The Boy Who Cried Wolf, A Story the Progressive-Left Fails to Heed.

[code1211]

Negative.

What has Trump done to stop any investigation? What has he done obstruct?

What requested documents has he withheld, redacted, destroyed or refused to provide.

He has given over a million and a half pages of documents as they were requested.

What real world facts support your paranoia?

 

[code1211]

A form of government we don't have here in the states?

Actually, we DO have democracy in the US. Thousands of them.

The danger of centralizing power to the District of Columbia is that the power and cash is taken from the hands of those that run things democratically and giving it over to the control of our oligarchs.

Taking power out of Washington and returning it to the Various States or to the People is the best way to correct the biggest problems of corruption and waste in this country.

THAT is what Trump is trying to do.

 

[code1211]

Wait for the conspiracy indictments.

People.sought and in some cases obtained stolen property.

Its right there in the indictment.

And if you aren't aware, just talking about and overtly trying to get something illegal is all it takes to get a federal felony.

Heads are going to roll.

Yet ANOTHER prediction of dire consequence.

Do liberals EVER deal with what is happening in the real world?

Is Hillary in jail yet? You have just described the various real world actions she committed and the conspiracy she used to do so.

Our "justice" system has little to do with justice and nothing to do with fair and equal application and enforcement of law.

10 years ago, I would not have believed that to be true outside of reverences to the obvious abuses at selected local levels. Now, the cancer has metastasized to all and the highest levels.

When the "Untouchables" are obviously and openly corrupt and above the law, we are living in a world of misery and pain.

 

[lurchadams]

Your post to which i responded:

"Quote Originally Posted by lurchadams View Post
Party over country. The GOP is scared poopless of Trump's base - they know Trump has almost 90% support within the GOP party. The cowardly GOP lawmakers care only about the next election - short term gain for them - long term damage to this country and our democracy."

I've highlighted and bolded the part of the post that pertains to the Republican party. The part not highlighted pertains the folks that the Dems have abandoned to to assert their Social-Democrat distopian nightmare.

The Republicans are responding to the folks who elected them. That's what a Representative in a Republic does. That base of includes a majority of Americans across the country. That's the reason that the Dems lost so many seats at every level of government during the 8 years of Obama's terms.

If you're dreams come true, the fifth in a row predicted Blue Wave election will sweep the Republicans out of office.

Then the Dems will fulfill their promises to raise taxes, lower tax revenues, reduce jobs, reduce wage rates and reduce the optimism of the American People.

This would be the Social Democrat Utopia they have promised.

Since H.W. Bush, the Democrats have rebuilt the economy after the previous GOP administrations' policies have plunged this country into a depression. Trump's trade wars and tax cuts and deregulation of the financial services industry will plunge us into the next one. Brace yourself!

 

[lurchadams]

What has Trump done to stop any investigation? What has he done obstruct?

What requested documents has he withheld, redacted, destroyed or refused to provide.

He has given over a million and a half pages of documents as they were requested.

What real world facts support your paranoia?

Not worthy of a response.

 

[Mach]

You obviously do not possess the skills of a critical thinker.,

Personal attacks? I rest my case.

 

[LincolnRossiter]

I'm glad the Mueller investigation has gotten far enough that even spineless partisan Trump bots like yourself are admitting they did interfere with our elections, you just have shifted your argument to "You can't prove it had an effect on an election won by a few tens of thousands of votes in a few select states. Also, I don't care!" Mueller is going to continue to drag your dishonest, partisan ass into the reality of the situation one dozen indictments at a time.

Whether it effected the outcome or not isn't even the argument. THE SAME DAY the Russians started this hack was THE SAME DAY Donald Trump went on TV in front of the entire world and asked the Russians to do it. Jesus Christ, how is that not involved?

For the record, there used to be a meme out there predicting the predictable evolution to Trump/Putin apologists’ denials on Russian meddling. It went approximately like so:

1. There was no meddling. It’s sour grapes.

2. There was meddling, but it was done by third-party non-state actors just for kicks. Russia wasn’t involved. Something something Seth Rich.

3. Russia may have meddled, but it was a tiny effort simply designed to undermine the election. They didn’t have a preference. They moved here after the redacted version of national intelligence assessment was released in early Jan, highlighting that Russia did, in fact, have a presence.

