View Poll Results: The Mueller report. The week after its released.
Trump is not charged with any crime, and Mueller's report is found to have some procedural issues. 2 2.50%
Trump is not charged with any crime, Mueller's report offers disclosure showing it was fairly conducted. 26 32.50%
Trump is charged with a crime, but the evidence presented is flimsy and circumstantial and will be quickly dismissed by his legal team. 1 1.25%
Mueller has hard evidence on collusion, including emails, and recordings. Trump gets a subpoena. 51 63.75%
Voters: 80. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-30-2019, 05:39 PM
Ancient Erudite is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 176

The Mueller report. The week after its released.


The Mueller report. The week after its released.

Pick the choice that best represents what you think will happen.

1 ) Trump is not charged with any crime, and Mueller's report is found to have some procedural issues.

2 ) Trump is not charged with any crime, Mueller's report offers disclosure showing it was fairly conducted.


3 ) Trump is charged with a crime, but the evidence presented is flimsy and circumstantial and will be quickly dismissed by his legal team.

4 ) Mueller has hard evidence on collusion, including emails, and recordings. Trump gets a subpoena.
  #2  
Old 01-30-2019, 06:28 PM
enipla is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 14,078
Many, many crimes are exposed with hard evidence. Many before he was President. Many while in office. The spineless Senate refuses to impeach and askes "What about Hillary?"
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
  #3  
Old 01-30-2019, 06:33 PM
Folly's Avatar
Folly is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chicago! (no more burbs)
Posts: 2,192
None of the above. Mueller follows the DOJ policy of not indicting a sitting president. He gives report to Congress to decide whether or not to impeach.
  #4  
Old 01-30-2019, 06:38 PM
Thing Fish is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,239
3 is not happening. Mueller won't file charges based on anything less than ironclad evidence, and even then he might choose to leave it up to the Senate rather than the criminal justice system. I think Mueller is highly competent, so 1 is unlikely.

It'll be either 2 or 4, probably 2 but there's a really wide range of possible outcomes there. Option 2 would cover everything from "no serious wrongdoing on the part of anyone associated with Trump" to "multiple Trump family members and close associates are charged with conspiring with Russia to fix the election, and massive circumstantial evidence suggests that they did so at Trump's direction". Those two outcomes would have massively different political implications.
  #5  
Old 01-30-2019, 07:04 PM
Ancient Erudite is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 176
Wow, I know this board learns to the left, but the choice of #4 is a long shot. People are going to be upset here.

Last edited by Ancient Erudite; 01-30-2019 at 07:04 PM.
  #6  
Old 01-30-2019, 07:08 PM
silenus's Avatar
silenus is online now
Isaiah 1:15/Screw the NRA
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 51,011
No, we're not.
  #7  
Old 01-30-2019, 07:10 PM
enipla is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 14,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancient Erudite View Post
Wow, I know this board learns to the left, but the choice of #4 is a long shot. People are going to be upset here.
8 convictions, and 30 indictments connected to Trump. And he's sitting on top of this Jenga Tower.

So far. That's just Mueller. Now the States can't touch him until he's out of office, but they are waiting.
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
  #8  
Old 01-30-2019, 07:33 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 34,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Folly View Post
None of the above. Mueller follows the DOJ policy of not indicting a sitting president. He gives report to Congress to decide whether or not to impeach.
This. Oh, I HOPE there is enough hard evidence to convict him, but even if there is, what happens in the first stage is the report is given to Congress, and impeachment proceedings, um, proceed. Hopefully, after he's impeached THEN he gets sent up the river to spend some quality time in prison.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #9  
Old 01-30-2019, 07:35 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 34,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancient Erudite View Post
Wow, I know this board learns to the left, but the choice of #4 is a long shot. People are going to be upset here.
I don't think so. Honestly, the evidence is mounting and I'm feeling the same sort of death spiral we saw with Nixon as more of Trump's circle gets picked off and sent to trial. Eventually, it will be like Jinga….someone will grasp the right block and the whole thing will come tumbling down. I don't think this is a long shot at all...I think it's 50/50 at this point. At least. YMMV of course.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #10  
Old 01-30-2019, 07:53 PM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancient Erudite View Post
Wow, I know this board learns to the left, but the choice of #4 is a long shot. People are going to be upset here.
Leans, might be a bit of an understatement.
  #11  
Old 01-30-2019, 07:56 PM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is offline
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 36,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
Leans, might be a bit of an understatement.
Tilts?
  #12  
Old 01-30-2019, 07:57 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,724
Quote:
Quoth enipla:

So far. That's just Mueller. Now the States can't touch him until he's out of office, but they are waiting.
I know of no legal theory under which the states are so constrained. Them actually going after him while he's still President would be unprecedented... but then, so much else about this administration is also unprecedented.
  #13  
Old 01-30-2019, 08:14 PM
Oredigger77 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Back at 5,280
Posts: 4,828
There is zero chance of Trump being charged within a week of the report being released. He'll go through impeachment first at a minimum no one has any incentive to charge him without impeachment.

Longer term I believe that Trump is too dumb to collude and that everyone around him will go to jail but they never told trump what they were doing either because they were afraid he would be too dumb to keep a secret or he isjust a figurehead who they treat like a mushroom.
  #14  
Old 01-30-2019, 08:53 PM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post
Tilts?
Lol, idk if I had to guess I'd say the boards run around 75 percent hardcore leftists.
With another 10 solidly left and maybe 5 leaning left.

So idk lays maybe?
  #15  
Old 01-30-2019, 09:12 PM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,079
There will be plenty of evidence he's a criminal, but he won't be arrested or subpoenaed. That's the job of Congress.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #16  
Old 01-30-2019, 09:22 PM
El_Kabong's Avatar
El_Kabong is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Smack Dab in the Middle
Posts: 15,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
There will be plenty of evidence he's a criminal, but he won't be arrested or subpoenaed. That's the job of Congress.
This, plus the criminality may not be directly related to collusion, but may be unrelated crimes uncovered during the course of the investigation, such as money laundering, or procedural crimes based on Trump's actions during the investigation, such as obstruction or witness tempering.

None of the poll options fit any of the above, so I've left it uncompleted.
  #17  
Old 01-30-2019, 09:23 PM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is offline
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 36,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
Lol, idk if I had to guess I'd say the boards run around 75 percent hardcore leftists.
With another 10 solidly left and maybe 5 leaning left.

So idk lays maybe?
Of course it's heavily left. We're here to fight ignorance.
  #18  
Old 01-30-2019, 09:24 PM
jayjay is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 37,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
Lol, idk if I had to guess I'd say the boards run around 75 percent hardcore leftists.
With another 10 solidly left and maybe 5 leaning left.

So idk lays maybe?
I hate to break it to you, but it doesn't require hard-core leftist political beliefs to recognize that our president is mentally-ill, a crook and, at the very least, sympathetic to our enemies.
  #19  
Old 01-30-2019, 11:13 PM
sweepkick is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
Lol, idk if I had to guess I'd say the boards run around 75 percent hardcore leftists.
With another 10 solidly left and maybe 5 leaning left.

So idk lays maybe?
As little as 10 years ago, many people who are now considered 'hardcore leftists' were considered centrists. The right has gone off the deep end, and their unrelenting and well-funded propaganda blitz demonizing anyone that doesn't agree with their fantasy rhetoric has a very large number of critical-thinking-challenged Americans believing that these people are now 'hardcore leftists'.
  #20  
Old 01-30-2019, 11:20 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 21,137
As the others have said, none of your options is correct.

Given that you have been active in the Mueller investigation threads, I would expect that you would already know that?
  #21  
Old 01-30-2019, 11:30 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 5,649
There will be evidence of illegal financial actions by the president but no effort to indict him. There will be strong circumstantial evidence that he had motives for acting on behalf of Putin and took action in that direction, also members of his campaign will have been shown to have collaborated with the Russians. But there won't be a smoking gun showing direct involvement of Quid-pro-quo. So anybody who is unbiased and has half a brain will see that he colluded with the Russians, but there will be enough of a fig leaf that Republicans will claim that he is a pure as driven snow.
  #22  
Old 01-30-2019, 11:59 PM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweepkick View Post
As little as 10 years ago, many people who are now considered 'hardcore leftists' were considered centrists. The right has gone off the deep end, and their unrelenting and well-funded propaganda blitz demonizing anyone that doesn't agree with their fantasy rhetoric has a very large number of critical-thinking-challenged Americans believing that these people are now 'hardcore leftists'.
I'm judging by 15 years ago standards since thats about thd last time I followed politics enough to have formed any definition of what leftist is.

