April 19, 2019

"The most generous reading of Robert Mueller’s report, the one pushed by President Donald Trump’s own defenders, is, in fact, profoundly damning"/"Barr Is Right About Everything. Admit You Were Wrong. After Trump’s vindication, the liberal media and its allies in government should face a reckoning. I’m not holding my breath."

I'm trying to read: 1. Ezra Klein in Vox, and 2.  Christopher Buskirk in the NYT.

It's quite the cacophony.

Options: 1. Read a lot of commentary and see what strikes you as most convincing, 2. Note that there's plenty of opinion on the side where your feelings already are and move on, 3. Triangulate, 4. Don't look at any commentary, just read the report for yourself and make your own decision, 5. Reaffirm your aversion to politics and move on.

302 comments:

1 – 200 of 302   Newer›   Newest»
RMc said...

The top three comments on Buskirk's story:

"No, you are wrong. The Mueller report rips Trump apart."

"I don’t need the Mueller report to dislike Trump and this administration."

"The hypocrisy on the right is proven once again to be breathtaking."

They really are watching a different movie, aren't they?

Greg Hlatky said...

We should apply the standard the Clintons and their sycophants use: unless proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in a court of law, not only is there total innocence but also that the accusers were morally bankrupt.

Narayanan said...

Is there any way to reality check Mueller's competency for honest service?
Till that can be done no point to his report.

gilbar said...

6. don't let facts get in the way of your Trump Hatred
example: "I don’t need the Mueller report to dislike Trump and this administration."

rhhardin said...

Don't read the report at all. A bunch of Trump enemies couldn't find anything at all, is the take-away.

There's an inability to spot good character. The left can't intuit what it might be. So they spot its opposite everywhere.

chuck said...

They really are watching a different movie, aren't they?

Living the Dream.

I'm Full of Soup said...

Jonathan Tamari, obviously a far left liberal writer for the Phila Inquirer, tweeted this yesterday:

"not new or surprising but for all the questionable actions in this report, there's not been one ounce of contrition. No "mistakes were made" or "in hindsight, I would have..." or "I apologize for misleading the American people" Not even acknowledged". END OF QUOTE.

So according the liberals, Trump should apologize to the doctors who mistakenly [deliberately?] diagnose an illness in the country and then drag him and his admin through an two year series of public and invasive painful surgeries and treatments because Trump repeatedly said the doctors were Quacks?



Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

"The worst thing of this is the belief an accused needs to prove their innocence."

--Matthew Sablan

iowan2 said...

One major reveal in the report is President Trump is the most transparent President to ever occupy the Oval Office.

Not a single exercise of executive privilege. Hundreds of hours of sworn interviews with has staff were taken. All of it covered by executive privilege. Not a single false statement. Not a single violation of law discovered.

Kevin said...

6. Recognize the central charge of treasonous collusion with a foreign power to steal an election had absolutely no basis in fact.

From there what do you triangulate from? Someone else’s personal feelings based on said lie?

Lewis Wetzel said...

As you would expect, the Ezra Klein piece is madness.
Why would anyone read Klein on this topic, anyway?

Ralph L said...

In the 2+ years of noise, I haven't heard what Russia actually did to influence the election besides some social media crap. 99% of the country has tuned it out.

traditionalguy said...

And don't forget the Trump proclamation of " Never Forget." The Clinton lovers writing stories for the CIA and Clinton,Inc. are no longer setting the agenda since the expensive 3 year Insurance Policy has been exposed as a total fraud.

After a two year stalling tactic we are back to the point that Hillary warned about if her Campaign did not destroy Trump. After Matt Lauer asked hera real question off script,Hillary screamed that Lauer was through and then proclaimed truthfully that, "If I lose we all go down and that fascist fuck will have us swinging from nooses. What the fuck is wrong with you idiots?"

It's swinging from nooses time.

Kevin said...

"The hypocrisy on the right is proven once again to be breathtaking."

These people should have died from asphyxiation long ago.

David Begley said...

Mueller has inverted the standard. No longer innocent until proven guilty. Now it is, prove your innocence.

The only good thing to come out of this is that anyone with a brain can see how discredited and corrupt the MSM is.

Bay Area Guy said...

Mueller was appointed as special PROSECUTOR to PROSECUTE cases relating to allegations of Russian conspiracy with the Trump campaign to rig the 2016 election.

His job wasn't to write a long-ass book reports to explain away why he declined to prosecute Trump.

Here's the hierarchy of his duties:

1. Prosecute Trump for Russian conspiracy: No evidence
2. Prosecute Trump's underlings for Russian conspiracy: No evidence
3. Prosecute Russians for Russian conspiracy: Indicted 13 trolls, but no trial
4. Prosecute Trump for process crimes: Declined, punted to Barr.
5. Prosecute Trump's underlings for process crimes: Nailed Flynn & Papp
6. Write a long-ass book report to explain all this, try to make Trump look bad in a few places, without prosecuting him: Done!

So, there won't be an indictmemt of Trump, probably no impeachment if one believes Hoyer & Schiff, and we will have an election in 2020, like we always knew. Thanks a lot Comey, Rosenstein and Mueller for this high brow snipe hunt!

rehajm said...

As you would expect, the Ezra Klein piece is madness

It's bizarre. Even though Russian Facebook ads are problem number #4 on Hillary's Why I Lose Elections they are election problem #584 for the rest of us. Apparently Trump was supposed to ignore the coup and instead focus all of his efforts on micromanaging whatever the coup wanted him to in a timely manner.

Rahula said...

"A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

rehajm said...

Since it's so important Ezra, didn't 'The Russians' show up for their court case? How's that coming along, Ezra?

Kevin said...

Where does cruel neutrality with the training of a law professor come down on the whole thing?

The blog seems to have shifted to “whatever the circumstances, keep them guessing.”

MayBee said...

The funniest thing I heard was that the report exonerates Comey as the one honest broker. Well, yeah, when the people investigating are your friends, they write your words as the truth.

The Democrats aren't going to impeach. Nadler will continue to try to subpoena everything Trump has. It won't go anywhere. Lindsey Graham and the senate will investigate the genesis of the collusion narrative. The media will be awful through the 202 campaign, because they are happy to lie to themselves.

whitney said...

For four years they have come at Trump with everything they've got and they got nothing. Trump may be the most honest president in history

Wince said...

I found the Sean Davis style of "Fisking" the Mueller Report on Twitter was very helpful.

Yet Twitter remains a mystery to me. I came to the thread via a link, but had the hardest time finding it on Davis' own Twitter page.

rhhardin said...

Trump may have said fuck. This is supposed to indicate anger. Quote the opposite, it indicates control. It's a comment on the situation.

Somewhere I read that swearing is what Tourette's syndrome is but in normal people - it's not generated in the usual linguistic centers but elsewhere. The syndrome happens when the trigger for swearing is constantly stimulated, instead of stimulated appropriately to the situation, where it serves as control.

AlbertAnonymous said...

Time to check out the oranges....

Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Ohr, Yates, HRC’s Perkins Coie lawyer...

MayBee said...

If we could get everybody to commit to having a Special Investigator for their first 2 years in office as president, I bet we would see a lot of behavior that is just damning.
Does anybody think the White House has ever been full of polite, honest angels?

What do you think it would have been like watching Obama's people come up with the idea that we owed money to Iran? Do you think anybody tried to tell him we shouldn't fly pallets of cash to Tehran?

Ken said...

5

MikeR said...

Ezra Klein is "arguing past the sale". First convince me that the investigation wasn't a witch hunt. Then we can talk about whether Trump was wrong to resist it.

Henry said...

Here's my opinion:

1. The report doesn't support a criminal indictment.
2. The end.

Wince said...

Below is Howie Carr's analogy used to explain the "obstruction" claim against Trump.

But isn't simpler analogy whether Ann Frank obstructed justice by hiding in the attic?

Howie Carr:

Suppose you were a mayor, and the police chief of your city publicly announced that you, the mayor, had robbed a bank. You know you did nothing of the sort, and when you check out the story, you find out that the bank in question wasn’t even robbed.

But it also turns out the police chief had in fact gotten some of his pals to case the joint, you know, kind of like if Hillary Clinton hired some Democrat smear outfit to fabricate the fake dossier with help from the same Russians Trump was accused of “colluding” with.

So you, the mayor, privately mention to your chief of staff that you might just fire the police chief for trying to frame you, and the chief goes out and holds a press conference to say that if he’s canned, it will be obstruction of justice of his ongoing investigation of the bank robbery that never happened.

Isn’t a defendant considered innocent until proven guilty? And the alleged perp has to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, right?

Henry said...

The Crucible had a happy ending.

MayBee said...

