Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Mueller Report is being delivered to Barr today
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| Russian goal was to sow dissent. They succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. Just look at what the Dems are doing after saying they were waiting on Mueller. |
Anonymous
Let's get something straight........ Of those "34 indictments" that liberals and the left wing media continue to scream about, only 6 - yes, SIX - of them were associated with Trump's campaign. And, of those 6 - how many were charged with collusion or conspiracy? ZERO. Yep, nada. Most of the charges were around things they did BEFORE serving on the campaign OR process crimes like lying to investigators - something that would have never happened if this investigation had not happened to begin with. The rest of those charged were mostly Russians that had NOTHING to do with Trump's campaign. Bottom line - a special counsel was not needed to prosecute any crimes here. |
Anonymous
|
Democrats: Please, Please Stop Sharing Seth Abramson’s Very Bad Tweets
By Ben Mathis-Lilley Dec. 5, 2017 9:31 PM Petersen elaborated to say that she was specifically referring to acquaintances posting the work of British quasi-journalist Louise Mensch and New Hampshire writing professor Seth Abramson. Both are key figures in the #Resistance tweetstorm community, and both have been covered and dismantled before, but the recent flurry of news involving Michael Flynn and Trump lawyer John Dowd’s obstruction-of-justice miniscandal has them cooking again. Mensch is perhaps most famous for having written in May that the “marshal of the Supreme Court” had spoken to Donald Trump about his allegedly impending impeachment. (In reality world, the marshal of the Supreme Court is the person who handles security at the Supreme Court building, not an illuminati supercop.) She’s now “reporting” that, in addition to that still-impending impeachment, Trump has already been indicted a bunch of times. (The indictments are ostensibly under seal. Anne Helen Petersen @annehelen The people sharing the most Fake News in my FB feed aren't Trump Voters. They're lefty academics. WHICH IS SUPER EMBARRASSING. 1:09 PM · Dec 4, 2017 https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/12/sharing-seth-abramson-not-once-not-ever.html |
Anonymous
It was needed because Trump fired the FBI director while the investigation was already underway. |
Anonymous
The bit you quoted is about Louise Mensch (who is a known whackadoo), not Seth Abramson. I don’t find much value in Seth Abramson’s tweets, but most of the criticism in that piece is disagreement with Abramson’s opinions, not his statements of fact. |
Anonymous
|
Abramson’s tweet concerns Dowd’s claim that he ghostwrote a Donald Trump tweet that implied Trump knew before Michael Flynn was fired that Flynn had lied to the FBI. (Lying to the FBI is a crime, so if Trump later asked James Comey to drop the FBI investigation into Flynn, as Comey says he did, such a request could constitute obstruction of justice.) I find it objectionable in seven ways.
1. “ATTENTION.” Beginning a tweet with a word in all caps suggests special importance and resembles the BREAKING tags many journalists put on tweets that introduce previously unreported information, but in this case, the word doesn’t actually mean anything besides “this is a tweet.” 2. “Has lied, is lying, or does lie.” Abramson could have just written “lied,” but that wouldn’t have sounded as intense and technical. “LOUD NOISES: If John Dowd becomes known to have been material to an incident of falsehood instantiation,” etc. 3. “Donald Trump admitted committing a crime.” The crime being admitted to would be obstruction of justice, but Trump crucially does not acknowledge that he ever asked Comey to drop the Flynn investigation. According to Trump, he let the FBI’s investigation into Flynn proceed unmolested. This may well not be true, of course, but it’s not simply a fact that Trump admitted to a crime. 4. “He has himself committed a crime.” This is a big stretch. Dowd’s claims about the authorship of the tweet were made to Reuters and Axios, not to anyone in law enforcement. Abramson’s idea is apparently that creating public uncertainty as to whether Trump wrote the alleged admission of obstruction constitutes obstruction itself. I’ve read a lot about this story and haven’t seen anyone else suggest that Dowd might seriously be prosecuted in this bank-shot manner, and I spoke to two Slate staffers with law degrees who found the scenario farfetched. 