4. Russia meddled and may have had a preference for Trump, but Hillary deserved it. She and the DNC robbed Bernie of a nomination he trailed by over 4 million votes in. And they meddled in Putin’s affairs. NO TRUMP PEOPLE WERE INVOLVEED!!!
Plus something something Obama for kicks.

5. Russia meddled on Trump’s behalf and maybe some Trump people were involved, but it didn’t affect the outcome, so no harm no foul. WITCH HUNT!!
We’re at this stage now.

6. Russia meddled and Trump’s campaign was complicit and maybe it affected the outcome, but big deal. We’re saving western civilization. Plus Hillary and Obama and Soros. Bad. White genocide. Nationalism must prevail. MAGA.
This is next

 

[jamesrage]

JFC.

He's literally on tape encouraging a hostile foreign power to break our laws, yet you guys still just chug along with your cultish support.

Again any reasonable intelligent adult can see that Trump was joking.He was joking about Clinton being a currupt piece of **** was trying to hide evidence of wrong doing. All this whining over Clinton hacking is nothing more than an attempt to excuse her wrong doing. Sure to lawyers it matters how the evidence of wrong doing was obtained. In the court of public opinion it only matters if the evidence is true.

 

[jamesrage]

I actually think the Russians jumped on it to set him up.

They wanted him to win, because that would sow dischord. Hillary would be same old, same old.

Set his campaign up to be proven complicit in the Russians actions?

Maybe there is something to that theory. However is more likely to put a boot up Russia's ass? A democrat controlled presidency or a republican controlled presidency?

Could actually light the whole country on fire.

I doubt it. Crying wolf to many times will make people ignore any actual claims. Because every day it seems like a new Trump conspiracy comes out. Trump allegedly likes being peed on by Russian hookers, Trump colluded with Russians, Trump raped some girls, Trump did this,Trump did that. It gets old really quick. The only people who will care are the die hard partisan hacks who hanged onto all the other Trump conspiracies that turned out to not be true or blown out of proportion.

If members of the trump team get indicted for conspiring with the Russians, with good evidence, what the hell do you think trumps true supporters are going to do?


Calmly accept that their dear leader is for all intents a traitor (too strong a word, maybe, but in the ballpark)?

Or go completely ape****?

Neither. They will dismiss the claims.

 

[jamesrage]

Any reasonable person

with a brain.

You're giving never Trumpers way too much credit.

Maybe you are right.However I doubt all of them hopped aboard the die hard anti-Trump band wagon of lets believe any negative story that comes out.

 

[jamesrage]

Any person that isn't blindly following him like he's a god can see that he objectively has ****ed-up more than any president of past.

Only a die hard anti-Trumper would say that.

 

[jamesrage]

Wtf? Your standard is how you think people "feel" and not the facts of the matter? Russia took him seriously and acted on his call. Totally baffling why you think that's ok for our political process.

Trump made a joke of Clinton's corruption and ignorance. It doesn't take a computer genius to know that you don't put classified **** on a unsecured server. It was already hacked and hacked by multiple countries before Trump even said anything. Because any country's intelligence agencies that is competent will try to find classified info from other countries by any means necessary including hacking the servers and email accounts of government officials.

 

[JasperL]

You didn't answer my question. as expected. You danced all around it, with a lot of idiotic rhetoric, but never addressed it. I think all governments should not attempt to interfere with other elections, to include the Untied States. What to you think? Is it okay for governments to try and sway elections of other governments? Yes or no? Just answer the ****ing question. It's a pretty simple question.

It depends.

BTW, remember Iraq? It was a long, long time ago but we took far more drastic actions to effect regime change there and in Afghanistan than funding a group that later went on to oppose Bibi. Also, too, Vietnam, and Iran and who knows how many countries in Central and S. America. Not sure why you brought up the most trivial example of the U.S. interfering in who is in charge of a given government.

Furthermore, if you want to talk about U.S. efforts to oust Bibi, you've been on DP long enough to know how to start a thread. I bet there are several on topic already, which you can bring back from the dead if you want. It's a red herring in relation to this case, unless you're OK with Russians and Chinese and the Saudis and North Korea and any other country with money and intelligence services using their spies to try to elect people in this country sympathetic to their causes. If you don't care about such things, say so, and we can agree to disagree. Otherwise, it's a transparent attempt to divert from the Russia case, and is doing Russia's bidding, or is trolling.