Oh! Even the way Trump's words about his presidency being f*cked was written up in the most unflattering way. They quote him as saying that, then there is a block of descriptive text......then several sentences later his quote continues about *why* his presidency is f*cked. Written so people can ignore the last part. But not spoken like that!

Bay Area Guy said...

Ezra Klein is a putz, and desperately deserves a wedgie.

Bob_R said...

Five. Option Five. It's Good Friday. Passover at sunset. We won't remember the Muller Report 3,000 hours from now, much less 3,000 years.

Bob_R said...

See? I already forgot how to spell Mueller's name.

Shane said...

5

Paco Wové said...

The Mueller report is like the Bible – everyone can dip into its pages and find the solace they need.

traditionalguy said...

Funniest thing is that the biggest criminals last gasp move to avoid prosecution is to announce a run for President. Will that turn their arrest intolook like a political act?

Scott Gustafson said...

No online poll?

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

EDH @ 7:40 - THANKS!

Jeff Brokaw said...

“A republic, if you can keep it”

Chuck said...

There are 12 criminal referrals out, stemming from the Mueller investigation.

Remember when this blog's commentariat went nuts, slamming me for questioning the announcement made at the time of the completion of the Mueller report, that there would be "no further indictments"? I tried to argue that there could be, and probably were, criminal referrals to other USA offices stemming from things that Mueller had discovered but which weren't part of "Russian interference in the 2016 election."

Now we know that I was right. (I don't claim much unique insight for having staked out my claim; I think that most knowledgeable observers thought the same thing.)

There were 14 criminal referrals in all. One was the recently-exposed Greg Craig referral. (So much for all of this being a gigantic plot run by Clinton-friendly Democrats.) Another was the referral of the Michael Cohen investigation to the SDNY USA office. And we saw what happened with that. Cohen pled guilty with Trump being named "Individual 1."

Those are the only two referrals we know about. The other 12 have been sealed/redacted.

narciso said...

Mueller as I've pointed out is conflicted six ways from Sunday, banamex Amazon and Facebook (any conflicts) firm ties to Qatar and Deutsch bank, like a character from the second season of the black list.

James K said...

Leftist Glen Greenwald said Mueller “obliterated” the collusion charge. Good enough for me.

Gahrie said...

6> Punish the Left and the MSM for their bad behavior.

Ambrose said...

Good for the NYT for publishing Buskirk's piece. It is fun to read the comments from the bubble dwellers who react as if Buskirk's views are a bizarre aberration from the fringe.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Sean Davis -

"I'm trudging through the collusion section of the Mueller report, and it's difficult to convey how unimpressed I am with it. For example, the Papadopoulos/Downer meeting, which we're told sparked the *ENTIRE* 2016 anti-Trump investigaiton, is barely a footnote."

&
In the Carter Page section, the report never discloses that Page previously served as an FBI informant in 2013 and helped DOJ snag several unregistered Russian foreign agents. Instead, the language in the report makes it sound like he was a co-conspirator.

&
The Mueller report section on the Trump Tower meeting somehow never mentions that the Russian lawyer who requested the June 9 meeting was at that very moment a top client of the Clinton campaign contractor which fed false information on Carter Page to the FBI and DOJ.

&
SD - "The breathless tone of the collusion section of the report and the blatant omission of material facts pertaining to actual Russian collusion by the Clinton campaign makes clear that Mueller and his lawyers were desperate to find collusion by Trump. And yet they still found none."
&
&
&

iowan2 said...

In the near future the most fun is going to be President Trump ignoring Nadler. I hope. Democrats had an all in bet. President Trump now has all of their chips. Democrats have zero basis to investigate. Zero. President Trump will professionally decline all requests with the refrain, been there done that.

What is left for Democrats is political, not oversight. Oversight is done. The executive is under no requirement to continue.

I do recommend Nadler immediately start impeachment proceedings. Start selling the idea that the special counsel found nothing to charge. But Congress has much LOWER standards. Yep sell that principle of democracy.

stlcdr said...

Ralph L said...
In the 2+ years of noise, I haven't heard what Russia actually did to influence the election besides some social media crap.

Exactly. And I’m not sure anyone has actually shown what was posted by said Russians. It would be interesting to see that. Of course the media won’t repeat that, because it would show how foolish they are.

Kevin said...

There are 12 criminal referrals out, stemming from the Mueller investigation.

And the redactions, Chuck. Don't forget about the redactions.

You don't know that any of those referrals have anything to do with Trump.

You don't know they weren't rejected and are no longer active.

You don't know that anything's happening at all.

But hey, keep hate alive!

AMDG said...

Regariding obstruction - How did Trump’s actions impede the Mueller investigation?

iowan2 said...

There are 12 criminal referrals out, stemming from the Mueller investigation.

THERE HAS TO BE A PONY IN THIS PILE OF HORSE SHIT!

Amadeus 48 said...

The gas is gone from this balloon.

On the to retribution stage.

Heartless Aztec said...

Hey, Ben! We're close to losing the Republic you guys worked so hard to give us. One word - factions. It's been a good run. Thanks.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

You think this is over?

The Russian Troofers are marching in lockstep to keep the big lie going. No mention of Hillary's Private Server used to stuff her bank account with Russian money.


Ambrose said...

@AMDG - as far as I can tell, Trump obstructed the efforts to indict or impeach him by not actually doing anything wrong. How dare he.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

LOL Chuck - Those referrals are probably the unattainable Russians.

Clyde said...

I’ll go with option #2. The people on the other side are a bunch of damned liars and worse. I don’t care what they think. They can keep digging in the manure of the Mueller Report. There’s no pony under there. Sad!

Xmas said...

The collusion section reads like a man getting increasingly frustrated with an investigation hamstringing his ability to effectively govern. It's full of Trump's public pronouncements and attempts to regain control of his ability to be president, with interspersed statements like, "didn't prevent the turnover of emails to investigators or Congress".

Jeff Brokaw said...

People who continue to yammer on and on about how awful this is for Trump are actually making a different case; how delusional they are.

The bar was not cleared. Rational people accept conclusions they don’t like and move on with their lives. But sure, keep talking about it, media and Dems, you’re doing great!

buwaya said...

You Americans don't have common interests nor a common culture.
There is no synthesis possible, therefore no reconciliation can happen.

It is a power struggle which neither faction can afford to lose, since too much is at stake.

It is not cacophony, it is two streams of propaganda in collision. Consider the situation of the Cold War, where one could, correctly, discount what the enemy was saying, as it was intended with malice. Whatever side you are on, you are assured of not getting sincerity from the other, or often enough from your own.

Roy Lofquist said...

It's 2:00 AM. The light goes on. The cockamaroaches scurry to hide under the fridge. Son of a bitch! Somebody stole the damn fridge!

Danno said...

Blogger iowan2 said...In the near future the most fun is going to be President Trump ignoring Nadler.

All they Prez and his people need to do is follow the Eric Holder playbook. Telling Nad-less to FOAD.

Hagar said...

I am sure that laws against conspiring with foreign governments to influence the US Government exist dating back to the reaction against Citizen Genet, who in 1793 set armed French seamen ashore in Charleston and was going to march them up to Philadelphia to "dethrone" George Washington, raising multitudes of Americans to revolt against Washington's "tyrannical anti-democratic policies," etc., and so forth, as well as from every international conflict with attendant scares the US has been involved in since.

But do the instances referred to in the Mueller Report rise to meet these laws?

Well, lawyers will argue anything on behalf of their clients, but I do not think so.
The ABQ Journal this morning headlines that the Report lays out the grounds for "obstruction of justice" charges, but reading through the article I only see reports of witnesses testifying that they have seen President Trump - not a lawyer - get upset and venting in the privacy of his office and personal staff without any official actions resulting from these mini-tantrums.

I also refuse to accept the charge of "collusion" to start with. If, indeed, the Trump campaign had obtained Hillary!'s and the DNC's tapes from Russian intelligence - or Outer Slobovia's - and passed them on to Wikileaks, that still would not meet the intent of the anti foreign conspiracy laws - especially when nobody contends that the information was not true.

Finally, when one considers the United States' record of interfering in other countries' internal affairs over the last two centuries - often quite forcefully indeed, and not with mere "conspiracy" - it is difficult to take those laws seriously anyway.

wildswan said...

There's my relatives and there's the media. My relatives, the approach is like trying to talk someone off a ledge. Be nice.

The media is in the situation of Napoleon's army staring to retreat from Moscow. The domes of the Kremlin were in sight when the Generals realized they had lost. The retreat begins; the temperature (audience size) is dropping; the endless plains (24/7 coverage of something) stretches out before them; guerrilla snipers (bloggers) come dodging out picking off stragglers; and the snow (the country becomes indifferent) starts to fall. Napoleon rides off to Paris and the army is left to minor leaders (Mueller vanishes, the media starts interviewing a constantly rising number of minor officials from nowhere who are running for President: "Can you skateboard better than Beto?"; "Are you now or have you ever been a man?") The punishment fits the crime.

