Did
Mueller come up with nothing? Certainly not. Just not the slam-dunk
"unindicted co-conspirator" affirmation that might have provided a
bipartisan basis for impeachment, which is what you need to get impeachment and
removal. Leading Russian figures were indicted for a criminal attack on the American
election system. Several American figures, including the former campaign chair,
deputy campaign chair, and national security advisor, have all been convicted
of felonies, based on questionable relationships with Russia and lying about
it. Evidence of criminal activities were found which Mueller did not think to
be part of the narrow scope of his inquiry, which he farmed out to other
jurisdictions, such as the Southern District of New York. What they did not
find was sufficient evidence that Trump or people in the campaign assisted in
the basic Russian crime of interfering in our elections.
There
was a crime against our country, and it was Mueller's job to prosecute those
who were involved in committing it. Please, please, please, don't tell me that
you're OK with a foreign government hacking into campaign computer systems and leaking secret stuff, so long as they
do it to the Democrats and not the Republicans. The Russians try to do this in
elections around the world. It was no witch hunt--Mueller did his job and was
honest enough not to try to make illegitimate cases that could not be carried
through to convictions. Where he did prosecute, no one has been acquitted. And
yet, through all of this, he had to endure constant a constant media attack
calling his investigation a witch hunt. Now Trump supporters are calling for
Trump opponents to apologize and back off. Maybe. But Trump supporters need to
apologize for their constant Mueller-bashing and witch hunt charges. Lots of
people in the Trump orbit were guilty of inappropriate relationships with
Russia, which is why they're going to jail. There was a major crime against our
electoral system, a cyber 9/11. I was actually kind of hoping Mueller would
indict a sitting President--Vladimir Putin of Russia. But he didn't. But don't
call it a nothingburger. You don't have to be on the Left to have problems with
a foreign government hacking our election system and a President who benefits
from that hacking and then acts as if the Russians did nothing wrong, and even
carries on conversations with their leader while insuring that we have no
record of it. Trump consistently welcomed the fruits of this crime against our
country, asked Russia to provide Hillary's hacked e-mails, and as President
consistently has disregarded his own intelligence community's assessment that
there is no reasonable doubt that this interference was the work of the
Russians. . I would call that collusion after the fact (rather like
being an accessory after the fact to murder), but that is not the sort of
collusion that fell within Mueller's mandate to prosecute, and is not, I guess,
illegal. It may be within reason to impeach the President on just these
grounds, it is certainly something for Americans to take into consideration in
2020 when, as is expected, Donald Trump’s name will appear at the top of the
Republican ticket.
We
have not been given a definitive answer to the question of whether our
President is so under the influence of a foreign government that he is likely
to do things that are not in our national interest in virtue of his business
interests or the undue influence that foreign governments might have over him.
That is the proper subject, not of a criminal investigation, but of
Congressional oversight.
24 comments:
There was a major crime against our electoral system, a cyber 9/11
Comparing the DNC getting hacked to 9/11 is...well, I wouldn't do it.
Trump consistently welcomed the fruits of this crime against our country, asked Russia to provide Hillary's hacked e-mails
If you are referring to the same "asking" of Russia to provide Hillary's emails that she deleted (despite their being subpoenaed) that I saw, it was obviously a joke. And a pretty amusing one, I thought, given how unconcerned the left was with her behavior. Was there another moment where he seriously asked them for their help retrieving the emails she wasn't supposed to even have, let alone delete?
consistently has disregarded his own intelligence community's assessment that there is no reasonable doubt that this interference was the work of the Russians
Trump punting on Russian responsibility for the hacking is certainly a valid question, but the whole presumption-of-innocence thing makes me not leap straight to "collusion" as the explanation. He knows things I do not, and he lies all the time, so any guess of mine or yours is a guess only. I never figured he colluded with Russia to affect the campaign (looked like a Democrat smear job from the beginning), so blaming this question on collusion doesn't fit the factual narrative thus far. I'd blame incompetence before being a Russian actor at this point.
We have not been given a definitive answer to the question of whether our President is so under the influence of a foreign government that he is likely to do things that are not in our national interest in virtue of his business interests or the undue influence that foreign governments might have over him. That is the proper subject, not of a criminal investigation, but of Congressional oversight.
I do not really think there is anything anyone in Congress (or anywhere else) can say or do that would make you or others with your mentality agree that this question has been definitively answered in the negative. I'd happily be proven wrong, though. What would it take?
As for me, I still go with presumption of innocence until presented with a compelling reason to suspect otherwise. Democrats have yet to present such a reason, despite their rabid attempts to do so.
