to%20a%20joke%20of%20a%20game%20show%20host%20& %20finally%20settled%20on%20a%20foreign%20villain% 20&%20here%20we%20are,%202%201/2%20years%20later,%20with%20all%20of%20it%20expose d%20as) that “Russiagate” was a story promoted by Clinton supporters eager to absolve her from any responsibility for losing to Donald Trump are hardly in a position to take victory laps over Barr’s letter to Congress.

as of this writing, we have not seen Robert Mueller’s report, nor had an accounting of why he made the prosecutorial decisions that he did.

Barr had to “go through contortions to avoid charging” Trump with the crime. We should not allow the goalposts to be moved in a way that lets the president of the United States off the hook for potential felonies.

the crux of the story was always the possibility that the regime had pushed for sanctions relief as a quid pro quo for Russia’s assistance—a question left unanswered by Barr’s summary.

Barr cleared Trump of criminal wrongdoing,

but didn’t address the counter-espionage questions related to

whether Trump had been compromised somehow as a result of negotiating the Trump Tower Moscow deal deep into the 2016 campaign, or through other business dealings (https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21/how-russian-money-helped-save-trumps-business/).

But the biggest problem with claims that the media focused too much on the Mueller probe is the premise itself.

real journalists did their jobs covering an objectively huge story.

It is bizarre to suggest that

the appointment of a special counsel to investigate the president of the United States after he fired his FBI director and

privately told two high-level Russian officials (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html) that

he had “faced great pressure because of Russia” but

that it had been “taken off” with Comey’s dismissal is not

a legitimately massive story.

The same is true of allegations that Trump obstructed justice (something that

William Barr had categorically ruled out charging him with (https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/June-2018-Barr-Memo-to-DOJ-Muellers-Obstruction-Theory-1.pdf) before becoming AG

and being read in on the investigation).

over the course of the 22 months since Mueller’s appointment,

there have been dozens, if not hundreds, of highly significant developments,

each of which merited a decent amount of coverage.

all been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes, or are currently awaiting trial, and while those cases weren’t related to Russia directly,

they all sprung from Mueller’s probe and all of them kept the Mueller investigation in the headlines.

those close to Trump had over 100 contacts with Russian actors during the campaign, according to The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/26/us/politics/trump-contacts-russians-wikileaks.html), many of which they hid from investigators.

Each and every time Trump dangled a pardon (http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/cohen-email-trump-dangled-pardon-obstruction-justice-mueller.html) or Rudy Giuliani disclosed too much to reporters (https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/22/trump-rudy-giuliani-relationship-1120008) or Paul Manafort violated the terms of his release (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/politics/manafort-bail-revoked-jail.html)while awaiting trial,

it was a significant and legitimate news story.

Those claiming that the media focused too much attention on the Mueller probe should

specify which stories they believe didn’t merit extensive reporting.

a compulsive tendency to randomly blurt out “no collusion, no collusion”–a claim he’s made 231 times since mid-2017,

he’s also kept Russia front and center

by refusing to implement sanctions (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-sanctions/trump-administration-holds-off-on-new-russia-sanctions-despite-law-idUSKBN1FI2V7) that Congress passed against Russian actors,

repeatedly meeting with Vladimir Putin (https://www.vox.com/2019/1/29/18202515/trump-putin-russia-g20-ft-note) with no advisers or note-takers present, and

arguing that Russia was within its rights to annex Crimea (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2018/07/03/donald-trumps-talking-points-on-crimea-are-the-same-as-vladimir-putins/?utm_term=.60ec39f2992b).

When the president of the United States (https://www.thenation.com/article/russia-mueller-investigation-trump/)tells reporters (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/putin-is-probably-involved-in-assassinations-and-poisonings-but-its-not-in-our-country-trump-says/2018/10/14/d745e21c-cff2-11e8-83d6-291fcead2ab1_story.html?utm_term=.15c42d0720c9) that the president of Russia has “probably” ordered assassinations and poisonings,

“but I rely on them; it’s not in our country,” that’s objectively newsworthy.