A separate question is what to do about the Clintons and about rogue intelligence agencies going left and menacing democracy. For two years we've been the hunted, supporting the man we elected President against the bastards. Now we have to switch over to being the hunters. It can't be done in a day and we don't want to be lying SOBs like them. So it will take time. In my opinion we should leave Obama alone, no more Whack-A-President. This was a Clinton op and, if you think about it, it will be enough to prove that.

alanc709 said...

Chuck said...
There are 12 criminal referrals out, stemming from the Mueller investigation.

Remember when this blog's commentariat went nuts, slamming me for questioning the announcement made at the time of the completion of the Mueller report, that there would be "no further indictments"? I tried to argue that there could be, and probably were, criminal referrals to other USA offices stemming from things that Mueller had discovered but which weren't part of "Russian interference in the 2016 election."

Now we know that I was right. (I don't claim much unique insight for having staked out my claim; I think that most knowledgeable observers thought the same thing.)

There were 14 criminal referrals in all. One was the recently-exposed Greg Craig referral. (So much for all of this being a gigantic plot run by Clinton-friendly Democrats.) Another was the referral of the Michael Cohen investigation to the SDNY USA office. And we saw what happened with that. Cohen pled guilty with Trump being named "Individual 1."

Those are the only two referrals we know about. The other 12 have been sealed/redacted.

Which of these referrals dealt with Trump and/or his staff colluding with any Russians? How far up your ass do you keep your head? Do you ever sit down and wonder why people constantly laugh at your disingenuous postings in here?

Mike Sylwester said...

BleachBit-and-Hammers at 8:11 AM
LOL Chuck - Those referrals are probably the unattainable Russians.

I agree with that guess.

Robert "The FBI Whitewasher" Mueller is prosecuting Concord Management, a food-catering company in Russia, for meddling in our 2016 elections. That case's status is listed here.

I expect that this prosecution will end in an embarrassing fiasco for Mueller.

Then Russia might send another person or two to the USA to face Mueller's prosecution. Russia will select the one or two who would be hardest to convict and will hire again the law firm that is defending Concord Management.

Barr's Department of Justice will not be motivated to embarrass itself in continuing fiascos in order to justify Mueller's bogus indictments.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

4. Congressman Adam Schiff really hurt Democrats by raising the bar on collusion. For two years, Schiff and other Democrats in Congress repeatedly claimed there was evidence of collusion. Time and again, Schiff said he had “direct” evidence of Russian collusion and, since Barr’s initial summary letter, has yet to back down. In fact, Schiff has doubled down on his claims, going even further out on a limb that Mueller sawed off today. Politically, Schiff blew up a balloon for the Democrats that Mueller popped. Loudly.

Keeping quiet or at least making more measured statements would have kept the egg of the collective face of the Democratic Party. Schiff failed as a Democrat and as a leader on the House Intelligence Committee. He should step down as Chairman immediately, as he clearly was more interested in politically damaging Trump than getting to the truth. Democrats would be better served as a party if he resigned from Congress and went away altogether.



*Is it any wonder the hivemind are so collectively insane with delusion?

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Adam Schit(D) MUST be removed from his post. He has proven himself to be a political hack and a liar.

robother said...

Every single person in that "Insurance policy" meeting and needs to be indicted, personally bankrupted and serve prison time. They denied Trump voters a President with the powers to achieve much of anything in his first two years, and that was the goal. (indeed, since 2000, denying legitimacy to any any election that doesn't result in a Der President is the default insurance plan.) If the Deep State gets away with that, after one of their own admits publicly that there never was anything to it, our democracy is just a sham.

The Russian Collusion Hoax wasn't primarily about impeaching or indicting Trump; it was about crippling his presidency. SO far, it has succeeded more than failed --no Wall, no China trade deal, no NK deal, no end to the Afghan fiasco. The Democrats retook the House, based in large part on the narrative that the President might be a Russian operative. With a few notable exceptions, the Left and the MSM have openly become the handmaiden of the Deep State.

"What are you gonna do about it?" is the question every bully puts to his victims. "Nothing" confirms his continuing power.

buwaya said...

If this were a turning point toward victory you would see at least one of the major news media conglomerates changing its propaganda line. The point of owning a media conglomerate in the first place is political leverage. If the owners of these do not yet see that they need to reconcile with the administration and that part of the people that backs it, then the struggle is still deadlocked.

daskol said...

I'm more interested in vengeance, against the people who poisoned our discourse over the past nearly three years, and who knew better. The most encouraging thing I've seen in the past few days is ABC's Terry Moran tweet demanding accountability of the odious John Brennan. That way healing lies.

Mike Sylwester said...

The Moon of Alabama website describes the Concord Management company that is being prosecuted by Robert "The FBI Whitewasher" Mueller.

The company provides food for banquets, cafeterias and so forth. Because people used the Internet to complain about the food and service, the company's owner, Yevgeni Prigozhin, set up another company, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to use the Internet to influence public opinion.

The IRA does various activities on the Internet -- for example, posting Facebook ads that show Satan arm-wrestling Jesus. These activities caused a hysteria in our US Intelligence Community.

So, Mueller charged IRA for interfering in our election. Because the prosecution is generally mindless, Mueller included Concord Management in his indictments. Concord Management responded to the indictment against itself, and that is why this trial will end in an embarrassing fiasco for Mueller.

Anonymous said...

“Not a single false statement.”

The Mueller report documents lies by Sarah Sanders and Sean Spicer, seven instances in 24 hours after Comey firing.

daskol said...

The CIA, FBI, DNI, DoJ and, apparently, UK intelligence assets were mobilized to launch a major intelligence operation targeting the Trump campaign: they surveilled, attempted entrapment, laundered fake evidence and lied about it. If the major figures in the media could make like Terry Moran and think about things for a moment, they'd realize how badly they were abused by their "sources" and those whom they supported within the government. Make like Moran and think, people.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Is it even possible for a thing to be "profoundly damning"?
When people try to get adjectives and adverbs to make their argument for them, it's a sign that all is not well up stairs.

Anonymous said...

“Not a single false statement.”

“[A]lthough the evidence of contacts between Campaign officials and Russia-affiliated individuals may not have been sufficient to establish or sustain criminal charges, several US persons connected to the Campaign made false statements about those contacts and took other steps to obstruct the Office’s investigation and those of Congress. This office has therefore charged some of those individuals with making false statements and obstructing justice.”

Mueller Report

daskol said...

We were, as a nation, saved from a coup largely because of the shoddy incompetence of the leadership of our law enforcement, intelligence and even judicial leadership (how did the FISA court approve and re-approve FISA warrants on the basis of the flimflam submitted to them). We got lucky that these agency heads and apparatchiks lack competence, because they lack also the requisite character and restraint needed to make our govt function.

Henry said...

There are 12 criminal referrals out, stemming from the Mueller investigation.

The discursive dozen.

Is it even possible for a thing to be "profoundly damning"?

Haha. How about "sort of darning" -- like this Far Side cartoon:

"The weren't the most evil people in the world, nor the best. They were the village of the darned."

chickelit said...

Ezra Klein is a juice box hero; he's got stars in his eyes.

Nichevo said...

Wildswan: In my opinion we should leave Obama alone, no more Whack-A-President. This was a Clinton op and, if you think about it, it will be enough to prove that.


Disagree. Ni mercy. If you want to keep President Obama out of prison, let him confess and let President Trump commute his sentence, preferably to exile. I see no upside in accepting O's treachery. I'd prefer they were all executed, every last one of them. Since that won't happen, unless they skate and some of our excellent compatriots take their own measures, let them get all the disgrace, repudiation, disbarment, fine and prison available for the maximum of what they can be gotten for.

Why should it be otherwise? Please explain. If you don't believe in justice, it makes sense, but if you dont punish the behavior just as hard as you can, how do you deter it in future?

If these people were patriots they would suicide and save the country the ordeal that I suppose you fear.

Mike Sylwester said...

As time goes on, the public will recognize that the US Intelligence Community's persecution of Donald Trump was an abuse of power.

Two nice young men -- Carter Page and George Papadopoulos -- joined Trump's campaign staff of advisers, and the US Intelligence Community proceeded to secretly frame both of them as witting agents of Russian Intelligence. The purpose of these frame-ups was to justify FISA warrants enabling the FBI to collect and study all of their communications -- and two hops further -- within Trump's campaign staff.

Eventually liberals -- even though they will continue to hate Trump -- will recognize the wrongness of these actions. Also, many liberals will not go on forever with the anti-Russia hysteria.

