Red Mosquito

I dont really care about him, but its a good time to point out that the media is the enemy of the people.

BurtReynolds wrote:I dont really care about him, but its a good time to point out that the media is the enemy of the people.

The media has its fault, both sides, all sides, but they are not the enemy of the people. But thats a good story to tell yourself.

you'll come around

run2death wrote:Honestly, I could give a shit about the Russia stuff.

It has nothing to do with why DJT is such a despicable and disgraceful person. I mean, he's done all the real damning stuff in plain sight.

Yes

Bi_3 wrote:Taibbi: Russiagate is this generation’s WMD

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagat ... -a-million

Seems premature given we don’t know the details yet, but pretty damning

I'm admittedly jumping in without having given the piece a good read, but the bolded is utterly ridiculous.

If there’s nothing incriminating in the report and it does totally exonerate him, he’ll surely have no problem with the whole thing being released to the public? Or will he have one/some of his lackies block it’s release for him?
Reading that there’s red flags all over Barr’s interpretation and he’s ‘scrubbing’ parts of the full report? Whatever that could mean

“It completely exonerates me; no, you can’t look at it”

run2death wrote:Honestly, I could give a shit about the Russia stuff.

It has nothing to do with why DJT is such a despicable and disgraceful person. I mean, he's done all the real damning stuff in plain sight.

Yup.

I am not very shocked that the report apparently concludes that there was no evidence of outright collusion/conspiracy against the election within the Trump campaign. It wasn’t a clean affair, but I am not sure how many presidential campaigns ever are at that level, and then add to it that many of the leading forces in that campaign were complete newcomers.

What disturbs me more is the obstruction issue. It disturbs me because the President made extreme efforts in plain sight to scuttle the investigation into his campaign. Even if you take away firing Comey, and his alleged effort to fire Mueller, and the recusal issue with Sessions (ALL of which was clearly done to put his finger on the scale of the Russia probe), his tweeting aimed at discrediting the investigation and pushing for its conclusion as the chief law enforcement officer in the nation, along with the tweets that unquestionably sought to intimidate and harass potential witnesses, should be enough. This is what is impeachable, even if that route is ultimately not the most expedient thing to do politically. And while I understand that what is declined criminal prosecution does not amount to total exhonoration, and not dispositive as to whether a president can be impeached for the same act (he/she can), I am not sure the public will, and certainly is taking shape to be claimed a witch hunt even if it isn’t.

The biggest disappointment for me is that, once again, the President received positive reinforcement for engaging in behavior that no one else could ever get away with.

liebzz wrote:I am not very shocked that the report apparently concludes that there was no evidence of outright collusion/conspiracy against the election within the Trump campaign. It wasn’t a clean affair, but I am not sure how many presidential campaigns ever are at that level, and then add to it that many of the leading forces in that campaign were complete newcomers.

What disturbs me more is the obstruction issue. It disturbs me because the President made extreme efforts in plain sight to scuttle the investigation into his campaign. Even if you take away firing Comey, and his alleged effort to fire Mueller, and the recusal issue with Sessions (ALL of which was clearly done to put his finger on the scale of the Russia probe), his tweeting aimed at discrediting the investigation and pushing for its conclusion as the chief law enforcement officer in the nation, along with the tweets that unquestionably sought to intimidate and harass potential witnesses, should be enough. This is what is impeachable, even if that route is ultimately not the most expedient thing to do politically. And while I understand that what is declined criminal prosecution does not amount to total exhonoration, and not dispositive as to whether a president can be impeached for the same act (he/she can), I am not sure the public will, and certainly is taking shape to be claimed a witch hunt even if it isn’t.

The biggest disappointment for me is that, once again, the President received positive reinforcement for engaging in behavior that no one else could ever get away with.

Yep, this is all spot on. And this is why having Trump has long-term ramifications; why shouldn't any president in the future obstruct justice or press on DOJ investigations that may impact them? There's clearly not going to be any consequences.