. Trump made the investigation a huge international story,

https://www.thenation.com/article/russia-mueller-investigation-trump/ (https://www.thenation.com/article/russia-mueller-investigation-trump/)

[hater]

:lmao CNN getting obliterated today

https://twitter.com/DustinGiebel/status/1110411772060753921

[Spurs Homer]

No, the Media Didn’t Over-Hype ‘Russiagate’

No human being on Earth has done more to keep the Trump-Russia narrative in the news than Donald Trump.

Those who have long contended (https://www.thenation.com/article/russia-mueller-investigation-trump/#39;s%20an%20overlooked%20point.%20Democrats%20beg an%20desperately%20trying%20to%20blame%20anyone%20 but%20themselves%20for%20losing%20the%20presidency %20to%20a%20joke%20of%20a%20game%20show%20host%20& %20finally%20settled%20on%20a%20foreign%20villain% 20&%20here%20we%20are,%202%201/2%20years%20later,%20with%20all%20of%20it%20expose d%20as) that “Russiagate” was a story promoted by Clinton supporters eager to absolve her from any responsibility for losing to Donald Trump are hardly in a position to take victory laps over Barr’s letter to Congress.

as of this writing, we have not seen Robert Mueller’s report, nor had an accounting of why he made the prosecutorial decisions that he did.

Barr had to “go through contortions to avoid charging” Trump with the crime. We should not allow the goalposts to be moved in a way that lets the president of the United States off the hook for potential felonies.

the crux of the story was always the possibility that the regime had pushed for sanctions relief as a quid pro quo for Russia’s assistance—a question left unanswered by Barr’s summary.

Barr cleared Trump of criminal wrongdoing,

but didn’t address the counter-espionage questions related to

whether Trump had been compromised somehow as a result of negotiating the Trump Tower Moscow deal deep into the 2016 campaign, or through other business dealings (https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21/how-russian-money-helped-save-trumps-business/).

But the biggest problem with claims that the media focused too much on the Mueller probe is the premise itself.

real journalists did their jobs covering an objectively huge story.

It is bizarre to suggest that

the appointment of a special counsel to investigate the president of the United States after he fired his FBI director and

privately told two high-level Russian officials (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html) that

he had “faced great pressure because of Russia” but

that it had been “taken off” with Comey’s dismissal is not

a legitimately massive story.

The same is true of allegations that Trump obstructed justice (something that

William Barr had categorically ruled out charging him with (https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/June-2018-Barr-Memo-to-DOJ-Muellers-Obstruction-Theory-1.pdf) before becoming AG

and being read in on the investigation).

over the course of the 22 months since Mueller’s appointment,

there have been dozens, if not hundreds, of highly significant developments,

each of which merited a decent amount of coverage.

all been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes, or are currently awaiting trial, and while those cases weren’t related to Russia directly,

they all sprung from Mueller’s probe and all of them kept the Mueller investigation in the headlines.

those close to Trump had over 100 contacts with Russian actors during the campaign, according to The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/26/us/politics/trump-contacts-russians-wikileaks.html), many of which they hid from investigators.

Each and every time Trump dangled a pardon (http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/cohen-email-trump-dangled-pardon-obstruction-justice-mueller.html) or Rudy Giuliani disclosed too much to reporters (https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/22/trump-rudy-giuliani-relationship-1120008) or Paul Manafort violated the terms of his release (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/politics/manafort-bail-revoked-jail.html)while awaiting trial,

it was a significant and legitimate news story.

Those claiming that the media focused too much attention on the Mueller probe should

specify which stories they believe didn’t merit extensive reporting.

a compulsive tendency to randomly blurt out “no collusion, no collusion”–a claim he’s made 231 times since mid-2017,

he’s also kept Russia front and center

by refusing to implement sanctions (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-sanctions/trump-administration-holds-off-on-new-russia-sanctions-despite-law-idUSKBN1FI2V7) that Congress passed against Russian actors,

repeatedly meeting with Vladimir Putin (https://www.vox.com/2019/1/29/18202515/trump-putin-russia-g20-ft-note) with no advisers or note-takers present, and

arguing that Russia was within its rights to annex Crimea (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2018/07/03/donald-trumps-talking-points-on-crimea-are-the-same-as-vladimir-putins/?utm_term=.60ec39f2992b).