One by one, liberals will break ranks and begin to criticize the US Intelligence Community's persecution of Trump and of his advisors.

I hope that William Barr will give the public an idea of the communication collection that was justified by the bogus FISA warrants.

* From how many people were communications collected?

* What were those people's names?

* How many communications were collected?

* Who studied all those communications?

* How were the study's results used?

* When did the collection of communications end?

* What is the current status of the collected communications?

Anonymous said...

“Trump may be the most honest president in history.”

“During the 2016 campaign, the media raised questions about a possible connection between the Trump Campaign and Russia. The questions intensified after WikiLeaks released politically damaging Democratic Party emails that were reported to have been hacked by Russia. Trump responded to questions about possible connections to Russia by denying any business involvement in Russia—even though the Trump Organization had pursued a business project in Russia as late as June 2016. Trump also expressed skepticism that Russia had hacked the emails at the same time as he and other Campaign advisors privately sought information [redacted] about any further WikiLeaks releases.”

Mueller Report

“Lying and subterfuge—not crimes, but that’s what Mueller accuses Trump of engaging in. And given that this particular redaction probably refers to longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone, whose lying-to-Congress case is still pending, this portion suggests that Trump himself ordered Stone to be in contact with WikiLeaks, while Julian Assange’s outfit was being used by the Russians as part of their covert operation to help Trump. Pause for a moment: A presidential candidate apparently directed a henchman to make contact with—perhaps collaborate with—an ongoing attack on American democracy.”

Mother Jones

William said...

I go with 5, but my aversion to politics is chiefly directed against the Dems and their cheering section in the media.......I suppose we all have a double standard, but some double standards are more pretzel like than others. There's nothing particularly admirable in Trump's marital or business history, but he made a lot of money and fooled around with beautiful women. By his own yardstick, he was successful. There's nothing particularly admirable in Bill Clinton's marital or business history either, but Whitewater went bankrupt and he fooled around with non-beautiful women. (Also, "fooled around with" is a euphemism for rape in Bill Clinton's case.). I think Trump got hotter chicks than Bill Clinton and in a marginally more honorable way. Also, he made more money than the Clintons and in a less money grubbing kind of way......I'm not going to read the Mueller report. I know everything I need to know about Trump, the Clintons, and the media who report on their doings.

stevew said...

I've read some of the reaction pieces on the NYT, Boston Globe, and then some conservative outlets like NR and Washington Beacon. So far the one that rings most true to me is Andy McCarthy's. But, then, his analysis fits my point of view on the whole thing.

Barry said...

5. Reaffirm your aversion to politics and move on.

The problem with number 5 is that it's not just "politics" but our democracy at stake. When the populace checks out of the political process, the government is ripe for assumption by extremist or criminal elements. That's how you get plutocracy, kleptocracy, or oligarchy, however you want to name it. You can call this delusion if you wish. But immoral and illegal behaviors are being done in the open without repercussions. Giving up to that because we're tired of "politics" is sacrificing our values and the rule of law.

---

Greg Hlatky said...

We should apply the standard the Clintons and their sycophants use: unless proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in a court of law, not only is there total innocence but also that the accusers were morally bankrupt.

Or we can hold both camps in contempt and prosecute the liars currently in power and work to ensure more liars don't get put into power?

Lewis Wetzel said...

Anonymous, your Mother Jones quote is wholly speculation.
How much lying and subterfuge did Obama engage in?

Nichevo said...

Anonymous said...
“Trump may be the most honest president in history.”


Althouse, surely you can disable the anonymous comments, at least for awhile until Inga or whoever get it out of their systems?

AllenS said...

William said...
I'm not going to read the Mueller report. I know everything I need to know about Trump, the Clintons, and the media who report on their doings.

I agree 100%.

buwaya said...

"Liberals" will not change their minds.
This attitude is bound up in their cultural consensus, to which they are required to be faithful, otherwise they are subject to painful sanctions.
This sort of thing, emvedded in the leadership class, can persist for a very long time, and is usually broken only with a great crisis, a collapse of the system.

Until you get your crisis there will be no significant change.

narciso said...

They borrowed their strategy from efforts against harold Wilson and gough Whitlam, when the shoes on the other foot as diana west points out.

William said...

The Covington kid wore a MAGA hat and had an un-photogenic smile. That was profoundly damning evidence of his evil. If they can do this to a high school kid with a MAGA hat, think what they can do to the President with the Mueller report.

Original Mike said...

Inga's ashamed to show her face.

She knows.

lgv said...

I work at the gym almost everyday. There are two TVs adjacent to each other. One has Fox News and the other has CNN. For 2 years, CNN has been 45% collusion, collusion, collusion!!!!, 45% Trump is evil/wrong about something else, and 10% other news.

Today, it was 100% Obstruction! Obstruction! Obstruction!. We have now established what CNN will be doing for the next 2 years.

Why are all the Trump bashing tidbits even in the report? Why is "I'm f....ed!" in there? Does it have something to do with collusion?

Lewis Wetzel said...

Who goes to Mother Jones for political analysis, anyhow? Might as well get it from Field and Stream.

daskol said...

Buwaya, what are we in the midst of if not a crisis? Trump delivered the death blow to the GOP and won the presidency, snatched it from out the grasp of the embedded interests. He's now survived both offense and rear-guard action intent on taking him out, and in all likelihood things are going to get a lot uglier as his administration initiates the offensive aspect of his counter-attack, investigating and publicizing the results documenting corruption of our law enforcement and intelligence apparatus that goes all the way to the top. Meanwhile, the Dem party, meant to retake the reigns of power before the Trump team can change things too much, is in utter disarray, and running a clown car's worth of opportunistic candidates who smell opportunity in this chaos. This slow motion crisis of our leadership class hasn't yet wrecked our economy, but that may be a function of our still decentralized society, that is remains robust enough to survive the chaos of our institutional crisis.

Anonymous said...

Althouse, I did not see on your list of choices, "Damn both their houses, find a better class of politician."

narciso said...

Klein is not the dumbest juiceboxer that would be cilizza:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/devin-nunes-hidden-passage-in-mueller-report-shows-scope-memo-tainted-by-trump-dossier

Hagar said...

The ongoing chatter about "collusion" and "Obstruction of justice" is arguing about the unfashionable cut and coloring of the emperor's new clothes after the obnoxious kid has pointed out that the emperor is walking about stark naked - no clothes.

stephanie delmonico said...

Why has Inga gone anonymous? Psychotic break? Has her repressed embarrassment about her own stupidity, venality, and puerile behavior forced her to hide the shame associated with her name?

Has she turned into Sybil, creating multiple personalities as a way to hide from herself?

Poor Inga. Poor, poor Inga.
Sad!

Fernandinande said...

I freely admit that all those bad people were wrong, and here's what they should be saying now: "Trump was too dumb to collude with anybody."

Maillard Reactionary said...

"cacaphony": The perfect word to describe these reactions.

"Shitstorm" is another word that fits well.

Michael K said...

Anonymous must be Inga. Those quotes have a sound of desperation and stupidity,

A bad combination.

"One must beware of anyone who is stupid and diligent — he must not be entrusted with any responsibility because he will always cause only mischief."

German General Staff,

narciso said...

They wrote that before or after they sent Lenin to the Finland station?

buwaya said...

A crisis as I see it would be something that causes great and widespread suffering - a great inflation, a great depression, a losing war, a long and costly war, a revolution or civil war. Something whereby much of the population suffers great loss, and the entire ruling class loses legitimacy.

daskol said...

I think you may be underestimating the loss of the legitimacy the ruling class is suffering amidst this cooler crisis in which we've been engulfed now for, say, ten years: I'd date it from the immediate aftermath of the financial collapse and the rise of the Tea Party.

Darrell said...

Mass suicide by Democrats, Never-Trumpers, and the Resistance--including the Media-- will send a strong message to the world. It can't be ignored.

Drago said...

Put yourself in the Russians shoes for just a moment: They now know, conclusively, that 90%+ of the dems and visible sliver of LLR's will happily, knowingly, gleefully, eagerly, go forward with a hilariously obviously hoax-based banana republic/Stasi-like coup to remove a duly elected republican President.

Now, go one step further: After that hoax-based banana republic coup attempt has been explicitly exposed, with more exposure to come, that same group of dems/left/LLR-left is STILL gleefully willing to proceed on a path to remove a duly elected President.

There is joy in the Kremlin right now. Just imagine what disinformation they will cook up in the years ahead to feed the dems/left/LLR-left to undermine other republican candidates.

No wonder LLR Chuck, who stated explicitly on this site that republican electoral victories are "disasters", is happy to continue with his lefty teammates along this path.

