• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mueller testimony delayed by one week

j-mac said:
“...did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”

What am I missing here?
Click to expand...

The remainder of the sentence.

The remainder of the report.
 
Jay59 said:
Anyone that uses the term alt-right is drinking someone's koolaid. All there ever was of alt-right was a handful of bloggers and their handful of followers. their influence is a fiction.

More typically, these are union members in good standing, with sons playing football and daughters driving them crazy. They have a house, a mortgage, a car a truck and odds are a gun safe in the garage. It's a slice of middle America. In other words, deplorable.
Click to expand...

Your first two sentences contradict themselves. And so does recent history.

Yes, Deplorables can work for a living and have kids. They are still Deplorables.
 
haymarket said:
Your first two sentences contradict themselves. And so does recent history. Yes, Deplorables can work for a living and have kids. They are still Deplorables.
Click to expand...
What contradiction? Alt-right is a molehill that is referred to as a mountain by certain ideologies. You seem to be under the influence of such cloistered groups.

Do you realize calling a group deplorable is a bad thing, like racist bad? Worse even. At least you are clear that the Democrats have no regard for the middle class. After all, they're deplorable.
 
Jay59 said:
What contradiction? Alt-right is a molehill that is referred to as a mountain by certain ideologies. You seem to be under the influence of such cloistered groups.

Do you realize calling a group deplorable is a bad thing, like racist bad? Worse even. At least you are clear that the Democrats have no regard for the middle class. After all, they're deplorable.
Click to expand...

The contradiction between there is no alt righting there is an alt right. Or was that presidential conference this week something happening in the Twilight Zone?
 
hanger4 said:
Your obsessiveness over irrelevantcy is quite entertaining.
Click to expand...

How is collusion IRRELEVANT when you read it hear all the time and both Trump and Barr claim the Mueller Report cleared them of it?
 
haymarket said:
The contradiction between there is no alt righting there is an alt right. Or was that presidential conference this week something happening in the Twilight Zone?
Click to expand...
That's no contradiction. That's a failure of perception.

I never learned tenets of a alt-right, much less join their tiny little group. Why anyone would think they were anyone is a mystery.

Which conference?
 
humbolt said:
In the administration of justice. The institution involved doesn't alter the underlying principle.
Click to expand...

No - it is in a courtroom trial. Policeman and DA's perform parts of their job with a deliberate and intentional presumption of guilt and they are part of the administration of justice. Innocent until proven guilty is a legal concept in courtroom trials.
 
Jay59 said:
That's no contradiction. That's a failure of perception.

I never learned tenets of a alt-right, much less join their tiny little group. Why anyone would think they were anyone is a mystery.

Which conference?
Click to expand...

The conference held this last week in which the alt right was present that you claim is "tiny" and thus nothing to be concerned about.

Trump applauds far-right social media provocateurs

Tell that to the woman killed by the alt right in Virginia. No count it will be a great comfort to her family.
 
haymarket said:
How is collusion IRRELEVANT when you read it hear all the time and both Trump and Barr claim the Mueller Report cleared them of it?
Click to expand...
If there was collusion, it would be relevant. There was none, so not relevant.

There was an exhaustive investigation and no collusion was found = cleared for all practical purposes.
 
Jay59 said:
If there was collusion, it would be relevant. There was none, so not relevant.

There was an exhaustive investigation and no collusion was found = cleared for all practical purposes.
Click to expand...

How then does Trump and his Trumpkins say the Report cleared him of collusion?
 
haymarket said:
The remainder of the sentence.

The remainder of the report.
Click to expand...

The remainder of the sentence has nothing to do with Trump's campaign, or Trump himself working with Russian's, all it is saying is what we already knew, which is Russian's were trying to disrupt our election...How are their actions tied to Trump when it is clearly said that concerning those actions, “...did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government"...

Now, maybe you can show me where in "the rest of the report" Muller contradicts that....
 
haymarket said:
The conference held this last week in which the alt right was present that you claim is "tiny" and thus nothing to be concerned about. Tell that to the woman killed by the alt right in Virginia. No count it will be a great comfort to her family.
Click to expand...
Still not clear. Please be more specific.
 
haymarket said:
No - it is in a courtroom trial. Policeman and DA's perform parts of their job with a deliberate and intentional presumption of guilt and they are part of the administration of justice. Innocent until proven guilty is a legal concept in courtroom trials.
Click to expand...

