Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

An important view into the thinking of moderates and conservatives regarding Obstruction

Collapse
X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Tom Hicks
    replied
    Originally posted by Hoot Owl View Post
    And if the intermediary doesn't do the trick there is always 'the fixer'.

    Trump is crime 101, light.
    But like I've said before, if Trump wasn't operating under this rule of law he'd be operating much dirtier than he has been. He's the Putin type of person. I'm guessing that's a big part of his attraction to Vlad. I imagine Trump lusts for the power that Putin has.
    With the loss of Cohen, Donald required someone to fulfill the role of fixer.

    via the mechanism of his unsolicited audition memo, Barr was immediately accepted as the new fixer for President Sham Wow.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hoot Owl
    replied
    Originally posted by guido61 View Post
    Remember when conservative heads exploded because a shady campaign donor of Obama’s bought an empty lot next to Obama’s house and sold a portion of it to Obama?

    seems so quaint now, doesn’t it?
    BIG double standards on display.
    It works both ways, of course, but the current go-round dwarfs the other ones.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hoot Owl
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom Hicks View Post

    Also because the Trump campaign and Associates were dealing with cutouts instead of direct Representatives.

    The Russian Lady lawyer at the Trump Tower meeting was not an elected official.

    same thing with the Red Sparrow and the NRA, no coordination or conspiracy with elected Russian officials involved.

    and Paul manafort did not give polling data to officials of the Russian government, but rather to a Russian industrialist oligarch reputed to have ties with Russian intelligence.

    always there is the plausible deniability of operating through an intermediary.
    And if the intermediary doesn't do the trick there is always 'the fixer'.

    Trump is crime 101, light.
    But like I've said before, if Trump wasn't operating under this rule of law he'd be operating much dirtier than he has been. He's the Putin type of person. I'm guessing that's a big part of his attraction to Vlad. I imagine Trump lusts for the power that Putin has.

    Leave a comment:


  • Easy Listener
    replied
    Originally posted by Hoot Owl View Post
    No they're not.
    Yes they are! Grrrrr!

    Leave a comment:


  • Hoot Owl
    replied
    Originally posted by Easy Listener View Post

    Actually, Republicans were really going nuts about Obama's school transcripts being released. So there is that parallel, but, IMO, the rest of your points are biased caricatures of what actually happened.

    No they're not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom Hicks
    replied
    Originally posted by Hoot Owl View Post
    Yeah, Trump is innocent in the way the OJ is innocent. He got off because Mueller didn't have a link between working with Kalimnik and Russian campaign meddling. When you think about it, how could he make that link? Pretty hard to interview Russians in the Kremlin.

    Dirty president, in more ways than one.
    Also because the Trump campaign and Associates were dealing with cutouts instead of direct Representatives.

    The Russian Lady lawyer at the Trump Tower meeting was not an elected official.

    same thing with the Red Sparrow and the NRA, no coordination or conspiracy with elected Russian officials involved.

    and Paul manafort did not give polling data to officials of the Russian government, but rather to a Russian industrialist oligarch reputed to have ties with Russian intelligence.

    always there is the plausible deniability of operating through an intermediary.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vito Corleone
    replied
    Originally posted by Easy Listener View Post

    He got off because there was no evidence. On a side note, sometimes people like to say that Mueller didn't exonerate him. That is what a Judge or jury does. A prosecutor prosecutes, if there is enough evidence to bring a case. If there isn't they choose to not prosecute. Nobody ever said a prosecutor exonerated the accused. The best you can hope for is a prosecutor choosing to not prosecute.

    Which is what Mueller did.
    Once again, you’re completely wrong.

    Mueller stated that, from the outset, he was not going to make accusations of crimes being committed or recommend indictment, no matter what the evidence presented showed.

    He didn’t “choose” not to prosecute. He believed it wasn’t an option afforded to him by DOJ rules.

    That you repeatedly continue to dishonestly misrepresent this point in spite of it having been made clear to you numerous times is quite telling.

    Leave a comment:


  • Easy Listener
    replied
    Originally posted by Hoot Owl View Post
    Yeah, Trump is innocent in the way the OJ is innocent. He got off because Mueller didn't have a link between working with Kalimnik and Russian campaign meddling. When you think about it, how could he make that link? Pretty hard to interview Russians in the Kremlin.