I think the American people know how greasy and Smeary he and Team left are now so its not going to work. But I worry about future republican candidates who are not as effective fighters as Trump happens to be getting attacked by Chuck and Team Left and not being able to overcome that challenge.

narciso said...

That would require shame, something they haven't as yet displayed.

narciso said...

Yes drago the zinoviev letter, that fusion stringer Luke Harding referred without irony

Amadeus 48 said...

There will be no criminal action against President Trump for either Russian collusion matters or obstruction issues. The decider has decided. If Mueller had a different view, he would have recommended action on obstruction. He didn't.

This horse is dead.

I look forward to AG Barr's review of the predicate for the spying on the Trump campaign. Kimberley Strassel, Holman Jenkins, Daniel Henninger, Mollie Hemingway, and a few others have been on this from the beginning. Will the cone of silence descend in the media? Will the sun rise in the east tomorrow?

jim said...

Trump and his campaign did not collude with Russia. They were kept informed of Russian plans and cooperated. Hang them.

Drago said...

jim, I congratulate you for being so concise and thus, limiting the amount of damage you inflict upon yourself with your comments.

jim said...

Damage? This is what is clear from the report: they gleefully anticipated Russian actions and steered clear of overt conspiracy.

Francisco D said...

Here's my opinion:

1. The report doesn't support a criminal indictment.
2. The end.


I agree Henry, but some people gotta talk. That is how they make their living.

For others, it is a source of amusement and/or self-justification.

Danno said...

alanc709 said..."Which of these referrals dealt with Trump and/or his staff colluding with any Russians? How far up your ass do you keep your head?"

It is not how far up he keeps it, but rather he never comes out for air.

Drago said...

jim: "Damage? This is what is clear from the report: they gleefully anticipated Russian actions and steered clear of overt conspiracy"

tsk tsk tsk

We can't protect you from yourself if you won't listen.

I'm quite sure this isn't the first time you've heard that!

Drago said...

It's easy to see who the bottom 10% of lefties/LLR-lefties are as they desperately cling to their narratives and Starbucks.

Bob Boyd said...

Ezra Klein at Vox says, in effect, Trump should have believed the media when they told him he cheated and stepped down.

Sebastian said...

@Drago: "Put yourself in the Russians shoes for just a moment: They now know, conclusively, that 90%+ of the dems and visible sliver of LLR's will happily, knowingly, gleefully, eagerly, go forward with a hilariously obviously hoax-based banana republic/Stasi-like coup to remove a duly elected republican President."

Hey, hey, yours truly has pushed this meme for a while now. Happy to share credit with other great minds, of course.

Drago said...

Sebastian: "Hey, hey, yours truly has pushed this meme for a while now. Happy to share credit with other great minds, of course"

I'll go see if I can find a great mind to join you.....

Michael K said...

They were kept informed of Russian plans and cooperated. Hang them.

Inga ? Is that you again?

Hagar said...

A somewhat overweight 74 year old man walking about in public buck naked may not be an edifying sight, but to argue about the regrettable fashion of his non-existent clothing is beyond foolishness.

Birkel said...

Just so we are clear:
Hidden things in the Mueller report will eventually, yadda yadda yadda, Trump impeachment.
Trump did not personally strangle Putin with his Jedi powers, yadda yadda yadda, Trump impeachment.
Finally, OrangeManBad, yadda yadda yadda, Trump impeachment.
And anybody who says otherwise is a Russian accomplice.

P.S. The fact that Greg Craig's (name?) indictment was held until after AG Barr's confirmation is evidence that Democrats in Mueller's team were managing the timing to limit political response against Obama/Brennan/Clapper/Rice/Comey/Yates. AG Barr took that ploy from them. We can now see Clinton's counsel - who was also Obama's counsel - was dirty. (When do we start calling him Obama's fixer?)

P.P.S. The MSM will lose more viewers but those who remain will be all the more deranged. Normal Democratics will be embarrassed but will not turn from their support. Buwaya has the measure of things.

Original Mike said...

One mention of the Steele Dossier in Mueller's report. One.

Fen said...

"5. Reaffirm your aversion to politics and move on."

Gaslighting. Our little coup attempt failed. My my how messy. Let's do something else today, m,kay?

Bull. Shit.

Roughcoat said...

The media is in the situation of Napoleon's army staring to retreat from Moscow. The domes of the Kremlin were in sight when the Generals realized they had lost.

Seriously? Napoleon's Grande Armée captured Moscow on September 14 and occupied it for over a month, withdrawing from the city on October 19. Far from realizing they had lost (when they entered the city), Napoleon and his generals believed they had won a decisive victory.

It was the Wehrmacht that came within sight of the Kremilin's spires, in December 1941. The Germans didn't enter Moscow, but they did get into the city's near suburbs.

tcrosse said...

"5. Reaffirm your aversion to politics and move on."

Those grapes were probably sour, anyway.

Fen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fen said...

Hey! You caught me tryimg to roofie you and sell you into sexual slavery. Good eye. Gosh isn't online dating crazy? Let's just move on.

TJM said...

LOL - maybe ObozoCare covers mental illness. These "journalists" definitely need help

hombre said...

Come now, Mr. Buskirk, “no evidence” doesn’t really mean no evidence. It means “forget the multi-million dollar investigation conducted by Mueller and his Democrat button men and believe your feelings and the deranged leftmediaswine.”

Evidence? Meh.

And obstruction? Never mind Mueller’s refusal to indict and the fact that Trump had the legal authority to shut down the investigation at any time. “Obstruction of Justice” just fits the template. In their hearts they just know he obstructed.

Unbelievable!

Birkel said...

Wouldn't it be interesting to properly investigate Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch for public corruption and obstruction of justice?
If I were Trump, I would pardon presidents Clinton and Obama so they could not hide behind the Fifth Amendment.

They could be punished for testifying falsely about their behavior and held in contempt if they refused a grand jury subpoena.

Just a thought.

Michael K said...

Far from realizing they had lost (when they entered the city), Napoleon and his generals believed they had won a decisive victory.

I think it was dawning on Napoleon that the Tsar was not going to fight again. They had Smolensk behind them but the troops occupying it had eaten all the rations. Hundreds of miles with snow and no food. Plus the typhus was killing a thousand a day,

Not much of a victory and he knew it then.

Drago said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Drago said...

Roughcoat: "It was the Wehrmacht that came within sight of the Kremilin's spires, in December 1941. The Germans didn't enter Moscow, but they did get into the city's near suburbs"

The only reason the Germans didn't march right into Moscow, drive Stalin into the vast tundra (which would have led to his overthrow), and have the German army winter comfortably within the City was Hitler pulled one of those quirky Hitler things and had Army Group Center swing to the South to help assist in the fight against a few Russian armies that had not yet been completely obliterated.

Dumb, dumb dumb.

Army Group Center takes Moscow and the Germans would have had control of 75 to 80% of all Soviet production capacity by that winter. The Germans would have essentially won in their 2-Front scenario.

Now, what lessons can be learned from that in terms of today's political warfare scenario?

LA_Bob said...

Buwaya's posts are usually short and succinct. As such they gloss over the myriad details of American culture and politics. But, I believe he is substantially right. It is all about power, period.

None of the details of the Mueller report matter all that much. The report is vague enough that either faction -- pro-Trump or anti-Trump -- can find whatever it wants to justify its preferences.

It's all just a continuation of the fun and games that have been American politics since the Founding. Some of those games led to the American Civil War, which was considerably more raucous than even a Supreme Court nominee confirmation hearing.

Very deadly and destructive event, that war.

Gunner said...

It's so amusing to watch the lefty moron commenters at the NYT pee their pants about a pro-Trump article.

Roughcoat said...

Not much of a victory and he knew it then.

He knew nothing of the sort. He believed that capturing and occupying an enemy's capital was the deciding factor in a war between nations. Such was the custom in warfare in that age. He absolutely believed that the Tsar would sue for peace. He was astonished when the Tsar did not oblige him and the Russians continued their resistance, principally and most effectively by torching their own city. Their actions as well as those of the Tsar violated all the contemporary if unwritten protocols and norms of war. As for the Grande Armée's problems with short rations and disease -- Napoleon was indifferent to their plight, which was typical of all armies. The Russian army was similarly straitened -- wracked with typhus and starving as a result of the scorched earth policies it had practiced so relentless during the summer campaign -- plus it had recently suffered a catastrophically costly defeat at Borodino (est. 45k casualties including the loss of more than 20 generals). For all its miseries Napoleon's army remained for the time being an effective and cohesive fighting force and Napoleon believed as was only natural that once the Tsar came to his senses and sought terms the army's suffering would be alleviated. Certainly he thought the Russian army posed no significant threat, being irretrievably shattered and functionally leaderless. And he was more or less correct in that belief: in fact the Russians were incapable of meaningful large-scale offensive operations.

