[POLITICS] Robert Mueller Testifies before the House

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

The political system is what it is. Pelosi is a player of the political system as it is - a complex game I think the likes of you and I really do not truly understand.

My degrees are in political science and history, I worked with campaigns and legislators on a volunteer and paid basis going back to my high school days, and I've worked with legislators on behalf of non-profs for longer than that. I'd like to think I'm qualified to speak on the subject.

Pfft. That just means you're an insider. You're an elite, not an average joe like the rest of us. By what right does an expert give opinions?!

 

[Worgen]

It is nice to have Muller voice on record saying he didn't exonerate the president. Though now I'm worried how soon it'll be before Republicans are saying he committed purgery for disagreeing with the God Emperor.

Considering how quickly the turned on their own, I am sure they already have in conservative media. Even though Mueller, Comey and most of the FBI have always been long time Republicans, you saw how quick it took the GOP to disown them as being part of the liberal conspiracy against Trump.

My favorite part was when one of the republicans accidentally got Mueller to say he could charge trump with a crime after he left office.

Time 14:16

https://youtu.be/KoF8h7Pfn_g?t=856

 

[Tireseas_v1legacy]

The political system is what it is. Pelosi is a player of the political system as it is - a complex game I think the likes of you and I really do not truly understand.

My degrees are in political science and history, I worked with campaigns and legislators on a volunteer and paid basis going back to my high school days, and I've worked with legislators on behalf of non-profs for longer than that. I'd like to think I'm qualified to speak on the subject.

And I counter with my degrees in Government, Philosophy and Law and time as a congressional intern during the last Pelosi Majority.

That said, there's just as many idiots in Congress as they're are in the US. I can firmly tell you Pelosi and the leadership team are not among them.

Pelosi is probably one of the best political strategists to ever hold the speakership. The last time she was speaker, she shepherded some of the hardest and most taken-for-granted legislation to make it through the congress and then get signed [https://www.politico.com/story/2010/12/legislation-signed-into-law-under-pelosi-046650]. She's done this largely by protecting the center-flank of the caucus (who ultimately are who make up the critical majority seats) and making their votes count when they can and letting them slide when they're unnecessary to pass.

While I'm in the camp that says impeachment investigations should commence as a matter of building a record, I'm respectful of her stance that this is ultimately a counter-productive move without some kind of substantive GOP buy-in that would at least give it the cover of being nonpartisan. But the Republicans, particularly the ones that have expressed private sentiments [https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/07/politics/justin-amash-republican-party-donald-trump-cnntv/index.html] have chosen either cowardice and/or pure craven ideology (likely a combination of both) that makes them fundamentally unwilling to take on a president that would stab them in the back the moment he feels that would be to his advantage.

At it's core, in large part because McConnell, whose approach to politics has been some of the most blatantly corrupt and unprincipled in history, controls the Senate, there is no path to success through impeachment absent something that really changes in the GOP, particularly in conservative media. We already know that just one GOP congressperson, by explaining the grounds for impeachment, can start to change minds that have bought into the narrative that the report exonerated the president [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/justin-amash-grand-rapids-michigan-town-hall-standing-ovation-resistance-trump-impeachment/], but it ultimately is going to require a bigger megaphone than one congressperson who could be easily blacklisted from conservative media, and one Republicans are more sympathetic to than traditional news sources.

In short, it's going to require Fox News to flip the script on Trump (either because the editorial opinion changes or it becomes a necessity due to growing support among GOP lawmakers) to really change the story on impeachment. Otherwise, impeachment becomes a futile effort.

 

[Agema]

My degrees are in political science and history, I worked with campaigns and legislators on a volunteer and paid basis going back to my high school days, and I've worked with legislators on behalf of non-profs for longer than that. I'd like to think I'm qualified to speak on the subject.

I hear what you're saying, and I'm sure you're considerably more up on it than I am; I've done no more than volunteer helping out on some local stuff.

However, back in the day doing my PhD, I had a degree in pharmacology, experience in research in industry and academia and university teaching, but I was still unaware of a huge amount of what being a university lecturer was really about. I stress that I don't mean to tell you how much you know, I'm just expressing my experiences of realising, with hindsight, how little I knew even as I was well into a career. Also, my general instinct is a Socratic one to start with an assumption of our own ignorance.