When the president of the United States (https://www.thenation.com/article/russia-mueller-investigation-trump/)tells reporters (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/putin-is-probably-involved-in-assassinations-and-poisonings-but-its-not-in-our-country-trump-says/2018/10/14/d745e21c-cff2-11e8-83d6-291fcead2ab1_story.html?utm_term=.15c42d0720c9) that the president of Russia has “probably” ordered assassinations and poisonings,

“but I rely on them; it’s not in our country,” that’s objectively newsworthy.

. Trump made the investigation a huge international story,

https://www.thenation.com/article/russia-mueller-investigation-trump/ (https://www.thenation.com/article/russia-mueller-investigation-trump/)


I hate to be "defender" of anyone's posts - and he could give two fucks if anyone does or doesn't - as it should be - but I digress...

but I don't see how anyone could read the above post and then honestly say that it is not pretty much spot on.

What is puzzling is why an accurate/spot on post like this - has so many posters attacking the poster often?

Hate truth much?

[Roscoe P. Coltrane]

I do believe some of you in here are in need of help. Give them a call I do believe they may be able to help you.http://rlv.zcache.com/doctors_office_appointment_card_business_card-r47a5309ec8b64c1d96158397c2952f84_xwjey_8byvr_512. jpg

[midnightpulp]

Wow you are so full of shit. Remind me NEVER to take any of your posts seriously if I make the mistake of conversing with you again. Disingenuous dirt bag.

C'mon, brother. Nothing he said was unreasonable.

And the media is a joke, on both sides. Reporters, cable news networks, and websites don't care about the "truth," nor do they care about balanced debate over an issue. They care about ratings and clicks, and what produces ratings and clicks are outrage, scandal, fear, and confrontation. After the Mueller report turned up nothing on Trump, people were "laughing" at the meltdowns Maddow, et al were having. I assure you she doesn't care. She's worth 20 million, and the fallout from the Mueller probe is sure to be good for business. On the flip side, Hannity, Ingraham, and Carlson (also worth tens of millions of dollars) wouldn't have cared if Trump were being walked away in handcuffs right now. Any Trump downfall would translate into record ratings for Fox, since you'd get both sides of the political spectrum tuning in en masse to watch the fireworks.

These people are in the entertainment business, not the truth-telling business. The truth is usually more boring than spin and imaginative speculation, meaning there's no money in it.

[Spurs Homer]

C'mon, brother. Nothing he said was unreasonable.

And the media is a joke, on both sides. Reporters, cable news networks, and websites don't care about the "truth," nor do they care about balanced debate over an issue. They care about ratings and clicks, and what produces ratings and clicks are outrage, scandal, fear, and confrontation. After the Mueller report turned up nothing on Trump, people were "laughing" at the meltdowns Maddow, et al were having. I assure you she doesn't care. She's worth 20 million, and the fallout from the Mueller probe is sure to be good for business. On the flip side, Hannity, Ingraham, and Carlson (also worth tens of millions of dollars) wouldn't have cared if Trump were being walked away in handcuffs right now. Any Trump downfall would translate into record ratings for Fox, since you'd get both sides of the political spectrum tuning in en masse to watch the fireworks.

These people are in the entertainment business, not the truth-telling business. The truth is usually more boring than spin and imaginative speculation, meaning there's no money in it.


How irresponsible of people to continue to regurgitate this garbage!


NO ONE has seen the Mueller report.

Only the BARR report.

You are part of the problem you are railing against!

[midnightpulp]

How irresponsible of people to continue to regurgitate this garbage!


NO ONE has seen the Mueller report.

Only the BARR report.

You are part of the problem you are railing against!