Hagar said...

Come to think of it, Trump has not been observed to walk around naked in public. There just are alleged instances of his figuratively have done so within his residence, and some people claim to have caught glimpses of him doing it, peeping in through the windows.

DL said...

Is no one else gravely concerned by the findings of the report? Yes, the findings are not as bad as has been feared and sometimes asserted, for which I am grateful. The Trump campaign did not actively conspire with the Russian government to undermine the integrity of an American election. But what was found was deeply troubling: the Trump campaign often actively welcomed, and was receptive to, the assistance of the Russian government. They reported none of these offers of assistance to law enforcement, nor does there appear to have a moment's concern about Russian activities provided they were of help to Trump's campaign. This is appalling.

Indeed, had these overtures been immediately reported to the FBI, as they should have been--and would have been by any other campaign, Republican or Democrat--there likely never would have been a Russia investigation.

The obstruction section of the report, meanwhile, demonstrates a very serious pattern of presidential misconduct. The defense that this misconduct may not rise to the level of a criminal offense is, again, holding the President of the United States to a shockingly low standard. The president sought to politicize the Department of Justice, repeatedly lied and encouraged others to lie, and continually sought to interfere with a criminal investigation. He was saved only by subordinates who refused to carry out his orders and impeded him from following through on his intentions at almost every turn. (And what kind of a president twice orders a subordinate to arrange the firing of the Special Counsel, but then inexplicitly backs down when the subordinate simply ignores the command--and then tries to get that subordinate to deny that the order had ever been given in the first place?)

Finally, can anyone read the written reply of the president to the Counsel's questions and contend that the document represents an honest reply to the questions posed? For a man who brags about his memory, the answers are so evasive and so full of the president's inability to recall that they cannot be taken seriously, and in light of this, his unwillingness to sit down for an oral interview except under subpoena shows a deep contempt for the administration of justice.

This report may not contain the firm evidence required to determine the "high crimes and misdemeanors" impeachable under the constitution. But the report does reveal a pattern of very serious misconduct that ought to be disqualifying for his renomination for President by a major political party, let alone his reelection to that office.

Drago said...

DL: "But what was found was deeply troubling: the Trump campaign often actively welcomed, and was receptive to, the assistance of the Russian government. They reported none of these offers of assistance to law enforcement, nor does there appear to have a moment's concern about Russian activities provided they were of help to Trump's campaign. This is appalling."

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Too funny.

Hillary and obama's govt was literally paying a foreign agent, in a foreign land, to work with Putin's pals directly, who were also paid with Hillary/Obama Fed Dollars, to contrive lies to justify spying on a domestic political opponent.

I love the Concern Troll pearl clutching.

I suspect another Chuck sock-puppet.

Lewis Wetzel said...

DL wrote:
"and would have been by any other campaign, Republican or Democrat"
More pure speculation. It was Hillary's people who conspired with Russian intel to produce the Steele Dossier.

Drago said...

LW: "More pure speculation. It was Hillary's people who conspired with Russian intel to produce the Steele Dossier."

More pure speculation. It was Hillary's people who conspired with Russian intel to produce the hoaxSteele Dossier.

Birkel said...

The pattern of alleged misconduct is protesting a Deep State that is attempting a coup.

Imagine an innocent man stating that he does not weigh the same as a duck!

Mike Sylwester said...

DL at 11:37 AM
the report does reveal a pattern of very serious misconduct that ought to be disqualifying for his renomination for President by a major political party, let alone his reelection to that office.

During Trump's remaining five years in office, he might be able to restore the US Intelligence Community into a non-partisan institution that serves the entire US population and not just the Democrat Party.

Never again should the US Intelligence Community frame a candidate's innocent campaign advisors in order to justify FISA warrants in order to collect practically all of the communications of the candidate's campaign staff and personal sphere.

I think that President Trump can fix that problem, but he might need another five years to do so.

Ken B said...

My approach will be two fold.
First, and most importantly, the rhhardin approach. Trump haters spent years and millions and came up with no evidence.
Second I will read a few people I respect after they read the report. I will expect extended quotations from Mueller if they make a claim. Greenwald will be one of these. He hates Trump and he is honest and careful. It is significant that his latest meets my standard and concludes there is nothing.

Birkel said...

Hey, Ken B.
I appreciate that your Trump hatred will never abate.
What will you choose to hate about him now?

Low unemployment?
Fewer federal regs?
Fewer federal employees?
Fast growth of middle class wages?
Low inflation?
Judicial nominees?

Drago said...

Ken B: "Greenwald will be one of these. He hates Trump and he is honest and careful. It is significant that his latest meets my standard and concludes there is nothing."

You should also read Matt Taibbi, Jimmy Dore, Michael Tracey, Aaron Mate', and there are others.

These guys are all bona fide leftists, but they are straightforward leftists who are not falling for the crap the other lefties, including LLR Chuck, are spewing out.

These guys have all mostly paid a price for their honesty and unwillingness to accept the Left/LLR-left collusion/obstruction lies about Trump....and they hate Trump!!

These guys trash all the usual suspect lefties/LLR-lefties.

Here's a couple good videos of them talking about all this and taking on the establishment left/LLR-left:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zS0AlApiWLs

These videos taking on Maddow is absolutely hilarious...and its from the lefties who oppose everything conservatives support...but they aren't falling for the Maddow/LLR Chuck smears:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi5YYZ9eocU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qe7A58TEms

I would strongly recommend LLR Chuck not watch these videos in particular since the takedown of his beloved "brilliant" Maddow is so complete it will drive LLR Chuck back to sputtering insults and attacks on African-Americans and children.....again.

Roughcoat said...

Drago, your explanation for the German failure to capture Moscow in 1941 reflects old scholarship, now regarded as incorrect. It is based on the self-exculpatory postwar commentaries by German generals attempting to shift the blame for Barbarossa's failure onto Hitler. In fact operations in the Kiev area as a result of the Germans' southward drive were completed by 19 September -- plenty of time, as it turned out, for the Germans to drive on Moscow and score major victories first at Smolensk and then in the Battles of Vyazma and Bryansk. The Kiev operation (and the destruction of Soviet forces around Kiev) was absolutely necessary to secure the southern flank of the German drive on Moscow. What halted Operation Typhoon and stopped the Germans from capturing Moscow was the Red Army's gigantic counteroffensive on 10 December, made possible by the arrival of reinforcements from the Far East (the result of a pact recently reached by the USSR and Japan). Timely Allied aid, plus the weather and attendant logistical problems contributed to the Wehrmacht's defeat at the gates of Moscow -- but mainly it was the Red Army that that stopped the Germans. Wikepedia has a good article on the subject, quoting the redoubtable David Glantz as follows:

"David Glantz argued, however, that had Operation Typhoon been launched in September, it would have met greater resistance due to Soviet forces not having been weakened by their offensives east of Smolensk. The offensive would have also been launched with an extended right flank. Glantz also claims that regardless of the final position of German troops when winter came, they would have still faced a counteroffensive by the 10 reserve armies raised by the Soviets toward the end of the year, who would also be better equipped by the vast industrial resources in the area of Kiev. Glantz asserts that had Kiev not been taken before the Battle of Moscow, the entire operation would have ended in a disaster for the Germans."

Drago said...

Roughcoat: "Drago, your explanation for the German failure to capture Moscow in 1941 reflects old scholarship, now regarded as incorrect."

Damn you suh!! I have been insulted. I demand satisfaction!!

Name your Second!!

boricuafudd said...

"Which of these referrals dealt with Trump and/or his staff colluding with any Russians? How far up your ass do you keep your head? Do you ever sit down and wonder why people constantly laugh at your disingenuous postings in here?"

How do you square that with the Mueller finding that no Americans or the Trump Campaign colluded with the Russians? Which is correct? It both cannot be true.

effinayright said...

Anonymous said...
“Not a single false statement.”

“[A]lthough the evidence of contacts between Campaign officials and Russia-affiliated individuals may not have been sufficient to establish or sustain criminal charges, several US persons connected to the Campaign made false statements about those contacts and took other steps to obstruct the Office’s investigation and those of Congress. This office has therefore charged some of those individuals with making false statements and obstructing justice.”

Mueller Report
***********************

But no charges against Sanders or Spicer, who you claim lied. And ...did they allegedly lie to the DOJ? To the Special Counsel?

No.

Very thin and watery gruel, indeed.

Rusty said...

Does DL = Chuck? He sure sounds like chuck. And for the record DL, both Barr and rosenstien agreed that nothing Trump did rose to the level of obstruction. They both agreed that it took some mental and legal acrobatics on Muellers part to label anything as obstruction. In other words Mueller had to redefine what constituted obstruction in order to put it in the report. You completely ignore Barrs comments on the matter and push your own conclusions.
Why can't you just be honest and admit you're substituting your own reality.
God. I dispise mobs and those that participate in them.

