-
-
Hey what ever happened to that Russian collusion story we heard about from the fake news media every single day for over 2 years?
Clinton appointee Judge John Koeltl dismissed the case with prejudice (substantive legal defect and cannot be refiled) concluding that the accusations were "entirely divorced" from the facts.
Comment
-
Presumably you read the opinion? Several notes:Originally posted by shockfan89_ View Post
1. He did not find that the accusations were "entirely divorced" from the facts. He found that the argument that Trump and Co. conspired with the Russian Federation to steal the documents was entirely divorced from "the facts actually alleged in the Second Amended Complaint." This was a motion to dismiss, not a fact finding hearing.
2. For the reasons stated above, we can't really just believe the facts in the order. But they are significantly worse to Trump and Co than they are to anyone else. Read the order. Papdopoulos met with "an unofficial agent of the Russian Government" who said Russia had dirt on Clinton and then Papadopoulos told his higher ups that "interesting messages coming in from Moscow."
3. The judge points out that Russia stole the materials. Russia is "undoubtedly" the primary wrongdoer, according to the judge. Trump and Co are protected from liability for disseminating the materials because of the First Amendment.
4. Trump is going to be sure to spread the "entirely divorced" quote around, just as you have done, to suggest it was all lunacy. What those folks aren't telling you is that the judge had to hear an argument for sanctions relating to the underlying validity of the claim. The judge specifically found it wasn't so unreasonable to warrant sanctions.
5. Lastly, I really do recommend people read it (just like I recommend people read the Mueller report). I do not understand how anyone could read these documents and think "yeah, I'm good with what happened there." And more importantly, the documents clearly show we were attacked by Russia. But Mitch and the rest of the gang can't get behind any actual election security provisions because they think it makes them look weak. It's absolutely bonkers.
Comment
-
I did read the opinion.
1. The argument was that Trump and Co. conspired with Russia. The judge said there was NO EVIDENCE OF THAT.
2. Mifsud told the FBI in February 2017 that his contacts with Papadopoulos a year earlier, during the 2016 presidential campaign, were mostly innocuous. He made that point both in an FBI interview and a follow-up email to agents. In fact, at one point in his email, he bold-faced a single sentence for emphasis: “Cybersecurity was never the direct object of any of our communications.”Mifsud even told the FBI that, after his interview, he went back to his documents to make sure there wasn’t something more sinister: “The issues that you specifically asked me about in your questions this morning did not feature in any of our email conversations as far as I can see.”
3. Doesn't matter, #1 already proved that Trump & Co did nothing illegal. NOTHING.
4. The judge also dismissed the case with prejudice basically saying no evidence was found and this case cannot be refiled.
5. If the dishonest Democrats and fake news media would honestly report the issue of Russian interference alone and leave Trump out of it then I agree we should all listen. In reality, the Obama administration is more to blame for Russian interference but all you ever hear is Trump Russia. I would think now that it has been 100% proven by every investigation, including this ruling from a federal judge, that Trump & Co was not at all involved, maybe we could all focus on Russian interference and look at the mistakes made by Obama, the motivation for letting it occur (maybe to frame Trump), and ensure that it doesn't happen with any more frequency in future elections than it has in the past 40 years. -
5.
Most people, excluding cnn and rachael maddow, believe 89's assertion: that to insert the President into the intelligence operation, with no evidence of such, was designed to inflict as much harm as possible to his Presidency. Even up to delaying the report findings until after the '18 elections, hoping for the dems to win control of the House, and thus the reigns of impeachment. No?
Who doesn't believe that the President's involvement was known to be false by the -ahem- "17 intelligence agencies" the day BEFORE that proven liar comey was fired? "But no," hillary didn't commit any crimes (so saith obama appointees). A lot of those public figures are still around to remind us too, because they just can't shut their mouths or conceal their hate. That's the bottom line.Last edited by ShockingButTrue; July 31, 2019, 11:19 AM. -
@shockfan89_:
1. My distinction is a minor point relating to the point that this was a motion to dismiss, not a fact finding hearing. They're different procedural issues. The judge found that no facts were alleged indicating that point. Obviously, you'd expect them to allege every fact they could, but it is important to be precise when you're discussing these issues. The judge did not make a determination on actual facts.
2. As explained above, kind of a different situation here. You're inserting facts that I do not believe were considered by the judge. My point is that the facts that were considered were a bad look and I don't think people should be okay with it.
3. This is the most important part. It ABSOLUTELY matters that Russia did this. People continue to (i) argue Russia wasn't involved; or (ii) that it doesn't matter. Russia attacked us. We need greater protections. Obviously, I think it's bad that Trump and Co TRIED to get materials directly from Russia, and I think it's good they failed. Obviously, I think it's bad that Trump and Co helped disseminate the stolen materials, but that is clearly protected by the First Amendment. Not everything that should be considered unethical for a president is illegal.
4. Again, not a fact finding hearing. It was dismissed. It was not objectively unreasonable. That question was before the judge. It is dishonest for Trump and others to simply act as if the lawsuit was the craziest thing ever put forth.
5. I think your entire paragraph 5 is off. I don't agree with basically any of it, other than that we should ensure it doesn't happen again (though, apparently you're wishy washy on that? And only want to limit it to the same frequency it has had over the last 40 years?). Either way, this starts with calling out people like Mitch and Trump who have failed to show adequate leadership on this front.
-
-
A comedians 'wet dream'... so much hilarious material makes it impossible to keep up.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartanntp
Gotta stop, gonna pee my britches...