 

[Saelune]

The truth is, the system failed. It is corrupt and does not work. The only actual solution to the government is starting over from relative scratch, but that requires enough people caring enough, and that wont happen because most people do not care. Expecting the government to fix itself is like expecting cancer to cure itself.

If we cant impeach Trump, then we cant impeach anyone. We owe Bill and Nixon apologies.

 

[Gergar12_v1legacy]

Heres the deal, the deck's stacked against democrats and for republicans. If a dem fucks up, they are investigated by a republican, ditto for a republican fucking up. Either have a demo be investigated by a democrat and a republican for a republican. Or have the opposite party investigate the offending party.

This is bullshit. Literally, everything is stacked in favor of big money republicans in America.

Also, Bill Clinton signed the crime bill that made the US into an even harsher police state. So he sucks.

 

[Seanchaidh]

The political system is what it is. Pelosi is a player of the political system as it is - a complex game I think the likes of you and I really do not truly understand.

My degrees are in political science and history, I worked with campaigns and legislators on a volunteer and paid basis going back to my high school days, and I've worked with legislators on behalf of non-profs for longer than that. I'd like to think I'm qualified to speak on the subject.

Pfft. That just means you're an insider. You're an elite, not an average joe like the rest of us. By what right does an expert give opinions?!

Political insiders typically express opinions that they want others to accept independently of whether they are true. Since our politics are pretty rotten, this generally means that the opinions they express are designed to mislead or lower standards. So, they're perfectly free to give their opinions, but it's not exactly surprising when they turn out to be utterly wrong.

 

[Trunkage]

The political system is what it is. Pelosi is a player of the political system as it is - a complex game I think the likes of you and I really do not truly understand.

My degrees are in political science and history, I worked with campaigns and legislators on a volunteer and paid basis going back to my high school days, and I've worked with legislators on behalf of non-profs for longer than that. I'd like to think I'm qualified to speak on the subject.

Pfft. That just means you're an insider. You're an elite, not an average joe like the rest of us. By what right does an expert give opinions?!

I find it funny when those politicians that are 'politically incorrect' (Boris and Donald) say their rant and becuase its deemed as politically incorrect, it's also seen as the truthful. I don't know why being politically incorrect is any more truthful than being correct. That doesn't make them an expert or layman. It makes them an asshole who can't argue without denigrating people.

 

[Nedoras]

In short, it's going to require Fox News to flip the script on Trump (either because the editorial opinion changes or it becomes a necessity due to growing support among GOP lawmakers) to really change the story on impeachment. Otherwise, impeachment becomes a futile effort.

Why would Fox flipping the script change a single thing? The Republicans love Fox only because they see them as being on their side. The second that stops, they're not going to give a shit anymore and go somewhere else. The Fox audience already loses their shit whenever they say anything critical of Trump, screaming that the hosts belong on CNN n' whatnot. This isn't about convincing them. They've decided that they're on a team, and they're sticking with that team no matter what. If Fox suddenly flips the script, they're not going to flip with it. These people will never be okay with impeachment. Never.

Honestly I think they should try. Will it fail? Sure, of coarse it would. But not even doing so also sends it's own kind of message. It's saying that it's totally okay that all of this is happening. It's an endorsement of it, and it sets a precedent that will surely be used against them in the future. And for what? Fear of riling up a base that is literally always in a state of being riled up? I will never understand this fear of the Republican base. They're not some sleeping giant that will awaken and cause problems, they're literally always awake and screaming at the top of their lungs. These are people who lost their shit over the "War on Christmas", and are currently losing their shit over a Muslim congresswoman for simply existing.

Trump barely won in 2016 despite having better turnout than previous, recent Republican candidates. They don't need to walk on fucking eggshells over every single little thing. They need to try to take back the narrative instead of aiding it and capitulating to it. They need to try and win over nonvoters instead of constantly worrying about what the Republicans will do or think.

 

[Saelune]

Centrists during Lincoln's era were probably saying ending slavery was a bad idea cause it would upset too many people.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

Centrists during Lincoln's era were probably saying ending slavery was a bad idea cause it would upset too many people.

It isn't that centrists don't want to impeach Trump, it is that they want to wait until it actually means something rather than just allowing him to get away with it. Doing it knowing it will fail in the Senate is doing Trump a favor and let him off the hook entirely. Waiting until you have the evidence in hand and ability to actually hold Trump accountable both in congress and to charge him criminally so that everyone in the world sees that if you try to harm the US, you will be prosecuted would be much more effective than moving to impeach before you can make it stick.