This report is so good for the president that if you look at it you’ll go blind.

So Q anon was only 20X wrong as the Comey gang?

digster wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:Taibbi: Russiagate is this generation’s WMD

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagat ... -a-million

Seems premature given we don’t know the details yet, but pretty damning

I'm admittedly jumping in without having given the piece a good read, but the bolded is utterly ridiculous.

If it turns out he is exonerated (vs just not prosecutable), it’s close in terms of government and media dissemination of a false narrative and close in the amount of damage done to US credibility and social cohesion. And since irreparably damaging our country’s faith in its political processes, leaders, and media was Putin’s goal, I guess you could say both he and Trump won a big one this week

I'm not sure; I mean, I get it's an eye-catching headline, but Taibbi strikes me as someone who maybe has become so engrossed in a narrative as to lose perspective. The reasons they're different to me are the obvious ones; the WMD fiasco led to the death of millions (both U.S. soldiers and Iraqis), and caused the US to spend who knows how many billions of dollars. Without the Iraq war, there's likely no caliphate, or it's markedly different. It changed how the rest of the world conducts their foreign policy, and how they interact with the US. Particularly in terms of foreign policy, it's not too far of an overreach to say that screwing up the WMD question has impacted practically every decision and action we've made over the past fifteen years.

Compared to that, even if you grant Trump the most lenient possible reading of the report's conclusions, it's just extremely difficult for me to see how this reaches that type of impact. I don't think it's going to impact how foreign allies and adversaries interact with us; it hasn't seemed to thus far. And the impact it does have (it's causing us to be more polarized and distrust each other and our institutions) were already there prior to the Mueller report; they were already there prior to Trump. I don't think the fact that half the country hates the other half and vice versa was going to go away regardless of what the report said.

digster wrote:but Taibbi strikes me as someone who maybe has become so engrossed in a narrative as to lose perspective.

Oh you mean like all the people on the left who have been blindly suckling at the teat of Mueller and Russiagate for the past two years? I think in retrospect Taibbi's way more spot-on than most of the "journalists" and pundits who have been screaming about collusion and treason.

I'd say a more apt analogy, as opposed to WMDs, is that this is the left's version of birtherism. Anything to discredit a president they don't support, even in the face of facts.

Fuck Donald Trump though

meatwad wrote:

digster wrote:but Taibbi strikes me as someone who maybe has become so engrossed in a narrative as to lose perspective.

Oh you mean like all the people on the left who have been blindly suckling at the teat of Mueller and Russiagate for the past two years? I think in retrospect Taibbi's way more spot-on than most of the "journalists" and pundits who have been screaming about collusion and treason.

I'd say a more apt analogy, as opposed to WMDs, is that this is the left's version of birtherism. Anything to discredit a president they don't support, even in the face of facts.

The difference is that the Mueller probe itself asked legitimate questions, and there legitimate questions still to be asked about what exactly was happening with the Donald Jr. meeting with the Russian contacts, especially since there were repeated walk backs and lies about that meeting. Birtherism was complete nonsense.

meatwad wrote:

digster wrote:but Taibbi strikes me as someone who maybe has become so engrossed in a narrative as to lose perspective.

Oh you mean like all the people on the left who have been blindly suckling at the teat of Mueller and Russiagate for the past two years? I think in retrospect Taibbi's way more spot-on than most of the "journalists" and pundits who have been screaming about collusion and treason.

I'd say a more apt analogy, as opposed to WMDs, is that this is the left's version of birtherism. Anything to discredit a president they don't support, even in the face of facts.

I don't think being blind to perspective and evidence due to adherence to a narrative is the domain of only one ideology or viewpoint, and I didn't really say that in that post. I was only saying that the comparison to the WMD fuckup was hard to fathom.

And the latter comparison doesn't seem to make much sense, either; whether or not Russiagate ends up being completely disproven, there were clearly odd signs at the outset, even if in the end they can be explained. The sole reason birtherism happened is because the president was black.