Prolegomena part 2
Still setting up the TS argument for God's existence, This is part 2 of the Prolegomena where I explain about Transcendental Signifies and deal with TAG, separatism that argument fro my own. Again my own original argumemt the Existence of God, and as always, for rational warrant rather than proof,
I did not expect a direct indictment of Trump. It is a disappointment but one I expected.It is not crushing to the resistance. Colbert had the right rapport, took a big white board with two full columns of stuff in little letters taking up every inch of the board,(reasons why Trump is bad pres)then erased one line.
As for me, I still go with presumption of innocence until presented with a compelling reason to suspect otherwise.
As in, Hillary Clinton has never been convicted of a crime, and is therefore innocent?
As in, Hillary Clinton has never been convicted of a crime, and is therefore innocent?
Innocent of what?
Legion of Logic said...
Innocent of what?
Whatever she is being accused of doing at the time.
Whatever she is being accused of doing at the time.
A conviction is not the same as a compelling reason to believe something occurred, such as her extremely reckless- sorry, careless - handling of sensitive information through her prohibited private email server. We know that occurred, yet it was not part of a trial.
So again, it would all depend on what specifically she is being accused of, same as anyone else. Including Trump.
Legion of Logic said...
We know that occurred, yet it was not part of a trial.
We know one of Trump's campaign managers, a senior adviser, one of his sons, and other staff cooperated in various ways with Russia during the campaign. You don't find that a compelling reason to think Trump was, at the very least, aware of such cooperation?
You don't find that a compelling reason to think Trump was, at the very least, aware of such cooperation?
Yes, that's a compelling reason to believe Trump was aware. Not so much that Trump is a Russian actor of some sort, or that he collaborated with Russia to steal the election from Hillary. Trump being aware of people meeting with Russians is not an impeachable offense.
"Did Mueller come up with nothing?"
We cannot answer that question at this time, because we have not yet seen the report. It's reputedly somewhere between 300 and one thousand pages long, and all we've seen so far is a 4 page digest written by a person with no pretence of objectivity.
Once I see the report, I'll weigh in on what he may have found. Not until then.
You should wait at least until Lent is over.
You've been doing good on your pledge to avoid politics.
There was nothing partisan about that comment. No politics whatsoever. It's what everyone ought to be doing. There's a giant (and quite unjustified) rush to judgement going on.
It's like critiquing Moby Dick after reading the first 4 pages.
Good for you.
Interesting choice, Moby Dick.
One of my all-time favorite books. I've read it three times so far, and would like to read it once again at some point.
I've seen the movie, but not read the book.
Why do you like it so much?
It makes me think.
It's a big book. For a sampling, read Chapter 119, The Candles.
Had to look up "corpusants". St Elmo's Fire (the phenomena, not the movie).
Ahab was obsessed all right...and more than a little crazy.
It also helps if you are, like me, a fan of "over the top" language, like in Eddison's The Worm Ouroboros or Charles Williams' Arthurian Poetry.
It also helps if you are, like me, a fan of "over the top" language,
Really? I never noticed! :-)
Sometimes an intentional understatement can be entertaining too.
I am defending my own original God argument no one else makes: the transcendental signified argument, on Metacrock's Blog
the last two posts have been setting up this argument,
Defending the premises of my transcendentalism signer argument fro God part 2. This is 3-7
Metacrock's blog
1. Any rational, coherent, and meaningful view of the universe must of necessity presuppose organizing principles (Ops)
2. OP's are summed up in TS
3. Modern Thought rejects TS outright or takes out all aspects of mind.
4. Therefore, Modern thought fails to provide a rational, coherent, and meaningful view of the universe.
6. Therefore universal mind, offers the best understanding of TS
7. Concept of God unites TS with universal mind therefore offers best explanation
for a view that is Rational, Coherent, and Meaningful (RCM).
Victor, the US government interferes with elections around the world. Remember Obama trying to do in Nentanyahu?
And all this so called interference, which the DNC itself also engaged in, happened during OBAMAS WATCH!
The The Mueller Report was started on a fraud, a lie, a conspiracy theory. The report said the original basis of the investigation was a fraud, a lie, a conspiracy theory. Of course when investigating a fraud, a lie, a conspiracy theory someone will uncover some facts. If the investigators have unlimited power to look into the personal and financial lives of people with the purpose of destruction, they will destroy.
Thanks Victor for advocating for a fraud, a pack of lies, and conspiracy theories. May God save you from the Inquisitor when the politics turn against you.
Post a Comment