Those screaming for Democrats to impeach now are actually helping Trump get away with it rather than have him actually have to pay for his crimes because it will make it much more difficult to impeach him again when they can make it stick. Moving to impeach without the votes to actually do it is helping Trump out here. They cannot gain more votes without the evidence that is being blocked by Trumps Lackeys.

The House's next move after filing with the courts should be to have the Deputy Sergeant at Arms arrest Barr and Ross for contempt of congress, as was last done in 1927. The House first of all needs to show their teeth in order to be taken seriously. Impeaching without teeth just makes them look weaker and stupid.

 

[Agema]

Centrists during Lincoln's era were probably saying ending slavery was a bad idea cause it would upset too many people.

I would probably prefer Trump to be tried with a fair chance of conviction by a federal court after he leaves office than escape justice through a failed impeachment (I'm guessing here that double jeopardy applies and impeachment may preclude a later trial). That way justice will be done, the warning will go out for future aspiring presidents, and Trump will be tarred in perpetuity for criminality in high office.

It's not just about throwing mud at Trump for the sake of form - there's a longer term and bigger picture to think about.

 

[Pseudonym]

Question for the people who want Trump impeached. What for exactly? There have been accusations of working together with Russia to influence the election, of obstruction of justice and of unduly enriching himself and his companies through the presidency. Which of those do you think are the most credible and worthy of impeachment?

Centrists during Lincoln's era were probably saying ending slavery was a bad idea cause it would upset too many people.

I would probably prefer Trump to be tried with a fair chance of conviction by a federal court after he leaves office than escape justice through a failed impeachment (I'm guessing here that double jeopardy applies and impeachment may preclude a later trial). That way justice will be done, the warning will go out for future aspiring presidents, and Trump will be tarred in perpetuity for criminality in high office.

It's not just about throwing mud at Trump for the sake of form - there's a longer term and bigger picture to think about.

Not true, it turns out, or at the most pessimistic legally unclear. https://www.justice.gov/file/19386/download

I know the knee jerk answer is "their job", but in reality, what do you expect the Democrats to do when the system of checks and balances are Balanced directly in favor of the Republicans... the very republicans who are very opposed to this very concept?

I dunno...not play election-year politics with an issue the public has been led to believe of existential import for the third year running? Actual support for impeachment continues to drop the longer this stretches on, and if Democrats try to keep their kick-the-can nonsense up, they're guaranteed to face severe repercussions in 2020...and that's an election Democrats absolutely, positively, under no circumstances can not afford to fuck up any worse than they already have.

"Their job" is the knee jerk answer, because it's the right one. Either the Trump administration is an existential threat to the country, or it isn't. If it is, then it's the Democrats moral, ethical, and professional imperative to do anything in their power to end it, or at least do their part as decisively as possible. If it isn't, well, Congressional Democrats are fucking liars. Like it or not, this is what they campaigned on in 2018, and it's up to them to fulfill campaign promises, as opposed to dither around pretending we're in the middle of a Constitutional crisis. It's time for Democrats to put their money where their mouth is, and stop making excuses.

I guarantee you, Republican voters won't be forgetting this any time soon, and left to their own devices Republican candidates will turn 2020 into a referendum on Democratic conduct. I can only speak for myself, but if Democrats don't vote to impeach, come 2020 I'll abstain or vote third party before I cast a single Democratic vote.

This is peak "blame Republicans for Democrats not doing their jobs".

They shouldn't impeach because they said they would or because they are the oppositions party. A member of congress should impeach because they think it is plausible the president committed relevant crimes, regardless of party affiliation or the like. I will grant you that those who ran on impeachment and who want to wait now have been dishonest, and should be held to account for that by their constituents come 2020.

 

[Agema]

I find it funny when those politicians that are 'politically incorrect' (Boris and Donald) say their rant and becuase its deemed as politically incorrect, it's also seen as the truthful. I don't know why being politically incorrect is any more truthful than being correct. That doesn't make them an expert or layman. It makes them an asshole who can't argue without denigrating people.