The owner of two of the companies named in the indictment appeared in court and Mueller tried to claim that the charged company hadn't been served properly. That is usually an argument the defendant uses. It's funny that the prosecution used the argument when they were caught flat footed when the defendant was represented in court. Then he tried to deny them discovery. I guess Mueller didn't have his turds in one bag. He was ill prepared because he didn't expect any of the defendants to show up.

You'll need some evidence for that. All I've read about is the lawyers representing Concord showed up. And if you want to quote WHY Mueller argues that, that's fine, because Russia refused to serve the defendants in the case.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/mueller-russia-interference-election-case-delay-570627

“The [U.S.] government has attempted service of the summonses by delivering copies of them to the Office of the Prosecutor General of Russia, to be delivered to the defendants,” prosecutors wrote. “That office, however, declined to accept the summonses. The government has submitted service requests to the Russian government pursuant to a mutual legal assistance treaty. To the government’s knowledge, no further steps have been taken within Russia to effectuate service.”

Mueller’s team sent a copy of the formal summons to Dubelier and Seikaly (Concord Management's lawyers) and asked them to accept it on behalf of Concord Management, but Dubelier wrote back on Monday saying that the government’s attempt to serve the summons was defective under court rules. He did not elaborate.

As to this:

You should catch up on current events:
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/mueller-russia-interference-election-case-delay-570627
"A federal judge has rejected special counsel Robert Mueller’s request to delay the first court hearing in a criminal case charging three Russian companies and 13 Russian citizens with using social media and other means to foment strife among Americans in advance of the 2016 U.S. presidential election."

“Defendant voluntarily appeared through counsel as provided for in [federal rules], and further intends to enter a plea of not guilty Defendant has not sought a limited appearance nor has it moved to quash the summons. As such, the briefing sought by the Special Counsel’s motion is pettifoggery,” Dubelier and Seikaly wrote. "

You left out the part I quoted above. And note the part about "through counsel." The co-defendants (the owners and any employees - aka the individuals, humans, who might have to go to jail) refused service and Russia refused to serve them. The lawyers were the only human beings related to Concord who showed up in court.

 

[code1211]

Since H.W. Bush, the Democrats have rebuilt the economy after the previous GOP administrations' policies have plunged this country into a depression. Trump's trade wars and tax cuts and deregulation of the financial services industry will plunge us into the next one. Brace yourself!

HW should never have allowed the Dems to raise the taxes. In that, you're right.

I guess the establishment types just can't help themselves.

Are you yet another of the under informed folks that believe that W did something that augmented the drive toward the Financial meltdown.

Do yourself a favor. Find out who signed the final repeal of Glass-Steagall. Study up on how eliminating this last of the Great Depression safeguards impacted banking practices.

Who was responsible for the financial meltdown? Anyone in the US who secured a loan or issued a loan, invested in any market or sold or bought anything that required financing between 1990 and 2007. If you did none of these things and were not the dependent of anyone who did so, you are free of blame.

 

[code1211]

Not worthy of a response.

As I thought. You have nothing but wild hyperbole and empty rhetoric with no facts to back up anything you said.

 

[lurchadams]

HW should never have allowed the Dems to raise the taxes. In that, you're right.

"Allowed" the democrats to raise taxes? Who signed the bill? I guess you feel the Democrats are so powerful no one can resist them.

Are you yet another of the under informed folks that believe that W did something that augmented the drive toward the Financial meltdown.

You are yet another misinformed folks that think trickle down economics work. Do you also believe in unicorns?

Do yourself a favor. Find out who signed the final repeal of Glass-Steagall. Study up on how eliminating this last of the Great Depression safeguards impacted banking practices.

Here you go, friend. Learn something:

By the time Clinton signed the Financial Services Modernization Act, commonly known as Gramm-Leach-Bliley, repealing the key components of Glass-Steagall in 1999, the regulation was nearly toothless. The law was simply catching up to what the market had already accomplished in the previous 10 to 15 years, said Kathleen Day, a lecturer at Johns Hopkins University and an expert in financial crises.

Bill Clinton: Glass-Steagall repeal had nothing to do with financial crisis | PolitiFact

What is Trump doing to maintain oversight over the financial services industry? He repealed the regulation that the industry had to work in the best interest of their clients. I guess that's why Trump's such a "populist". As I said, brace yourself for another financial meltdown as a result of "conservatives" being in control. It's coming!