Who really cares anymore? Trump isn't in handcuffs, so whatever suspicious minutia we find will be irrelevant. What I mean by "nothing" is nothing will be in that report that will send his ass to jail.

[CosmicCowboy]

How irresponsible of people to continue to regurgitate this garbage!


NO ONE has seen the Mueller report.

Only the BARR report.

You are part of the problem you are railing against!

TDS. :lmao

[boutons_deux]

Who really cares anymore?

Trash, Barr, McConnell care enough to keep Mueller port secret. Anybody know why?

[TSA]

C'mon, brother. Nothing he said was unreasonable.

And the media is a joke, on both sides. Reporters, cable news networks, and websites don't care about the "truth," nor do they care about balanced debate over an issue. They care about ratings and clicks, and what produces ratings and clicks are outrage, scandal, fear, and confrontation. After the Mueller report turned up nothing on Trump, people were "laughing" at the meltdowns Maddow, et al were having. I assure you she doesn't care. She's worth 20 million, and the fallout from the Mueller probe is sure to be good for business. On the flip side, Hannity, Ingraham, and Carlson (also worth tens of millions of dollars) wouldn't have cared if Trump were being walked away in handcuffs right now. Any Trump downfall would translate into record ratings for Fox, since you'd get both sides of the political spectrum tuning in en masse to watch the fireworks.

These people are in the entertainment business, not the truth-telling business. The truth is usually more boring than spin and imaginative speculation, meaning there's no money in it.

yup

1110356246396313600

[boutons_deux]

There was no liberal scam

Trash is blatant Pootin puppet, in PLAIN DAYLIGHT.

I expect Trash, now even more emboldened, to lift all (Obama's) sanctions on Russia, while still failing to impose sanctions on Russia voted by Congress in 2017.

Then he will get his hotel in Moscow, eventually, as payoff.

Scam? Y'all rightwingnutjob assholes been duped, conned, by Trash.

[Spurs Homer]

Who really cares anymore? Trump isn't in handcuffs, so whatever suspicious minutia we find will be irrelevant. What I mean by "nothing" is nothing will be in that report that will send his ass to jail.

Who cares? What about citizens that want the facts? What about people that know a cover up when they see it happening?

How the fuck do you know the evidence will be irrelevant?
How do you know why Mueller punted?

What if he was pressured into it?

Isn't that obstruction?

What if Mueller found enough evidence - but was forbidden from making a conclusion?

Maybe Trump would be in handcuffs if this cover up is exposed?

Why are you so easily buying this possible criminal cover up from the same people who did nothing but throw out conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory?

Republicans and Trump specifically do nothing but "project" their own criminality onto the other side -

surely trump accused the "deep state" of coming up with a huge coup and witch hunt -


this is the kind of person - that would do exactly what he has accused other of doing -

in this case - cover up a crime.

[Chris]

C'mon, brother. Nothing he said was unreasonable.

And the media is a joke, on both sides. Reporters, cable news networks, and websites don't care about the "truth," nor do they care about balanced debate over an issue. They care about ratings and clicks, and what produces ratings and clicks are outrage, scandal, fear, and confrontation. After the Mueller report turned up nothing on Trump, people were "laughing" at the meltdowns Maddow, et al were having. I assure you she doesn't care. She's worth 20 million, and the fallout from the Mueller probe is sure to be good for business. On the flip side, Hannity, Ingraham, and Carlson (also worth tens of millions of dollars) wouldn't have cared if Trump were being walked away in handcuffs right now. Any Trump downfall would translate into record ratings for Fox, since you'd get both sides of the political spectrum tuning in en masse to watch the fireworks.

These people are in the entertainment business, not the truth-telling business. The truth is usually more boring than spin and imaginative speculation, meaning there's no money in it.

He's trying to lend credibility to the "investigation" because he's been on the wrong side of the argument for over 2 years. Trying to distance himself from Media ("I don't watch enough to know who has a bias blah blah blah) He's full of shit. I'm the one who's been telling the forum these people are professional agitators. You don't need to explain how Mockingbird Media operates to me, I've been trying to educate the board for years.