Obviously, many of them appreciate these rants because they do believe it's true, and everyone else ("elites", mainstream media and politicians) have been lying to them for years. However, to some extent, the word you're possibly looking for is "authentic", not "truthful". Authenticity is a form of truthfulness, in the sense of being true to oneself (leaving aside that some apparent authenticity is feigned), but does not require the substance of what is said to be true - indeed, some of these people are widely not trusted or believed. In a similar way, people who watch the ironically named "reality TV" will have noticed that when contestants discuss other people being "real" or "fake", what they really mean by the former is unfiltered splurging of whatever is on someone's mind irrespective of how hurtful or antagonising it may be.

So-called "political correctness" does entail a certain amount of control, tact and constraint. But even if not precisely lying, people can view it as fudging, euphemism, trickery, etc. For people frustrated that they can't let fly with what's bubbling up in their psyche lest they face public opprobrium, it is a great relief and entertainment when the likes of Trump, Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson break those constraints on their behalf. They just like that someone is saying it.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

Question for the people who want Trump impeached. What for exactly? There have been accusations of working together with Russia to influence the election, of obstruction of justice and of unduly enriching himself and his companies through the presidency. Which of those do you think are the most credible and worthy of impeachment?

Centrists during Lincoln's era were probably saying ending slavery was a bad idea cause it would upset too many people.

I would probably prefer Trump to be tried with a fair chance of conviction by a federal court after he leaves office than escape justice through a failed impeachment (I'm guessing here that double jeopardy applies and impeachment may preclude a later trial). That way justice will be done, the warning will go out for future aspiring presidents, and Trump will be tarred in perpetuity for criminality in high office.

It's not just about throwing mud at Trump for the sake of form - there's a longer term and bigger picture to think about.

Not true, it turns out, or at the most pessimistic legally unclear. https://www.justice.gov/file/19386/download

I know the knee jerk answer is "their job", but in reality, what do you expect the Democrats to do when the system of checks and balances are Balanced directly in favor of the Republicans... the very republicans who are very opposed to this very concept?

I dunno...not play election-year politics with an issue the public has been led to believe of existential import for the third year running? Actual support for impeachment continues to drop the longer this stretches on, and if Democrats try to keep their kick-the-can nonsense up, they're guaranteed to face severe repercussions in 2020...and that's an election Democrats absolutely, positively, under no circumstances can not afford to fuck up any worse than they already have.

"Their job" is the knee jerk answer, because it's the right one. Either the Trump administration is an existential threat to the country, or it isn't. If it is, then it's the Democrats moral, ethical, and professional imperative to do anything in their power to end it, or at least do their part as decisively as possible. If it isn't, well, Congressional Democrats are fucking liars. Like it or not, this is what they campaigned on in 2018, and it's up to them to fulfill campaign promises, as opposed to dither around pretending we're in the middle of a Constitutional crisis. It's time for Democrats to put their money where their mouth is, and stop making excuses.

I guarantee you, Republican voters won't be forgetting this any time soon, and left to their own devices Republican candidates will turn 2020 into a referendum on Democratic conduct. I can only speak for myself, but if Democrats don't vote to impeach, come 2020 I'll abstain or vote third party before I cast a single Democratic vote.

This is peak "blame Republicans for Democrats not doing their jobs".

They shouldn't impeach because they said they would or because they are the oppositions party. A member of congress should impeach because they think it is plausible the president committed relevant crimes, regardless of party affiliation or the like. I will grant you that those who ran on impeachment and who want to wait now have been dishonest, and should be held to account for that by their constituents come 2020.

It's not an either/or issue, they can impeach him for a laundry list of crimes, and that is what I think they should actually do here, just they need to have their ducks in a row before doing it. Here are just a few of the things he should be impeached for:

1)Obstruction of justice: By firing Comey and trying to have Mueller fired, Mueller's report made it pretty clear that they believe the President was in fact guilty of obstructing Justice. In addition, but on the same note, He should be impeached for abusing the office of president to influence and control the Department of Justice and FBI for personal gain to protect himself from investigation rather than protect the country and uphold the law. This is partially why they should wait to allow the contempt charges against Barr and Ross to play out. Trump abusing these positions to protect himself is obstructing congresses investigation was well as preventing the DOJ to further investigate him. Once democrats have the documents that Barr and Ross are preventing them from obtaining to further the judiciary committees investigation, they will have more evidence in hand to solidify their case against Trump.