 

[lurchadams]

As I thought. You have nothing but wild hyperbole and empty rhetoric with no facts to back up anything you said.

When someone says something so ridiculous as you did, it's not worthy of a response. Deal with it.

 

[JasperL]

HW should never have allowed the Dems to raise the taxes. In that, you're right.

I guess the establishment types just can't help themselves.

Are you yet another of the under informed folks that believe that W did something that augmented the drive toward the Financial meltdown.

Do yourself a favor. Find out who signed the final repeal of Glass-Steagall. Study up on how eliminating this last of the Great Depression safeguards impacted banking practices.

That's funny. We're supposed to believe that a law passed by a GOP Senate and House was Clinton's fault, and that once Bush took over the same GOP House and Senate were incapable of changing the law they passed and Bush's regulators were incapable of enforcing existing lending standards. We're also supposed to forget that Bush didn't file suit to prevent states from enforcing their own lending standards.

I'm with you in assigning part of the blame to Clinton! But you're just showing your partisan colors by absolving the guy in charge while the bubble was blowing up and then crashing from any role in the mess he watched happen. BTW, here's my favorite photo of the era - it's Bush era regulators effectively promising....not to regulate. And they didn't!



The guy on the left with the chain saw is the OTS chief who regulated AIG, the insurer that cost about $200 billion to bail out. To be fair, it wasn't really a bailout of AIG, but important customers like GS and CITI, and we funneled the bailout money through AIG, but the point remains. One of the largest insurers in the world was regulated by a "thrift" regulator. Wasn't an accident. OTS promised not to regulate so AIG chose them as regulator.

Article here: https://www.propublica.org/article/banks-favorite-toothless-regulator-1125

 

[code1211]

"Allowed" the democrats to raise taxes? Who signed the bill? I guess you feel the Democrats are so powerful no one can resist them.



You are yet another misinformed folks that think trickle down economics work. Do you also believe in unicorns?



Here you go, friend. Learn something:



Bill Clinton: Glass-Steagall repeal had nothing to do with financial crisis | PolitiFact

What is Trump doing to maintain oversight over the financial services industry? He repealed the regulation that the industry had to work in the best interest of their clients. I guess that's why Trump's such a "populist". As I said, brace yourself for another financial meltdown as a result of "conservatives" being in control. It's coming!

ANOTHER prediction of dire consequence.

Are you aware that the regulation that was addressed never went into effect and that anyone is able to invest in products that do require fiduciary responsibility?

The action Trump took was to not implement the regulation that had never been in force in the first place.

 

[code1211]

When someone says something so ridiculous as you did, it's not worthy of a response. Deal with it.

As long as we're discussing being ridiculous, here's your post to which I responded:

"Quote Originally Posted by lurchadams View Post
Whether there is evidence or not of its effect, there is no doubt now that Russia attacked our democracy. As leader of this country, Trump should actually leading the investigation into the hacking of our voting system and other efforts to subvert our democracy. Instead, Trump continues to deny it ever happened and continues his romance with Putin. The most likely reason is this could be that Trump thinks or knows the Russian efforts help him and want them to keep doing it. Trump knows that Putin needs to bless any significant business deal in Russia and sucking up to Putin as Trump is, is the only way to secure a business deal -The security of this country be damned.

It's criminal negligence at the very least for a president to behave this way."

This is such a ridiculous post, it's comical.

Tell me, how can a voting system be "hacked" that is not connected to the internet?

 

[JasperL]

"Allowed" the democrats to raise taxes? Who signed the bill? I guess you feel the Democrats are so powerful no one can resist them.

You are yet another misinformed folks that think trickle down economics work. Do you also believe in unicorns?

Here you go, friend. Learn something:

Bill Clinton: Glass-Steagall repeal had nothing to do with financial crisis | PolitiFact

What is Trump doing to maintain oversight over the financial services industry? He repealed the regulation that the industry had to work in the best interest of their clients. I guess that's why Trump's such a "populist". As I said, brace yourself for another financial meltdown as a result of "conservatives" being in control. It's coming!

I just wanted to mention that the bill to repeal Glass-Steagall was called the "Gramm-Leach-Bliley" Act, and all three of the lead authors were Republicans, and it was a GOP House and Senate. Somehow in right wing land, the role of Republicans in that repeal gets...forgotten. I'm sure it's a simple oversight!