5. “Disbarred immediately.” Disbarments require investigation and hearings; they aren’t automatic. 6. “America needs an answer on this right now.” Or later. Later, once the situation has actually been investigated by the highly qualified special counsel prosecutors who are self-evidently doing a thorough job, would be fine too! 7. “If.” Finally, there’s the “If.” Snuck carefully in behind “ATTENTION,” it’s the key word in Abramson’s tweet and in most viral resistance posts. If X happened, then Y catastrophe would befall Trump and his advisers. If such and such supposition about a sketchy report of this and that is true, then Trump was compromised by the Soviets in 1987 and has been manipulated as an intelligence asset ever since. Anyone who’s familiar with history or has, like, ever watched a true-crime documentary knows that Robert Mueller’s investigation is unlikely to produce a definitive, indisputable, universally satisfying and convincing account of Trump-Russia collusion. Responsible writing about the subject can acknowledge this without minimizing the seriousness of what we do know; what Abramson et al. are selling is the idea that every fact is knowable and every speculative suspicion justified, if you make the right connections and assumptions. But I guess the nice thing about living in a world of if is that you’ll never run out of material. Democrats: Please, Please Stop Sharing Seth Abramson’s Very Bad Tweets By Ben Mathis-Lilley Dec. 5, 2017 9:31 PM https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/12/sharing-seth-abramson-not-once-not-ever.html |
Anonymous
That is such crap. If you think an investigation ends because of a change in directors, you are clueless. Really. That's NOT how the FBI works. |
Anonymous
|
Both Abramson and Mensch are huge conspiracy theorists. Hopefully, when this is all said and done, they will be exposed as such.
They are both horrible. This, from a very left leaning source: https://thinkprogress.org/blue-detectives-collapse-trump-russia-a42a94537bdf/ There are plenty more articles about their lack of credibility out there....... http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/the-mueller-report-conspiracy-theories-from-qanon-to-mensch.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/resistance-trump-louise-mensch-seth-abramson-eric-gardland-amy-siskind-conspiracy-theories-lists-a8043076.html |
Anonymous
So we agree that Trump is clueless. |
Anonymous
|
13:22 Oh sh*t
I love it. I am spiking the ball in the end zone. |
Anonymous
Not sure what you're talking about...... I assume it refers to the interview with Lester Holt. Here is a transcript of the interview. Please let us know where exactly Trump said by firing Comey he would end the investigation..... https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/05/11/president_trumps_full_interview_with_lester_holt.html And, BTW, the person who wrote the bolded above is the clueless one. Was that you? |
Anonymous
| I am a liberal and never read Seth Abramsen or Louise Mensch. Abramson is self-publishing a book, which is just sad IMHO. It smacks of nitwits like Alex Jones, Hannity, Carlson, and QAnon but just the liberal side of crazy. |
Anonymous
Then why did Trump ask the director to go easy on Flynn? And why did Trump tell the Russian ambassador that the pressure of the investigation had been lifted after he fired Comey? |
Anonymous
I will refer you to Spicer's statement regarding Trump's comments.... "The President has always emphasized the importance of making deals with Russia as it relates to Syria, Ukraine, defeating ISIS and other key issues for the benefit and safety of the American people," Spicer said in a statement to CNN. "By grandstanding and politicizing the investigation into Russia's actions, James Comey created unnecessary pressure on our ability to engage and negotiate with Russia." He added, "The investigation would have always continued, and obviously, the termination of Comey would not have ended it. Once again, the real story is that our national security has been undermined by the leaking of private and highly classified conversations." And, asking him to go easy on Flynn? Because he knew Flynn did nothing wrong. Once again, investigations do NOT end with the change of a director. My spouse is ex-FBI and worked under 3 different directors. NO investigation was ever ended when one of them left. |
Anonymous
+1 |