2)Perjury: It has been pointed out that throughout Trumps previous court cases, he has perjured himself repeatedly. Not only has he disgraced the office of the President by his constant and persistent lies to the American people, he has lied repeatedly under oath and that alone is enough to deem him unfit for presidency. He should be impeach and criminally charged for his repeated perjury.

3)Fraud 1: Although he settled the Fraud case and repaid back the money taken from students at Trump University, it does not change that a crime was in fact committed and the criminal case can still move forward regardless of civil settlements. They already have the sworn testimony of students and teachers and have grounds to pursue criminal fraud charges. Just like when someone steals a car and they give the car back, they are still charged with stealing the car in the first place regardless of any civil lawsuits on the matter of the damages to the person who hey stole the car from. The same should apply here.

Fraud 2: Trump again committed fraud when he misrepresented his businesses and hid his debts. These cases are making their way through the courts as we speak.

Fraud 3: Trump has defrauded charities on multiple occasions, he stole from a cancer charity and funneled money into his businesses, he had a fraudulent charity that was forced to close due to using it for personal and political benefit instead. Additionally he has publicly promised and claimed to have donate millions that he never donated but lied to the public to scam them into believing he had done so for political and personal financial gain.

4)His campaign was working with Wiki leaks and Russia to obtain dirt on Clinton. This was pretty well established via Eric Trump's own admission as well as the relationship with Roger Stones and wikileaks.

5)He allowed the security of the United States to be compromised at the highest level by appointing a foreign agent to National Security Adviser and having another foreign agent who was on Russia's payroll as his campaign chair. Trump then refused to be briefed on proper security protocols during his transition. Trump also further comprised national security by refusing to secure his phones by firing the person who was supposed to secure his phone in addition to continue to use his personal phone for official business. Trump further compromised security by disclosing classified information to the Russian government in his meeting with Lavrov and Kislyak. He disclosed classified information again with President Duterte when discussing the positions of US submarines, and again leaking classified information on the 2017 Manchester Arena Bombings to the Press. After the fallout from the leaked information from the Russian meetings, Trump then started to destroy any record of his meetings with Putin and others so that people would not know what he disclosed or not to be able to hold him accountable. There exists no official record of what was discussed during those meetings now due to Trump choosing to protect himself rather than the nation. There have been numerous officials voice concern over Trump as being a national security risk.

6)Campaign finance violations: The paying off of numerous women during the campaign, his campaign's persistent soliciting illegal foreign donations, and his shifting of campaign contributions into his personal businesses have proven his willingness to undermine campaign finance laws that are meant to keep campaigns fair and legal.

7)A number of officials have questioned Trump's capacity to make informed decisions in the event of a military, natural or national crisis that could endanger US citizens, military and our allies in the event of an emergency. He should be deemed unfit for office due to his inability to effectively understand what people are telling him and make an informed decision.

8)Abuse of power. Not only has Trump abused his position to use the IRS, FBI and DOJ to obstruct investigations into himself and his allies, he has also abused this power and used it to attack political opponents, interfere with ongoing court cases and violate immigrants right to due process.

9)Violating the emoluments clause. Trump has been profiting from foreign official's staying at his hotels and golf clubs and selling " the ear of the president" to members of his golf clubs. He has been blatantly violating the emoluments clause in the most extreme and flagrant manner and believes the law does not apply to him because he has yet to be held accountable.

10)Once Congress has access to trump's financial records, they should be able to investigate and possibly charge his with Money laundering and other financial crimes he has been suspect of by his banks and others. These records are currently being blocked by Trump's lapdog treasury secretary, but they will not be able to restrict access forever as Congress has precedent and grounds to obtain them. Trump's cronies are only postponing the inevitable, but will not be able to stop it all together.

 

[Saelune]

Question for the people who want Trump impeached. What for exactly? There have been accusations of working together with Russia to influence the election, of obstruction of justice and of unduly enriching himself and his companies through the presidency. Which of those do you think are the most credible and worthy of impeachment?

Centrists during Lincoln's era were probably saying ending slavery was a bad idea cause it would upset too many people.

I would probably prefer Trump to be tried with a fair chance of conviction by a federal court after he leaves office than escape justice through a failed impeachment (I'm guessing here that double jeopardy applies and impeachment may preclude a later trial). That way justice will be done, the warning will go out for future aspiring presidents, and Trump will be tarred in perpetuity for criminality in high office.