Individual responsibilities asspciated with the justice system do not alter the principle. It is a legal construct to prevent spurious accusations. Just because impeachment is inherently a political process diesn't mean we abandon the principles of justice. I realize it does mean that to you, but of course, you are wrong. Your views would be completely opposite if your preferred party was in power.
 
apdst said:
What changed since?
Click to expand...

hanger4 said:
*Barr deliberately obfuscated the report by summarizing it in ways that were not supported by the Mueller report.*

Absolute bull-****, poppycock if you prefer. The Barr summary changed not one iota after the reports public release.

This conclusion remains unaltered;

“[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

Mueller made no determination concerning OoJ, he failed to complete his work.
Click to expand...

Au contraire.

Yes, Bill Barr’s Memo Really is Wrong About Obstruction of Justice - Lawfare

How Barr’s Excerpts Compare to the Mueller Report’s Findings - The New York Times

Debunking Three Myths About Barr’s Summary of the Mueller Report - The Bulwark

Certainly more than 1000 former US prosecutors do not see it your way.

Former Federal Prosecutors Renew Statement That Trump Would Have Been Indicted If he Weren't President
STATEMENT BY FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTORS - DOJ Alumni Statement - Medium

Back to the main point, a poster was challenged as follows:

haymarket said:
Where does the Mueller report say there was no collusion? Please quote that finding.
Click to expand...

Rather than show us in the Mueller report when he could support this statement, he cited a report on the Barr summary that was authored before any of us saw the Mueller report. The Barr summary was NOT the Mueller report, but a letter of dubious authority (see above). You don't support a Bible reference by showing us someone's work that was an interpretation of the Bible, particularly if the point of that derivative work was to make a Bible argument. The challenged poster was asked to "quote the finding".... he could not do so.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
How is collusion IRRELEVANT when you read it hear all the time and both Trump and Barr claim the Mueller Report cleared them of it?
Click to expand...

There's no criminal charge for collusion, therefore irrelevant.

That's why watching you obsess over it is quite entertaining.
 
upsideguy said:
Au contraire.

Yes, Bill Barr’s Memo Really is Wrong About Obstruction of Justice - Lawfare

How Barr’s Excerpts Compare to the Mueller Report’s Findings - The New York Times

Debunking Three Myths About Barr’s Summary of the Mueller Report - The Bulwark

Certainly more than 1000 former US prosecutors do not see it your way.

Former Federal Prosecutors Renew Statement That Trump Would Have Been Indicted If he Weren't President
STATEMENT BY FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTORS - DOJ Alumni Statement - Medium

Back to the main point, a poster was challenged as follows:



Rather than show us in the Mueller report when he could support this statement, he cited a report on the Barr summary that was authored before any of us saw the Mueller report. The Barr summary was NOT the Mueller report, but a letter of dubious authority (see above). You don't support a Bible reference by showing us someone's work that was an interpretation of the Bible, particularly if the point of that derivative work was to make a Bible argument. The challenged poster was asked to "quote the finding".... he could not do so.
Click to expand...

Upsidguy, let's get something clear right now, my first post to you stated a fact, Mueller made no determination concerning OoJ. You were wrong. Since that time you shifted the goalposts a little this and a little that way, the fact remains, Mueller made no determination concerning OoJ.
 
MovingPictures said:
Mueller testimony delayed by one week - POLITICO



Smart move.

The idea of just 2.5 hours to question Mueller's team was just idiotic. No way you can ask him all of the important question in that time.

Frankly, these negotiations with Mueller have been ludicrous and the SC has not done itself any favors by ducking a hearing, and having to be compelled to come and defend their own damn report.
Click to expand...
The hearing format should be at least the same time length as barrs considering mueller has the most intimate knowledge of the case than anyone else. How many days and hours did they interview barr?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
humbolt said:
Individual responsibilities asspciated with the justice system do not alter the principle. It is a legal construct to prevent spurious accusations. Just because impeachment is inherently a political process diesn't mean we abandon the principles of justice. I realize it does mean that to you, but of course, you are wrong. Your views would be completely opposite if your preferred party was in power.
Click to expand...

Sure it does and I gave you a perfect example.
 
hanger4 said:
There's no criminal charge for collusion, therefore irrelevant.

That's why watching you obsess over it is quite entertaining.
Click to expand...

What does Mueller say about collusion in his report?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom