a quick poll about Russia and Donald Trump

yep

mueller is punting to politics, it's time to really play politics. impeachment should be the objective, even if unstated, because if you cant beat this guy at it, you will not get the reforms you want and we need any time soon anyway. tide will go out. also ppl will think you suck and we will deserve this pubeclod president's competent fash successor.

1 its possible to get a perpetually and exclusively self-interested with a grift-only philosophy and record to actual dismissal, I believe it.

2 he is an actual danger in ways that go beyondbuild the wall horseshit, belee that

Who is Dave Weigel and why do I suddenly see his tweets everywhere and all the time

He used to write for Vox, now writes for WaPo, and has a lot of access with the Dem primary campaigns. Not sure why it's sudden for you in particular.

He has good takes

He’s a good journalist in the reporting sense who hasn’t had a “both sides” lobotomy.

He wrote a book about prog

mueller is punting to politics, it's time to really play politics.

I agree. The only crimes I thought would seriously expose Trump to impeachment would be either clear and obvious quid pro quos between him and Russia regarding lifting sanctions in exchange for Russian hacking of the election on his behalf, or else evidence of massive financial crimes. Mueller did not turn up sufficient evidence of the former; the latter is still in play, but at best emerging publically late this year.

It's smartest to let the investigators do their jobs and keep up as much political pressure as possible on identifiable popular issues, e.g. M4A, student debt relief, passing a better tax reform bill in order to finance a green new deal, and rational immigration reform, with a possible side play for raising the national minimum wage. Reparations would be good, too, but that push is still in early days and can't be a central plank, yet.

Beyond the actual report, which virtually no one has actually seen - how long is it? what questionable activity and individuals are documented in it? - there are a surprising number of glaring loose ends. Wasn't Gates still up in the air? What happened to Andrew Miller, or Jerome Corsi, both of whom were I thought threatened with subpoenas or indictments? How did Don Jr. escape more scrutiny? For that matter, did Mueller stop because he was done or because he was told to stop? Could the report have specified which if any of those characters Mueller and his team forwarded on to other legal bodies to pursue, and why? That could be a reason to keep it under wraps, at least for now. Four-page Barr letter def. introduces more questions than it answers.

And through it all Trump is still a dangerous, destructive asshole, so hopefully he'll get his. He's so compulsive that hopefully his months of cry wolf "witch hunt! no collusion!" will lose their magic powers when he starts crowing again on the stump.

I remember it like it was yesterday. pic.twitter.com/fjbJncVhGm

— Doug Henwood (@DougHenwood) March 25, 2019

how're those pathetic prayer candles working out

This:

I reckon some fairly smart people are in such a furious hurry to sink the knives in, on the basis of a noted legal cover-up artist's selective hyper-partisan spin on Mueller's report, because they're guessing correctly that what's actually in it isn't great for their reputation. https://t.co/DkH9i7SiZc

— Will Wilkinson 🌐 (@willwilkinson) March 26, 2019

Whaddaya think they got on Greenwald?

he goes on Fox

he has dog

in re. taibbi's WMD analogy, this actually seems more apposite (might need full thread for context):

The media's atrocious gullibility, which is letting this happen without serious resistance, is even more scandalous than the credulity that herded public opinion behind the invasion of Iraq. Because we already *know* this administration does nothing but lie.

— Will Wilkinson 🌐 (@willwilkinson) March 25, 2019

This Trump campaign memo seeking to de-platform Democrats constitutionally duty-bound to check executive abuses of power, on the basis of claims consistent with Barr's gloss on Mueller's report, gives away the aim of the game: no rule of law, no oversight. https://t.co/jKtPg1isB9

— Will Wilkinson 🌐 (@willwilkinson) March 25, 2019

Trump's hand-picked AG (confirmed by a lapdog Senate, with a record of shielding presidents from scandal) telling us what the report says & sitting on it doesn't settle anything. But spinning it like it does to prevent congressional oversight tell us a lot. This is far from over.

— Will Wilkinson 🌐 (@willwilkinson) March 25, 2019

weird to see "leftsist" buying barr's lines

*leftists

b/c Trump has successfully painted the media as "liberal" and they've all said he's exonerated so

where've y'all been on this and the politics thread in the last two days as certain posters rent their garments?

one one hand Barr is a Trump goon, but on the other he's been friends with Mueller for decades. I'm not really expecting a ton of discrepancies btwn the summary and the report

I mean the answer might be 4 but I wanna see if they both used the same equation to get to it

WMD analogy is so dumb. If Trump had been impeached and executed, along with most of his supporters, and THEN Mueller told us there was no collusion--maybe you'd have a case. Or if WMD had been an idea that was looked into by experts, who came back and said there's no evidence, which led to the invasion of Iraq being called off. Fuck political analogies IMO.

if anything it's like Benghazi, minus the part where the person actually had to testify

whether he "colluded" and whether that is a crime or an impeachable offense is a bit of a misdirection at this point. he clearly has SOMETHING going on with Russia, given the blatant lying about his dealings with/in Russia and his fawning over and deference to Putin.

My sources say the death penalty, for espionage, being considered for @StevenKBannon. I am pro-life and take no pleasure in reporting this.

— Louise Mensch (@LouiseMensch) July 19, 2017

I'm still shocked that they went through with that, RIP Steve.

Mensch is straight up being incepted at this point

Why do we care about her?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/17/opinion/what-to-ask-about-russian-hacking.html

she's a resistance liberal thought leader

(despite being a conservative)

Yam is also fawning over Kim, which could be a bigger problem

he likes authoritarians, but he didnt let that keep him from tearing up the nuke agreement with Russia

Uh, Morbz, you are perhaps unaware that Russia has been trying to trash the INF treaty for decades and that our unilateral withdrawal was a huge gift?

where've y'all been on this and the politics thread in the last two days as certain posters rent their garments?

― recriminations from the nitpicking woke (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, March 26, 2019 3:33 AM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

they've... been on this thread and the politics thread

Why do we care about her?

idk, why do we care about "leftsist"

(because he's the voice of his generation that's why)

i have read thst news, yes

do you really think *he* thinks it's a gift?

xxp

who?

wasn’t your point that much as he likes dictators (agreed), in this case he did something against a dictator’s interest (which is wrong)?

Mensch is fascinating because it's impossible to tell if she knows that she's making things up or if she believes it all.

I forgot about LM

i guess it depends how you look at Putin's interests vs Russia's xxp

whether he "colluded" and whether that is a crime or an impeachable offense is a bit of a misdirection at this point. he clearly has SOMETHING going on with Russia, given the blatant lying about his dealings with/in Russia and his fawning over and deference to Putin.

agreed - I always thought it was doubtful they'd find a smoking gun on par with Junior's emails, mainly because the Russians would know not to proposition the big man himself. quite frankly I don't really care, we 'interfere' in foreign elections all the time, and I'm past the point where I need to believe "he must've cheated!!" as an explanation as to why he beat Hillary Clinton. there's still something going on...maybe there's no piss tape but there are Russian businessmen who absolutely know his financial situation better than we do, and I think it's pretty close to a certainty that the Trump Org is propped up in no small way by money laundering. this is what needs to be investigated.

frankly I don't really care, we 'interfere' in foreign elections all the time

And I am sure the citizens of those nations welcome our interference as a wholesome addition to their democratic process, leading to better outcomes for themselves and the world.

as a general observation not directed at anyone in particular: it is an honorable thing to admit when you might be wrong, indeed it can build your credibility for occasions when you are confident you are right.

(def. not directed at previous poster btw)

whether he "colluded" and whether that is a crime or an impeachable offense is a bit of a misdirection at this point. he clearly has SOMETHING going on with Russia, given the blatant lying about his dealings with/in Russia and his fawning over and deference to Putin.

― A True White Kid that can Jump (Granny Dainger), Tuesday, 26 March 2019 16:23 (four hours ago) Permalink

IMO it's this kind of fuzzy thinking that got us here in the first place. Something Russia. Donald Trump admires strongmen and seeks alliance with them. He's also a liar by nature. I don't know what you mean by "misdirection." I really don't think there's a grand plot here that hasn't been uncovered. Donald Trump is a massive fraud in innumerable ways and it's all out in the open.

lol ok. IMO noticing the Prez has lied about his connections with an adversary and is ridiculously deferential to its leader prompts an investigation into his connections with that country. Mueller investigation was not that; people hoped it would turn into that but at this point it hasn't appeared to. I don't get why I'm supposed to have the specifics on what DT has going on with Russia. He's lied about stuff and he's weird wrt Putin. Frogbs otm re: money laundering. Saying "well he's a liar plus has a hardon for strongmen" doesn't explain it at all.