It's not just about throwing mud at Trump for the sake of form - there's a longer term and bigger picture to think about.

Not true, it turns out, or at the most pessimistic legally unclear. https://www.justice.gov/file/19386/download

I know the knee jerk answer is "their job", but in reality, what do you expect the Democrats to do when the system of checks and balances are Balanced directly in favor of the Republicans... the very republicans who are very opposed to this very concept?

I dunno...not play election-year politics with an issue the public has been led to believe of existential import for the third year running? Actual support for impeachment continues to drop the longer this stretches on, and if Democrats try to keep their kick-the-can nonsense up, they're guaranteed to face severe repercussions in 2020...and that's an election Democrats absolutely, positively, under no circumstances can not afford to fuck up any worse than they already have.

"Their job" is the knee jerk answer, because it's the right one. Either the Trump administration is an existential threat to the country, or it isn't. If it is, then it's the Democrats moral, ethical, and professional imperative to do anything in their power to end it, or at least do their part as decisively as possible. If it isn't, well, Congressional Democrats are fucking liars. Like it or not, this is what they campaigned on in 2018, and it's up to them to fulfill campaign promises, as opposed to dither around pretending we're in the middle of a Constitutional crisis. It's time for Democrats to put their money where their mouth is, and stop making excuses.

I guarantee you, Republican voters won't be forgetting this any time soon, and left to their own devices Republican candidates will turn 2020 into a referendum on Democratic conduct. I can only speak for myself, but if Democrats don't vote to impeach, come 2020 I'll abstain or vote third party before I cast a single Democratic vote.

This is peak "blame Republicans for Democrats not doing their jobs".

They shouldn't impeach because they said they would or because they are the oppositions party. A member of congress should impeach because they think it is plausible the president committed relevant crimes, regardless of party affiliation or the like. I will grant you that those who ran on impeachment and who want to wait now have been dishonest, and should be held to account for that by their constituents come 2020.

I want him to be impeached because I want a government that works. I want him to be impeached because impeachment is supposed to stop Trump. I want Trump to get impeached because I want to know that the justice system is on the side of justice.

'But Republicans will just stop it and that will exonerate him', No, no it wont. It will not exonerate Trump, it will implicate the entire Republican party. But then the proper action after that would be to remove all those Republicans from office, not by voting, but by taking them out in handcuffs.

But that requires Democrats and 'centrists' who don't support Trump to work together, so that wont happen. It requires people to care, and most people don't care.

I want to Impeach Trump because I am drowning in cynicism and I need a life preserver.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Obviously, many of them appreciate these rants because they do believe it's true...They just like that someone is saying it.

For my part, this is what it's about. I grew up living between southern Indiana, rebirth-place of the Klan and Overt Racism HQ of the North, and northern Alabama. Needless to say, I grew up in and around a whole lot of racism growing up; hell, I had family in the Klan (they're all dead now). Let me try to explain to you what people like me mean, when we grouch about political correctness.

First things first, you have to understand northerner, and now coastie, liberals like to pretend they're above racism. They can't be racist, because other people are more overtly racist; their area can't be racist, because other areas are more overtly racist; they were Union states, after all by God, and by comparison they're shining exemplars of racial equity because clearly, they don't say or do racist things. And if -- even if -- they might possibly be construed in some way to hold maybe an inconvenient thought about certain minority groups, their flavor of racism is still somehow superior.

Yeah...not so much. Best case scenario, they just learned to be more covert about it and are completely unaware of how bad off they actually are, and even if they have an inkling it manifests itself in overcompensation absent introspection.

It's in this context, I'd like to introduce the notion of "the tone". That's what I call it anyways. Grow up around enough overt and casual racists, you learn it and how to listen for it. It'd hard to quantify or qualify, you just know it when you hear it -- maybe it's a brief moment of hesitation before saying a given word, a certain emphasis on a syllable, a tonal shift at the start or end of a word or phrase, a slight tilt of the head when saying it, shift to a nasal tone, or an unusually exhaling sound as if you're spitting the word out. What having "the tone" means, is regardless of what just came out of your mouth, you hold the people you're talking about in some form of contempt or sense of superiority.