All the while Barney Frank is often blamed on these threads for being a cause of the crisis, from his minority perch in the GOP House and his minority position on the GOP dominated and led House banking committee.

 

[lurchadams]

I just wanted to mention that the bill to repeal Glass-Steagall was called the "Gramm-Leach-Bliley" Act, and all three of the lead authors were Republicans, and it was a GOP House and Senate. Somehow in right wing land, the role of Republicans in that repeal gets...forgotten. I'm sure it's a simple oversight!

All the while Barney Frank is often blamed on these threads for being a cause of the crisis, from his minority perch in the GOP House and his minority position on the GOP dominated and led House banking committee.

You gotta love right-wing revisionist history, eh?

 

[iguanaman]

"Intentionally steered our outcome?"

Not quite. That has been an ongoing claim from your side even before there was any Mueller investigation. That the ONLY way Trump could have won was by Russian support.

Yet there is NO evidence that this Russian action actually had any tangible effect on voting, such that it "steered the outcome" and caused Trump to win.

Meanwhile, if you recall, the DNC information hacks were all verifiably true; and I said back in 2016 prior to the election...what matter the source if the information is true?

Hillary was a bad candidate, Trump busted his ass in old-school "whistle-stop" campaigning that motivated voters to give him their electoral college votes in places the Democrats were so sure they were going to win they hardly bothered to even try to campaign.

Stop acting like the election was stolen, that dog don't hunt.

You guys are the ones that keeps bringing up that Russian meddling swung the election to Trump. It YOUR peccadillo because it ruins your narrative. We will stop saying the election was stolen when your side stops obstructing the Russian investigation and Trump and his people stop acting guilty as sin. That is what is making this so difficult. The obvious guilt indicated by all the lies told by Trump people and the cover-ups and misdirection by Republicans in Congress. . BTW The "bad candidate" you mention got over 3 million more votes than Trump. How can that be? I would not be bragging too much about Trumps targeting in those Blue States it appears that that was not from Trumps "gut" but another plot involving the Russians, Cambridge Analytica and Wikileaks. Yet another reason Muellers investigation is still ongoing.

It’s not clear to what extent Cambridge Analytica helped (Parscale denied that Cambridge was of any use in a recent 60 Minutes interview), but we do know that Trump’s digital operation was shockingly effective. Samuel Woolley, who heads the Computational Propaganda project at Oxford’s Internet Institute, found that a disproportionate amount of pro-Trump messaging was spread via automated bots and anti-Hillary propaganda. Trump’s bots, they reported at the time of the election, outnumbered Clinton’s five to one.

Pro-Trump programmers “carefully adjusted the timing of content production during the debates, strategically colonized pro-Clinton hashtags, and then disabled activities after Election Day.”

Martin Moore, director of the Centre for the Study of Media, Communication and Power at King’s College, told the Guardian’s Carole Cadwalladr that Trump’s campaign “was using 40-50,000 variants of ads every day that were continuously measuring responses and then adapting and evolving based on that response.”

These online ads were spread primarily through bots on social media platforms. The ads that got liked, shared, and retweeted the most were reproduced and redistributed based on where they were popular and who they appealed to.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/16/15657512/cambridge-analytica-facebook-alexander-nix-christopher-wylie

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Has anyone thought that it might be better to simply let the investigation run it's course?

You should ask the Republicans who are constantly trying to end the investigation that question. You sould ask Trump and his supporters why they're always trying to discredit or end the investigation.


How many times have Republicans claimed they have proof that the FBI or Obama administration was corrupt? Does that count as crying wolf?

Maybe if Trump didn't behave like a Russian stooge, these accusations would seem less credible.

You may accuse the left of crying wolf but how can you deny the right's see no evil, hear to evil, speak no evil mentality? Let's just pretend that there's nothing suspicious about Trump's behavior. Let's just pretend that Trump doesn't have extensive financial entanglements with Russia. Let's pretend that there's nothing odd about the American president advocating that we let Russia back in the G7 or G8.

 

[haymarket]

BTW The "bad candidate" you mention got over 3 million more votes than Trump. How can that be?

Because we have an antiquated system from the 1700's that was installed to thwart the will of the people in order to protect us from a foreign power raising creature of their liking to our own highest office. It sure did succeed in thwarting the will of the people but failed miserably in preventing that creature of a foreign power from taking our highest office.