"You Just Want to Slap The #### Outta Some People"Comment
-
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-99-...se-11564529382 The 99% Get a Bigger Raise
New data show much faster growth in wages and incomes.The fat lady is warming up dims...Political discourse nowadays is enough to depress anyone, and the media don’t help by ignoring good economic news. But buck up, Americans: Worker wages are growing much faster than previously reported.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) on Tuesday published its annual revisions to personal income data, and the surprise was the huge jump in disposable income and employee compensation.
The revisions show that employee compensation rose 4.5% in 2017 and 5% in 2018—some $4.4 billion and $87.1 billion more than previously reported. The trend has continued into 2019, with compensation increasing $378 billion or 3.4% in the first six months alone. Wages and salaries were revised upward to 5.3% from 3.6% in May year over year. And in June wages and salaries grew at an annual rate of 5.5%, which is a rocking 4.1% after adjusting for inflation.
Recall how liberals blamed “secular stagnation” as the reason worker incomes weren’t growing faster during the latter years of Barack Obama’s Presidency. Yet employee compensation has increased by $150 billion more in the first six months of 2019 than all of 2016. Compensation increased 42% more during the first two years of the Trump Presidency than in 2015 and 2016. This refutes the claim by liberals that the economy has merely continued on the same trajectory since 2017 as it was before.
#MAGA
T
...:cool:Comment
-
Say it ain't so:
And this is the same guy who claimed moral outrage and concern for them babies huh?Comment
-
While it's nice to see the U.S. economy humming, I have to wonder why the Trump administration (assuming re-election) is on pace to nearly equal the Obama admin in debt accumulation. In 2016 Trump foolishly said he could eliminate the debt over eight years without raising taxes. Sure, that was a ridiculous statement, but it should have at least been a signal that debt reduction was on his radar and perhaps even a priority. If he and Congress can't (or won't) slow it down during a booming economy, it isn't going to happen under his watch.
Comment
-
I agree that it was a ridiculous statement to suggest he could reduce the debt (let alone eliminate it) without raising taxes, but I don't agree that we can assume that means it was a priority. It was a talking point to get elected, just as it is for every politician. I think if it were actually a priority, the politician would never say something so far removed from reality. When it's truly a priority, the politician has to talk about specific key steps that must be taken to curb spending and increase revenue.Originally posted by RoyalShock View Post
But, in all, I absolutely agree with your overall post. Economic growth should be used for paying down debt, economic decline requires taking on debt. There is literally zero justification for trying to supercharge an already booming economy with a trillion dollar tax cut.Comment
-
nmComment
-
I am absolutely convinced that Russia and communist China will do everything in their power to defeat President Trump in 2020.Comment
-
-
Even aside from Trump's attacks on the Fed, I'm just perplexed by this Tweet. If this isn't a "mid-cycle adjustment," is it the start of a full on recession? Something is happening in the market.Comment
-
Just curious as to why we never hear about Trump/Russian collusion anymore? For nearly 3 years that is basically the only story the MSM was peddling. By my count that moves Trump's false or misleading statements count back down to single digits and MSM is now at 443,291,162. I guess Trump was right to call MSM the enemy of the people.Comment
-
... and the current President of the USA and the people that voted for him are proof of it being true.
It's a "scorched earth" policy and they're all-in... And if that does't work...*Last edited by ShockingButTrue; August 19, 2019, 07:53 PM. -
There were a large number of documented contacts between Trump's staff and Russian agents of some type or another. That's perfectly legal. Russians offered to help Trump in his campaign. That's perfectly legal. Trump's campaign did not report to the FBI, the CIA or anybody that Russians were offering to get involved in our election. That's perfectly legal.
The facts are known. Laws were not broken. It's become "old news", so it's not in the headlines any more.
I hope we do remember. I find it a bit disturbing when a country that is not friendly to the USA gets involved in our elections. Mueller exposed some things in our elections that have not been predicted or prevented by legislation. I think Congress needs to pay some attention to that.
I'm aware that most posting in this forum are happy that the Russians were on the side of the Republicans in the last election cycle. Don't let that cloud your judgement about allowing foreign agents getting involved in our elections. If they can do it for one party, they can certainly do it for the other party.
Blowing off the Mueller report because Trump was not indicted pretty much misses the value of what was found. Our elections, and by extension our Democracy, is susceptible to influences from countries that do not have our best interest as their prime objective.Last edited by Aargh; September 1, 2019, 01:08 AM. -
The problem is that Mueller wasn't tasked to look at foreign influence on the 2016 elections, he was specifically tasked to look at Trump/Russian collusion. That is what the MSM sold daily for 3 years. It wasn't whether or not the Trump administration broke the law, it was sold as Trump did this and will be impeached as soon as it officially comes out.
This was 100% a lie by the MSM and they knew it while they were doing it. As you stated, the facts are now known and laws were not broken. I would expect at least one year of the media recanting all their lies and admitting that they were, in fact, the enemy of the people and had an agenda to take down Trump. Instead, they switched focus to obstruction, racism, whatever other disingenuous talking point they can think of.
The media lies is what has diminished the Mueller report. What has also been ignored was the foreign influence on the part of Hillary. All foreign influence should be reviewed and steps taken to ensure it doesn't happen again.
I also would like someone to look at the FBI / DOJ influence and see what additional steps can be taken to ensure our intelligence agencies are not attempting to influence the elections.
-
-
-
J.P. Morgan says the tariffs will cost an "average household" $1,000.
https://www.kwch.com/content/news/La...6Qsjm8itA-YY-QThe future's so bright - I gotta wear shades.
We like to cut down nets and get sized for championship rings.Comment
Tweet
Comment