[Winehole23]

I'M THE ONE WHO TOLD YOU











(said the magpie)

[spurraider21]

He's trying to lend credibility to the "investigation" because he's been on the wrong side of the argument for over 2 years. Trying to distance himself from Media ("I don't watch enough to know who has a bias blah blah blah) He's full of shit. I'm the one who's been telling the forum these people are professional agitators. You don't need to explain how Mockingbird Media operates to me, I've been trying to educate the board for years.
there was an investigation. you dont have to like that there was, but there was one. if news outlets covered the proceedings, then good on them for doing their job. if you read print news from wapo, nyt, politico, usa today, etc (excluding op-eds, of course), you got a pretty clear picture of the investigation. who was questioned. who was indicted. the legal battles during the course of the investigation. that's what i did.

if you watch a lot of cable news or even your TV network news... your msnbc/cnn/fox. your morning joe, anderson cooper, george stephanopoulis, etc, then yeah you probably got a shit ton of opinion masqueraded as news. and any of those people who pushed that "we know that trump colluded, its a matter of when mueller presses charges" all deserve egg on their face. i never said "i dont know who has a bias." i said i dont know which particular heads made outright claims of "trump colluded" or "the walls are closing in", etc.

the only exposure i have to cable news is what people here post about it. i dont have cable/satellite at home, i just subscribe to netflix/prime and read all my news in print. so i dont get all the sensationalist stuff that you guys like to complain about here.

again, the fact that the investigation ultimately found no wrongdoing by trump with respect to russian interference efforts (based on what we know from barr's summary) is NOT the same as saying the investigation was a fraud/hoax. you seem to be thinking that the latter has been proven. it hasn't.

of course not to mention they punted the obstruction case

[AaronY]

These people are in the entertainment business, not the truth-telling business. The truth is usually more boring than spin and imaginative speculation, meaning there's no money in it.

This is 100% the truth with the public bearing a lot of the blame but getting so little of it. If this :cry muh Russia :cry horseshit didn't bring in ratings the story would have been nothing and people and news networks would have moved on. Instead it went on and on and was omnipresent everday with morons like djohn and RandomGuy refreshing the Kyle Griffin twitter feed 2700x a day for the latest BOOMs or others staying glued to the TV 24/7 constantly scouring the internet and TV for the latest updates in the hopes of getting some get out of Trump free card

[TSA]

Who cares? What about citizens that want the facts? What about people that know a cover up when they see it happening?

How the fuck do you know the evidence will be irrelevant?
How do you know why Mueller punted?

What if he was pressured into it?

Isn't that obstruction?

What if Mueller found enough evidence - but was forbidden from making a conclusion?

Maybe Trump would be in handcuffs if this cover up is exposed?

Why are you so easily buying this possible criminal cover up from the same people who did nothing but throw out conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory?

Republicans and Trump specifically do nothing but "project" their own criminality onto the other side -

surely trump accused the "deep state" of coming up with a huge coup and witch hunt -


this is the kind of person - that would do exactly what he has accused other of doing -

in this case - cover up a crime.

:lmao

[midnightpulp]

He's trying to lend credibility to the "investigation" because he's been on the wrong side of the argument for over 2 years. Trying to distance himself from Media ("I don't watch enough to know who has a bias blah blah blah) He's full of shit. I'm the one who's been telling the forum these people are professional agitators. You don't need to explain how Mockingbird Media operates to me, I've been trying to educate the board for years.

"Alternative media" is just as shameless in their pursuit of clicks, views, followers, etc. I cut through the bullshit in trying to find as many unspun facts as I can and see how those facts in question blend with my personal morality. All you can really do. We also need to acknowledge that many of the issues we debate are in fact moral gray areas, where a lone "objectively" correct solution can't exist, logically speaking. Over the past two or so decades, compromise (on both sides) has become more rare in favor of a win-at-all-costs mentality. This perhaps correlates with the rise of 24/7 News networks and the Internet. Compromise doesn't generate confrontation, and politicians and their media endorsers live off confrontation. If there's no "other," you can't create an "enemy" in order to drive people to the polls and to watch your network. No one wants to hear/read about Trump and Dems coming to compromise on border security. No. Trump has to continue his demand for a certain number of billions as the Dems deny him at every turn. Each side is playing to their respective bases, while the media gets more and more fodder for their programs. Maddow will call him a racist, while Hannity will talk about how Dems hate America.