Drago said...

Follow up from above: I also recommend liberals Joe Rogan and Dave Rubin as well.

Roughcoat said...

Drago: If it's any consolation, I held the same views as you and many others until David Glantz himself set me straight, and pointed me in the direction of new and better information on Barbarossa based on more recent scholarship (much of it authored by Glantz himself). The new information did not come out until after after the fall of the Soviet regime, and Glantz was among the first to get access to Russian archives on the subject.

As for a second: perhaps Buwaya will oblige, if you shoot at him first.

Drago said...

Roughcoat: "As for a second: perhaps Buwaya will oblige, if you shoot at him first."

Shoot at a Second?!!

Not exactly cricket now, is it?

Fen said...

"They really are watching a different movie, aren't they?"

And that's why this cold war is doomed to turn hot.

You cannot reason with these people. It's like they speak a different language. Have you ever seen conflict resolution between two peoples who can't communicate with each other? Its always ends with the side that's armed burying the side that isn't.

Makes me sad. I'm going to miss Late Night Comedy and... Broadway Musicals.

Roughcoat said...

I don't play cricket either literally or metaphorically. I'm American and I play American sports.

FullMoon said...

In the 2+ years of noise, I haven't heard what Russia actually did to influence the election besides some social media crap. 99% of the country has tuned it out.

Russia and the left have been partners in destroying America for a long time.
.........................................................

The demonstration in New York City, which took place a few days after the election, appears to be the largest and most successful known effort to date pulled off by Russian-linked groups intent on using social media platforms to influence American politics.

Sixteen thousand Facebook users said that they planned to attend a Trump protest on Nov. 12, 2016, organized by the Facebook page for BlackMattersUS, a Russian-linked group that sought to capitalize on racial tensions between black and white Americans. The event was shared with 61,000 users.

As many as 5,000 to 10,000 protesters actually convened at Manhattan's Union Square. They then marched to Trump Tower, according to media reports at the time.

The BlackMattersUS-organized rally took advantage of outrage among groups on the left following President Trump’s victory on Nov. 8 to galvanize support for its event. The group’s protest was the fourth consecutive anti-Trump rally in New York following election night, and one of many across the country.

“Join us in the streets! Stop Trump and his bigoted agenda!” reads the Facebook event page for the rally. “Divided is the reason we just fell. We must unite despite our differences to stop HATE from ruling the land.”

While the focus has been on Russian efforts ahead of the election, the BlackMatters rally days after Trump's victory shows that Russian-linked social media influence efforts continued after the election.

The BlackMatters organizing group was connected to the Internet Research Agency, a Russian “troll farm” with ties to the Kremlin, according to a recent investigation by the Russian Magazine RBC. Facebook has identified the Internet Research Agency as the group responsible for purchasing 3,000 political ads on Facebook’s platform and operating 470 accounts that appear to have attempted to influence the perspectives of Americans during the 2016 elections.

DL said...

Yes, Rusty, I wrote precisely that what Trump did may not rise to the level of a criminal offense. I am not disagreeing with you on that. But have you actually read any of the obstruction part of the report? Again and again we have appalling conduct, even if it is not criminal conduct. Expecting the attorney general to shut down FBI investigations. Attempting to order investigations into his political opponent. Subordinates routinely ignore the orders of the President, because they believe them to be illegal or unethical, and the president backs down when his orders are ignored. He orders his subordinates to lie to the American people. He lies to the American people. I don't give a damn, for example, that Trump wanted to build a hotel in Moscow in 2016. I care that he lied and tried to cover up that fact for some two years. That coverup was not a crime. But it is still indefensible.

Whataboutism is not a defense. HRC is not the president, and Republicans should hold the president to a higher standard than HRC anyway.

rhhardin said...

I already forgot how to spell Mueller's name.

ue is u umlaut. The e is sort of optional in languages without that character.

Mueller means miller (profession).

effinayright said...

Fen said...

Have you ever seen conflict resolution between two peoples who can't communicate with each other? Its always ends with the side that's armed burying the side that isn't.

********************

SJWs, feminazis, Antifa and the rest of the rabid left ought to ponder that fact. Push come to shove, and all that...

CWJ said...

DL,

Are any of your examples based on anything other than hearsay? How many have more than a single source?

DL said...

CWL, my source is Volume II of Mueller's report, of which I have read large portions. Mueller' sources are carefully footnoted at the bottom of every page of the report. Seriously, it is worth a read and you can make up your own mind.

Birkel said...

Waves at the smear merchant, DL.

Mike Sylwester said...

DL at 12:39 PM
Whataboutism is not a defense. HRC is not the president, and Republicans should hold the president to a higher standard than HRC anyway.

During the period that the US Intelligence Community became so remarkably partisan and abusive, the US President was Barack Obama.

In retrospect, therefore, he was not fit to be the US President.

MBunge said...

"I care that he lied and tried to cover up that fact for some two years. That coverup was not a crime. But it is still indefensible."


DEFENDING IS ALL LIBERALS DEMOCRATS DID WHEN IT CAME TO BILL CLINTON. THAT'S LITERALLY ALL THEY DID.

I feel sorry for you if you weren't around at the time and therefore don't understand what's going on, but YOUR side is the one that won the argument on this stuff. This is YOUR America and Donald Trump is YOUR President.

Mike

Big Mike said...

Republicans should hold the president to a higher standard than ...

That’s been the standard routine for how many decades now? The notion that we Republicans should be noble and hold ourselves to higher standards the the despicable Democrats. I know that it goes back at least to 1960 when Mayor Daley practically boasted of stealing the election for Kennedy and Nixon did nothing. Probably goes back to FDR or even earlier.

I relish the fact that we have a Republican President who relishes getting down in the mud with Democrats and standing on their heads to hold them under.water. GO DONALD TRUMP!

DL said...

So basically, it is now fine for presidents of both parties to lie about everything and anything? Lying is always bad, whether by Republicans or Democrats. Why is this so tribal? Will no one actually defend the president's conduct without mentioning a Clinton or Obama?

Seriously, you don't mind in slightest that Trump lied for two years about his pursuit of a hotel deal in Moscow? Is presidential lying now a good thing?

Birkel said...

I am holding this president to a higher standard.
The standard Obama did not meet was 3% GDP growth in at least one year of a presidency.
Obama never managed and I judged him harshly, therefore.

This president got there in his first full calendar year.
Higher standard status: met!!

Mike Sylwester said...

DL at 12:39 PM
Whataboutism is not a defense. HRC is not the president, and Republicans should hold the president to a higher standard than HRC anyway.

I think that most people understand the word whataboutism differently than you do, DL.

A correct example would be how the Soviet Government responded to citizens' complaints:

Citizen: "The toilets in our apartment's don't work."

Government: "Stop complaining. In the USA, Negroes are lynched."

This truly whataboutism response is completely irrelevant.

However, if you say that Donald Trump is not fit to be President, and I say that Hillary Clinton likewise was not fit to be President, then most people would not consider my response to be whataboutism Rather, my response is pertinent.

However, I do recognize and accept that you seem to prefer to use your own, unusual definition of whataboutism when your dismiss other people's arguments.

MBunge said...

"Is presidential lying now a good thing?"

Your side was wildly applauding Bill Clinton just 2 1/2 years ago. Your side was going to put him BACK in the White House.

If everyone doesn't play by the same rules, then the rules are just a scam. Getting outraged when people stop going along with your scam makes you look ridiculous.

Mike

Gospace said...

I find the Democrats bashing wikileaks to be, well, an amazing turnaround. Before it gets edited, the following is the opening of Wikipedia's wikileaks entry:

The whistleblowing website WikiLeaks has received praise as well as criticism. The organisation has won a number of awards, including The Economist's New Media Award in 2008 at the Index on Censorship Awards[1] and Amnesty International's UK Media Award in 2009.[2][3] In 2010, the New York Daily News listed WikiLeaks first among websites "that could totally change the news",[4] and Julian Assange received the Sam Adams Award[5] and was named the Readers' Choice for TIME's Person of the Year in 2010.[6] The UK Information Commissioner has stated that "WikiLeaks is part of the phenomenon of the online, empowered citizen".[7] In its first days, an Internet petition calling for the cessation of extrajudicial intimidation of WikiLeaks attracted over six hundred thousand signatures.[8] Supporters of WikiLeaks in the media and academia have commended it for exposing state and corporate secrets, increasing transparency, supporting freedom of the press, and enhancing democratic discourse while challenging powerful institutions.