It's just a guess though, and half joking.
You guys seem so sour... Lighten up
  #23  
Old 01-31-2019, 12:00 AM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post
Of course it's heavily left. We're here to fight ignorance.
lol, good one.

Last edited by Littleman; 01-31-2019 at 12:01 AM.
  #24  
Old 01-31-2019, 12:13 AM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
But really , staight up dirty hippies, the lot of ya
  #25  
Old 01-31-2019, 12:35 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
I'm judging by 15 years ago standards since thats about thd last time I followed politics enough to have formed any definition of what leftist is.

It's just a guess though, and half joking.
You guys seem so sour... Lighten up
Why would we lighten up? This is a serious situation. The topic here is serious, and no joke. The president himself is a serious problem, and not a joke. The rhetoric you used is part of the right wing attempt to move the overton window even more rightward. (It already is rather right wing, with ideas from fascists entering into the Republican mainstream. And, no, that's not an exaggeration: look up the alt-right.)

We may have what amounts to a Russian infiltrator in our White House. The evidence makes this seem more and more likely. And we know that Russians interfered in our election. This isn't a place where joking about how left wing we are because we oppose Trump is going to land.

If you want lighter banter, I'd suggest checking out threads about lighter topics. We're not playing around in these threads.
  #26  
Old 01-31-2019, 01:21 AM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Why would we lighten up? This is a serious situation. The topic here is serious, and no joke. The president himself is a serious problem, and not a joke. The rhetoric you used is part of the right wing attempt to move the overton window even more rightward. (It already is rather right wing, with ideas from fascists entering into the Republican mainstream. And, no, that's not an exaggeration: look up the alt-right.)

We may have what amounts to a Russian infiltrator in our White House. The evidence makes this seem more and more likely. And we know that Russians interfered in our election. This isn't a place where joking about how left wing we are because we oppose Trump is going to land.

If you want lighter banter, I'd suggest checking out threads about lighter topics. We're not playing around in these threads.
Is this thread going to decide actual legislation? Or have some serious influence on what happens?

So... Trump is a Russian spy now? And that's not way left?
  #27  
Old 01-31-2019, 01:40 AM
galen ubal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
Is this thread going to decide actual legislation? Or have some serious influence on what happens?

So... Trump is a Russian spy now? And that's not way left?
Here's a Washington Post piece on 18 reasons Trump could be a Russian asset.
It's an opinion piece, but each of those 18 reasons have been well-documented and are matters of public record.

Last edited by galen ubal; 01-31-2019 at 01:40 AM.
  #28  
Old 01-31-2019, 02:32 AM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen ubal View Post
Here's a Washington Post piece on 18 reasons Trump could be a Russian asset.
It's an opinion piece, but each of those 18 reasons have been well-documented and are matters of public record.
Here's an opinion piece showing well documented reasons Hillary should have been tried for treason, as a Russian asset no less.
https://www.modbee.com/opinion/lette...184639478.html


Doesn't make it any less radically right wing

Last edited by Littleman; 01-31-2019 at 02:33 AM.
  #29  
Old 01-31-2019, 02:47 AM
galen ubal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
Here's an opinion piece showing well documented reasons Hillary should have been tried for treason, as a Russian asset no less.
https://www.modbee.com/opinion/lette...184639478.html


Doesn't make it any less radically right wing
I would not call it well-documented, as it starts off with the "Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States’ Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?" myth. Hint: it's verifiably, factually untrue
What is factually untrue about the list in my cite above? Be specific, and show your work.

Last edited by galen ubal; 01-31-2019 at 02:49 AM. Reason: took out a snarky and confusing reference to whataboutism
  #30  
Old 01-31-2019, 03:21 AM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen ubal View Post
I would not call it well-documented, as it starts off with the "Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States’ Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?" myth. Hint: it's verifiably, factually untrue
What is factually untrue about the list in my cite above? Be specific, and show your work.
To be honest I'm not certain here but it looks like at least a few of those claims are just flat out opinions, since they say may have and cite no source whatsoever.