And on and on it goes.

[Chris]

Too many blanket statements here.


"Alternative media" is just as shameless in their pursuit of clicks, views, followers, etc.

Depends on your source. Independent journalists don't get ad revenue (clicks) and rely on sponsors and donations through outlets like Patreon.


I cut through the bullshit in trying to find as many unspun facts as I can and see how those facts in question blend with my personal morality.

Facts are facts to me, and my morality has nothing to do with it.


We also need to acknowledge that many of the issues we debate are in fact moral gray areas, where a lone "objectively" correct solution can't exist, logically speaking.

Give me a few examples. Most debates can be won with fact and logic imo.



Over the past two or so decades, compromise (on both sides) has become more rare in favor of a win-at-all-costs mentality.

That's called identity politics which evolved from mud-slinging. Pandering to their respective bases with a mask of indifference.


This perhaps correlates with the rise of 24/7 News networks and the Internet.

Mostly propaganda outlets and search engines do their jobs respectively filtering preferred news to the top. Platforms like Twitter and Youtube are complicit with such methods.


Compromise doesn't generate confrontation, and politicians and their media endorsers live off confrontation.

Controversy creates cash. Everything is an editorial now, once reserved for a small section at the back of the paper.


If there's no "other," you can't create an "enemy" in order to drive people to the polls and to watch your network.

Democrats/Leftist create imaginary enemies to justify their wrath. People on the right do this as well, but the Left are Jedi Masters.


No one wants to hear/read about Trump and Dems coming to compromise on border security. No.

I do. A lot of Americans want compromise and are tired of the wedge that Media/poltics drives between families/friends.


Trump has to continue his demand for a certain number of billions as the Dems deny him at every turn. Each side is playing to their respective bases, while the media gets more and more fodder for their programs. Maddow will call him a racist, while Hannity will talk about how Dems hate America.

This is typical red vs. blue optics at a psychological level. They're been using this dynamic for decades and it doesn't matter whether a Dem or Repug is POTUS. The agenda remains the same.

Trump isn't part of the big club. That's why they hate him. That's why Americans love him.

[spurraider21]

Too many blanket statements here.

Americans love him.
lol

[boutons_deux]

lol

42% approval, 55% disapproval, even after Barr pardons Trash.

[midnightpulp]

Facts are facts to me, and my morality has nothing to do with it.

Give me a few examples. Most debates can be won with fact and logic imo.

Trump isn't part of the big club. That's why they hate him. That's why Americans love him.

No. Most debates can't be won on facts and logic alone. The area of moral philosophy is about 3000 years old, and moral philosophers still can't agree on what a "correct" moral stance vis a vis an issue is. When discussing any issue with moral implications, you can approach said issue from a variety of moral positions (utilitarianism, relativism, consequentialism, deontological, virtue ethics, and religious). Perhaps this is easier for you since your morality informed by Christianity is anchored to objective truth handed down by God, but even within the Christian moral framework, debate still abounds. Example is the immigration debate. You think the Law of the Land should be obeyed per scripture, while I think per scripture that the proverbial doors should be "open" for people who are suffering. Christ also had some interesting ideas about rich people, so nor do I think it's "biblical" for people like Bezos to amass wealth larger than many countries while so many people die of starvation around the world. I'm not a practicing Christian, but it seems many on the right invoke Christ and scripture when it's convenient politically.

Other gray area issues are the death penalty, sentencing, abortion, taxation, age of consent laws as applied to firearm ownership, voting age, military eligibility, and sexual activity. There's no objective solution to any of these.

:lol at any billionaire not being a part of the "big club."