Obama’s 3 residences being searched

[Plasmodium]

24 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Somewhat valid statement in regard to intent...which I will put the case in question aside because your statement then becomes invalid as we all know what the "intent" was.  But I would be concerned with how we are issuing warrants that may be based on inaccurate information...regardless of attempt to conceal truth.  It is just a slippery slope is all.  I am all for catching people breaking the law and holding them accountable, but within the constitution and our justice system process.

I agree with the latter part of your post.  You will definitely have to remind me of what "intent" means in this context. 

[jross]

Donald Trump's character is widely criticized and viewed as lacking in ethics and integrity. The constant barrage of sensationalized and emotional reporting by the media, public, and leaders, along with the spread of misinformation and lies, has only contributed to a growing tolerance for his actions and behavior. If the focus were solely on the facts, the public discourse and perception of the former president would likely be different.

[El Luchador]

22 minutes ago, jross said:

Donald Trump's character is widely criticized and viewed as lacking in ethics and integrity. The constant barrage of sensationalized and emotional reporting by the media, public, and leaders, along with the spread of misinformation and lies, has only contributed to a growing tolerance for his actions and behavior. If the focus were solely on the facts, the public discourse and perception of the former president would likely be different.

What I find ironic is the media who acts out all incensed, set the tone with him early on. As far as I'm concerned all he did was reciprocate. 

[Plasmodium]

To be successful, Trump feels he has to make enemies.  He carefully cultivates them in social media, at his rallies, debates, press conferences.    Every opportunity he gets.  Right now, he is creating one in Ron DeSantis.  Friends come and go.  Enemies accumulate.

[El Luchador]

2 hours ago, Plasmodium said:

To be successful, Trump feels he has to make enemies.  He carefully cultivates them in social media, at his rallies, debates, press conferences.    Every opportunity he gets.  Right now, he is creating one in Ron DeSantis.  Friends come and go.  Enemies accumulate.

If he fails to get the Nomination this will be why.

[Bigbrog]

I just don't know why people keep wanting to talk about this idiot??  And it's usually the people who hate him the most that do it.  Let him fall into obscurity, never to be spoken of or heard from again.

[jross]

56 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

I just don't know why people keep wanting to talk about this idiot??  And it's usually the people who hate him the most that do it.  Let him fall into obscurity, never to be spoken of or heard from again.

Because people are smart?  By giving him attention there is a chance that he will run for president again, giving democrats a chance to win.

Because people are dumb?  Discrediting him will make people think he is a bad man and prevent his opportunity.  Reality is that this hardens the republican resistence to vote democrat and causes current democratic supporters to reconsider.

[Mike Parrish]

On 2/7/2023 at 4:22 PM, mspart said:

Mueller said there was no collusion.

Mueller said no such thing.

Read the Mueller report.

[mspart]

1 hour ago, Mike Parrish said:

Mueller said no such thing.

Read the Mueller report.

https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2019/03/mueller-concludes-investigation/

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/24/706385781/mueller-report-finds-evidence-of-russian-collusion

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/24/breaking-news-barr-to-release-summary-of-mueller-report-1233771

“The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,” the special counsel wrote in his findings, which Attorney General William Barr released on Sunday in four-page summary form.

Now from the Mueller report itself:

Starting in June 2016, the IRA contacted different U.S. persons affiliated with the Trump
Campaign in an effort to coordinate pro-Trump IRA-organized rallies inside the United States. In
all cases, the IRA contacted the Campaign while claiming to be U.S. political activists working on
behalf of a conservative grassroots organization. The IRA’s contacts included requests for signs
and other materials to use at rallies,107 as well as requests to promote the rallies and help coordinate
logistics.108 While certain campaign volunteers agreed to provide the requested support (for
example, agreeing to set aside a number of signs), the investigation has not identified evidence
that any Trump Campaign official understood the requests were coming from foreign nationals.

Although members of the IRA had contact with individuals affiliated with the Trump
Campaign, the indictment does not charge any Trump Campaign official or any other U.S. person
with participating in the conspiracy. That is because the investigation did not identify evidence
that any U.S. person who coordinated or communicated with the IRA knew that he or she was
speaking with Russian nationals engaged in the criminal conspiracy.

I would think that the plain language would be sufficient for you but I am guessing that is a naive thought.

mspart

[jross]

2 minutes ago, Mike Parrish said:

Mueller said no such thing.

Read the Mueller report.

The result of the two year investigation into criminal collusion is summarized on page 9 and 13 in the report like this:

• Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

There was not clear and convincing evidence.  

[Mike Parrish]

Read the Mueller report itself.
Barrs' summary is incorrect.

[jross]

There is better evidence for obstruction than collusion.  This is the exact quote from where the report describes no criminal collusion was found.
 

1 hour ago, jross said:

 page 9 and 13

• Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

 

[Mike Parrish]

5 minutes ago, jross said:

There is better evidence for obstruction than collusion.  This is the exact quote from where the report describes no criminal collusion was found.

Careful reading here is required.

Quote

the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government

Not that there wasn't any but that the targets of the investigation all took the fifth or were not made available for interview.
See Manafort, Paul

 

Nowhere does the report say, "no criminal collusion was found."
Only that they couldn't prove it in a criminal context.

Edited February 9, 2023 by Mike Parrish

[mspart]

So absence of proof is not enough for you.    Did any prosecution happen as a result of collusion?   The prosecutions that did happen were for other things.  None happened for collusion because there was no proof that it happened.   If it had happened, they would have found proof. 

This is like someone saying I robbed a person.  I say I never robbed a person.   An investigation  is begun and finds there is no evidence I robbed a person.   Yet you still are convinced I robbed a person because they didn't say I didn't rob a person.  Ridiculous.  

You have misread the Mueller report this same way.    You are looking for any excuse to find collusion.   When the official report says there is no evidence of collusion, that means they found no evidence of collusion.   It does not mean "it probably happened but we just can't find it".   It means there is no evidence to support the allegation.    That was the purpose for the investigation - to find evidence of wrongdoing.   They found no evidence of wrongdoing.  That is why there has not been any follow up investigations or prosecutions for actual russian collusion on the part of any US person.  

mspart

[jross]

6 minutes ago, Mike Parrish said:

Careful reading here is required.

Not that there wasn't any but that the targets of the investigation all took the fifth or were not made available for interview.
See Manafort, Paul

 

Nowhere does the report say, "no criminal collusion was found."
Only that they couldn't prove it in a criminal context.

Agreed.  "There was not clear and convincing evidence" in long form meant that that the evidence did not meet the high bar of evidence required to proceed with a criminal collusion case.  This doesn't mean it wasn't done.