You can call a black person any euphemism you like out of any book, however polite or unassuming you may think it is, but if I hear "the tone" you may as well have just said the N-word. Liberals like to think they're so fuckin' smart for cracking "dog whistles", but the reality is that's just the tip of the iceberg and an entire world of expressing bigotry in its panoply of forms and depths, through means verbal and non-verbal, awaits the eyes and ears of a trained connoisseur of hate.

So, these northern and coastie liberals? They don't know how to listen for "the tone". They don't seem to know what "the tone" is, or even that it exists. It should come as no surprise at this point, that a hell of a lot more than I'm comfortable with, when I hear northern and coastie liberals talk about certain minority groups, I hear "the tone".

Once you learn to hear that shit, and start hearing that shit, you can't unhear it. You can't deny it. And it's absolutely maddening.

I can only speak for myself, but I get so sick and tired of hearing "the tone" out of liberals' mouths I could puke. Sometimes, I want to scream at these people to cut the shit and just say the N-word, because it's not what they're saying but it's clearly what they mean. Then, I could at least respect the honesty even if I deplore the belief.

That's what "political correctness" is about. Today's slurs are yesterday's preferred argot. Today's preferred argot is tomorrow's slur. Hell, we're even coming full circle in some ways with today's preferred argot being yesterday's slurs. It's rhetorical wheel-spinning to push denialism and preclude genuine introspection, a thick-but-completely-transparent facade of otherness and superiority, the proverbial lipstick on a pig. Because people delude themselves into thinking they can solve for the underlying hate, by controlling how people speak. And there are some out there who damn well know of "the tone", but are perfectly content with it so long as they can exercise power over those who speak with it, by controlling their language.

So, in that light, there's a certain twisted catharsis that happens when morons like Trump pop off at the mouth and say dumb racist shit. There's no pretense, and there's no "tone". Because for once, you can call a racist a racist, without being called a racist.

 

[Kwak]

These scum are sick beyond belief.

Trump's latest Hannity interview shows how Fox News?s Russia coverage is disconnected from reality

They want you to believe Clinton colluded with Russia to defeat herself.
https://www.vox.com/2019/7/26/8931552/trump-hannity-interview-mueller-russia-collusion

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

These scum are sick beyond belief.

I don't buy the FNC interpretation of events, but on the other hand there are facts and questions present there Democrats and liberal-slanted news do themselves no favors denying, and/or trying to downplay.

The origins of the Steele dossier were originally found in Republican anti-Trump oppo for the primaries. Once Trump became the presumptive nominee, the DNC through Perkins Coie picked up the tab allowing Fusion to continue the work and hire Steele. Don't forget.

Meanwhile, Fusion GPS was materially involved with Prevezon, Veselnitskaya did have contact with and represented Fusion, and Fusion did run oppo on noteworthy persons associated with Hermitage including Browder. This partnership predated the 2016 election and did continue throughout.

Meanwhile, we also know the Russian goal, such as it was, was not only to boost Trump but to sew chaos in the election in general, particularly by fomenting division inside the Democratic party. Thus, the fake Bernie, BLM, and other social justice-oriented groups.

Do I believe this points to Democratic collusion with Russia? No. However, I do believe Steele and Fusion GPS were key vectors for Russian interference (being fed misinformation), and the DNC were unwitting partners by continuing to fund the firm through Perkins Coie.

The story, on the other hand, in my opinion takes a rather insidious turn on the part of the DNC, when Perkins Coie was found to be collaborating with the FBI and McCabe used discretionary funds to purchase the Steele dossier. McCabe was clearly conflicted and should have recused himself from the email and Russia investigation, and frankly, the FBI's ruling he was not conflicted utterly fails the smell test.

 

[gorfias]

Congressman Ted Lieu, elicited a three-word bombshell. "The reason, again, that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of the OLC [Office of Legal Counsel] opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?" That is correct," Mueller said.

He walked that back: View at about 1:30 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gzqzr1O-E7E


Another thing:
Suppose Trump fired Comey because Comey was investigating him. It matters why that bothered him and one has to prove it. If it was because he was afraid Comey would find criminal collusion with Russia, that is obstruction. But if there was no criminal collusion involved, he would not have to obstruct Comey for that reason. Ultimately, I thought there were no criminal allegations in the report as after years of unobstructed investigation, they do not have convincing evidence of it having happened.