    Dirty president, in more ways than one.
    He got off because there was no evidence. On a side note, sometimes people like to say that Mueller didn't exonerate him. That is what a Judge or jury does. A prosecutor prosecutes, if there is enough evidence to bring a case. If there isn't they choose to not prosecute. Nobody ever said a prosecutor exonerated the accused. The best you can hope for is a prosecutor choosing to not prosecute.

    Which is what Mueller did.

    Leave a comment:


  • E-money
    replied
    Originally posted by Easy Listener View Post

    Actually, Republicans were really going nuts about Obama's school transcripts being released. So there is that parallel, but, IMO, the rest of your points are biased caricatures of what actually happened.

    That isn't a parallel at all, one has nothing to do with the other, but nice job dancing around the issues.

    And your second point is inaccurate as well.

    Again, it's not hard, substitute Obama for Trump in all of those situations and let us know how you would really feel.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vito Corleone
    replied
    Remember when conservative heads exploded because a shady campaign donor of Obama’s bought an empty lot next to Obama’s house and sold a portion of it to Obama?

    seems so quaint now, doesn’t it?

    Leave a comment:


  • E-money
    replied
    Originally posted by Hoot Owl View Post
    That's good.
    I think we could double or triple the if's though if we worked on it for a while.
    Easily. I didn't mention the plans for a Trump tower in Moscow, or Miss Universe, or Eric Prince, or Rex Tillerson.
    Trump isn't orange, he's red.

    Leave a comment:


  • Easy Listener
    replied
    Originally posted by E-money View Post
    Here's my issue with the whole Trump/Russia thing.

    If Obama had setup meetings with Russians prior to becoming POTUS, Republican heads would have exploded.
    If Obama's people had tried to setup a back-channel hotline with Russia prior to being sworn in, Republicans would have screamed bloody murder.
    If Obama had publicly invited the Russians to hack McCain or Romney's email, Republicans would have tarred and feathered him.
    If Obama had a long history of doing business and getting loans from Russian oligarchs, Republicans would want it thoroughly investigated.
    If Obama hadn't released his taxes while running for President because they showed a lot of income tied to Russia, Republicans would be outraged.
    If several of Obama's staff lied about meetings with Russian officials, it would be headline news on Fox every night.
    If Obama had met privately with Vladimir Putin with only his translator, Republicans would swear he was selling our country to the Reds.
    If, after all of our Intelligence organizations had determined that Russia tried heavily to influence our election, Obama denied the fact, Republicans would be starting the impeachment process.

    But it's fine when their guy does all of this.
    Actually, Republicans were really going nuts about Obama's school transcripts being released. So there is that parallel, but, IMO, the rest of your points are biased caricatures of what actually happened.


    Leave a comment:


  • Hoot Owl
    replied
    Originally posted by Easy Listener View Post

    Your post communicates a great deal about how you have intellectually processed this information. Thank you.
    Okay.
    I take that with a smile, kind of a chuckle, knowing you...and me. Neither of us actually being important or anything.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hoot Owl
    replied
    Originally posted by E-money View Post
    Here's my issue with the whole Trump/Russia thing.

    If Obama had setup meetings with Russians prior to becoming POTUS, Republican heads would have exploded.
    If Obama's people had tried to setup a back-channel hotline with Russia prior to being sworn in, Republicans would have screamed bloody murder.
    If Obama had publicly invited the Russians to hack McCain or Romney's email, Republicans would have tarred and feathered him.
    If Obama had a long history of doing business and getting loans from Russian oligarchs, Republicans would want it thoroughly investigated.
    If Obama hadn't released his taxes while running for President because they showed a lot of income tied to Russia, Republicans would be outraged.
    If several of Obama's staff lied about meetings with Russian officials, it would be headline news on Fox every night.
    If Obama had met privately with Vladimir Putin with only his translator, Republicans would swear he was selling our country to the Reds.
    If, after all of our Intelligence organizations had determined that Russia tried heavily to influence our election, Obama denied the fact, Republicans would be starting the impeachment process.

    But it's fine when their guy does all of this.
    That's good.
    I think we could double or triple the if's though if we worked on it for a while.

    Leave a comment:


  • Easy Listener
    replied
    Originally posted by Hoot Owl View Post
    Yeah, Trump is innocent in the way the OJ is innocent. He got off because Mueller didn't have a link between working with Kalimnik and Russian campaign meddling. When you think about it, how could he make that link? Pretty hard to interview Russians in the Kremlin.

    Dirty president, in more ways than one.
    Your post communicates a great deal about how you have intellectually processed this information. Thank you.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X