Especially note the Sam Adams award. The Sam Adams Award is given annually to an intelligence professional who has taken a stand for integrity and ethics. The Award is given by the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence, a group of retired CIA officers REtired CIA officers, the very CIA headed by John Brennan, admitted Communist and reported by some sources as muslim convert, that attempted a coup against President Donald John Trump. Makes one wonder- How did anyone who was ever an admitted Communist end up in charge of the CIA? Oh, wait, that lover of America Obama!

Seeing Red said...

Seriously, you don't mind in slightest that Trump lied for two years about his pursuit of a hotel deal in Moscow? Is presidential lying now a good thing?

We survived 8 years of the most scandal-free president in history.

Ooopppps. Who authorized spying on the Trump campaign?

Fen said...

Chuck: my source is Volume II of Mueller's report, of which I have read large portions. Mueller' sources are carefully footnoted at the bottom of every page of the report. Seriously, it is worth a read and you can make up your own mind.

Give us specific examples instead of this vague mumble mumble crap.

You and Inga, ass to mouth.

Original Mike said...

"Does DL = Chuck?"

DL = Detroit Lawyer

narciso said...

interesting about sam adams he was an intelligence analyst, who said his estimates of Vietcong troop strength was suppressed by westmorelands g2 then col Daniel graham, it was the basis of a lawsuit against cbs that did not turn out well,

livermoron said...

RHardin:
Umlauts are usually avoided in German surnames. There are exceptions, of course. I believe that to be the case because the names go back before the advent of the umlaut in the Middle Ages.

DL - reading and comprehending are two different things. Set your sights higher.

Jim at said...

Inga's ashamed to show her face.

She knows.


BOOM!

Hagar said...

Roughcoat et al.,
It did not matter.
On the Eastern Front, the Russians were not going to stop fighting in front of the Wehrmacht, nor the various conquered peoples behind them, and the Germans could not hope to hold all that area.
In the West, the English were not going to stop fighting either, and the Germans could not get to them - particularly after Roosevelt declared the North Atlantic to be territorial waters of the United States and proceeded to bomb the U-boats faster than the Germans could replace them.
And eventually the Americans were going to come in on the British side. That was a given.

In the 20th century, there were only two superpowers - the Soviet Union with its Bolshevik religion and the United States with its English heritage.
The Germans were fighting for real estate; the Allies for ideas and emotional attachments.

Howard said...

You cucks claim victory and still think your obese opiate army f the returdlick will march on Washington with blazing guns.

Inga's too embarrassed for you pathetic simpering wimps to show up and gloat.

tcrosse said...

Umlauts are usually avoided in German surnames. There are exceptions, of course. I believe that to be the case because the names go back before the advent of the umlaut in the Middle Ages.

Before that they used air umlauts.

FullMoon said...

Thanks to whoever linked to this site in the past. Maybe Mike K.


Serious detail, timeline , links. This guy is amazing.
"Everything Mueller and Rosenstein were doing in late 2017 and throughout 2018 was intended to drag-out the Russia conspiracy narrative as long as possible, even though there was no actual Trump-Russia investigation taking place.

It was always the “obstruction” investigation that could lead to the desired result by Mueller’s team of taking down President Trump through evidence that would help Pelosi and Nadler achieve impeachment . The “obstruction case” was the entirety of the case they were trying to make from May 2017 through to March 2019."

Fen said...

Chuck: my source is Volume II of Mueller's report, of which I have read large portions. Mueller' sources are carefully footnoted at the bottom of every page of the report. Seriously, it is worth a read and you can make up your own mind.

Fen: Give us specific examples instead of this vague mumble mumble crap. (1:44 EST)

---

Coming up on two hours and nothing.

Original Mike said...

"Inga's too embarrassed for you pathetic simpering wimps to show up and gloat."

Yeah, I'm sure that's it.

Big Mike said...

So basically, it is now fine for presidents of both parties to lie about everything and anything? Lying is always bad, whether by Republicans or Democrats. Why is this so tribal?

Have you thought of asking Democrats? Why is an administration which allowed black defendants who had already pleaded guilty to voter intimidation to walk free, and which used the IRS to intimidate Tea Party groups celebrated as “the most scandal-free administration ever”?

Will no one actually defend the president's conduct without mentioning a Clinton or Obama?

Those two set the bar, didn’t they?

Seriously, you don't mind in slightest that Trump lied for two years about his pursuit of a hotel deal in Moscow? Is presidential lying now a good thing?

Seriously, even if it were true — and an assertion is not proof — why does it matter? A businessman cannot make business deals?

@DL, you do realize, I hope, that you are evil? You are as evil as any serial murderer.

Howard said...

Do your own homework, Fen. You argue like Elmer Fudd's ex-wife

Howard said...

I buy my umlauts from Vanna White

Howard said...

... did I just call Chuck Elmer Fudd? Sorry, Mr. Fudd

CWJ said...

Who's CWL?

Drago said...

Howard: "Inga's too embarrassed for you pathetic simpering wimps to show up and gloat."

Admit it, you could barely type that out before collapsing in laughter.

DL said...

I do not have a side, and do not know a Chuck. I voted for Bush, McCain, Obama (narrowly) in 2012, and supported Kasich in the primaries in 2016. Looking at Biden in 2020. But this has nothing, and should have nothing, to do with how one should respond to the report. Lying is always bad, and Democratic lying does not excuse Republican lying. The report documents a lot of lying. Start with Vol. II and read the first 40 pages. Or pick 30 pages at random. It's all horrifying. Or should be. I mean, I can give page numbers if that's what you really want, but even a cursory read validates everything I've written.

Seriously, literally every reply has mentioned a Democrat, and argued or implied how his conduct is fine because a Democrat has done something worse. Is that politics now? Every politician is an amoral compulsive liar, and that's fine, as long as they're my side's amoral compulsive liar? Can we not at least agree that there's plenty of terrible things in the report, even if you think we should excuse them on other grounds?

Achilles said...

5. Reaffirm your aversion to politics and move on.

posted by Ann Althouse


No.

The democrat party is entirely compromised of traitors. They actively worked with foreign agents to overturn a legal election.

There are not an insignificant number of Republicans on their side.

The minimum acceptable outcome is they all go to jail.

They should all hang.

A democrat led government will never be legitimate until the entire leadership and everyone is held account for their actions.

James K said...

Start with Vol. II and read the first 40 pages. Or pick 30 pages at random. It's all horrifying. Or should be. I mean, I can give page numbers if that's what you really want, but even a cursory read validates everything I've written.

Dersh and others have pointed out that Mueller had no business even writing Vol. II (assuming this to be the 182 pp on possible obstruction). He acknowledged that it is only for Congress to decide whether to charge the President, not his office. So that entire volume is just gratuitous character assassination, and red meat for the Democrats.

mccullough said...

So you’re looking at Joe Biden in 2020 but don’t like lying.

I think you are a liar.

mccullough said...

I don’t think anything in the report is terrible. People lie. Get over it.

mccullough said...

I think spending $35 million of tax money on this is terrible.

I think spending $5 million to settle Mueller’s fuck up of the anthrax investigation is terrible.

I think Obama and W’s years in office were terrible.

I think the Clinton and Trump years are pretty good.

Sam L. said...

The Mueller Report just BURNSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS their butts.

Rusty said...

DL said...
Yes, Rusty, I wrote precisely that what Trump did may not rise to the level of a criminal offense. I am not disagreeing with you on that. But have you actually read any of the obstruction part of the report? Again and again we have appalling conduct, even if it is not criminal conduct. Expecting the attorney general to shut down FBI investigations. Attempting to order investigations into his political opponent. Subordinates routinely ignore the orders of the President, because they believe them to be illegal or unethical, and the president backs down when his orders are ignored. He orders his subordinates to lie to the American people. He lies to the American people. I don't give a damn, for example, that Trump wanted to build a hotel in Moscow in 2016. I care that he lied and tried to cover up that fact for some two years. That coverup was not a crime. But it is still indefensible.

Whataboutism is not a defense. HRC is not the president, and Republicans should hold the president to a higher standard than HRC anyway.

Who mentioned Hillary? Not me.
Maybe you didn't catch the part where Barr said that Mueller streached the legal meaning of obstruction in order to include those passages you mentioned about Trump. And without context I might add. You are being outraged over being lied to, but it isn't the President that lied. It was Mueller.
I don't recall you being here and being outraged at the lies being told by the preious administration. They actuall make Trumps rather small potatoes. But I guess when your standards are s fungable as yours it makes no difference. as lond as the people you agree with get away with it.
You are oddly incurious as to who and why this hoax was foisted on the american public for so long. Many felonies were commited by many people not Trump and yet your only response to this monumental news is that Trump is a liar.
Don't you want to know who is behind it. Don't you want to see justice done, Chuck?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 302   Newer› Newest»