And several appear to have stemmed from the discredited dossier mentioned here. Which Is factually something Hillary's campaign purchased from Russia but for some reason that's not collusion.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost....s-treason/amp/

I just don't want to be misconstrued as supporting either of these far left or far right points of view , because i dont. They are definitely both far right and far left as far as I'm concerned.
I don't believe Hillary or dj are Russian spies.

Last edited by Littleman; 01-31-2019 at 03:25 AM.
  #31  
Old 01-31-2019, 03:34 AM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen ubal View Post
I would not call it well-documented, as it starts off with the "Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States’ Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?" myth. Hint: it's verifiably, factually untrue
What is factually untrue about the list in my cite above? Be specific, and show your work.
Btw this Snopes article admits connections, just refutes that the allegation was as simple as it was stated. Mostly by saying yeah she did it but it was out of neglect rather than intent.
  #32  
Old 01-31-2019, 03:35 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,189
As others have pointed out, options 1 and 3 are exceedingly unlikely. If there's anything we've learned about the Muller probe over the past two years, it's that it's being done very carefully and by the books, and that Muller is very careful about leaks. This isn't amateur hour; this isn't a partisan hack job carried out by blatantly partisan politicians; it's an old-guard republican servant of state taking his job seriously, and the results show. So what can we expect? Well, probably more of that. More by-the-books stuff. I'd guess he's going to complete his report and submit it to congress (y'know, the thing his job recommends).
  #33  
Old 01-31-2019, 04:24 AM
Chisquirrel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
Btw this Snopes article admits connections, just refutes that the allegation was as simple as it was stated. Mostly by saying yeah she did it but it was out of neglect rather than intent.
That's not what Snopes says, at all. Please read the article again, take notes, and come back when you can show where Hillary gave uranium to Russia.


For clarity:

"the U.S. government has not authorized any country to re-transfer U.S. uranium to Russia."



From 2015 (three years AFTER Hilary Clinton was no longer SoS):

"In a June 2015 letter to Rep. Peter Visclosky, the NRC said it granted RSB Logistics Services an amendment to its export license in 2012 to allow the Kentucky shipping company to export uranium to Canada from various sources — including from a Uranium One site in Wyoming. The NRC said that the export license allowed RSB to ship uranium to a conversion plant in Canada and then back to the United States for further processing."


But please, continue spreading factually incorrect information and posting "Letters to the Editor" as cites. Your opinion will be given due weight.
  #34  
Old 01-31-2019, 04:51 AM
galen ubal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
To be honest I'm not certain here but it looks like at least a few of those claims are just flat out opinions, since they say may have and cite no source whatsoever.

And several appear to have stemmed from the discredited dossier mentioned here. Which Is factually something Hillary's campaign purchased from Russia but for some reason that's not collusion.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost....s-treason/amp/

I just don't want to be misconstrued as supporting either of these far left or far right points of view , because i dont. They are definitely both far right and far left as far as I'm concerned.
I don't believe Hillary or dj are Russian spies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
That's not what Snopes says, at all. Please read the article again, take notes, and come back when you can show where Hillary gave uranium to Russia.


For clarity:

"the U.S. government has not authorized any country to re-transfer U.S. uranium to Russia."



From 2015 (three years AFTER Hilary Clinton was no longer SoS):

"In a June 2015 letter to Rep. Peter Visclosky, the NRC said it granted RSB Logistics Services an amendment to its export license in 2012 to allow the Kentucky shipping company to export uranium to Canada from various sources — including from a Uranium One site in Wyoming. The NRC said that the export license allowed RSB to ship uranium to a conversion plant in Canada and then back to the United States for further processing."


But please, continue spreading factually incorrect information and posting "Letters to the Editor" as cites. Your opinion will be given due weight.
Speaking of factually incorrect information, nowhere in that Washington Post article I cited references the Steele dossier. All of the references are to publicly available sources.
For that matter, the Steele dossier, while not completely confirmed, has been corroborated on a number of points. I'm not aware of any substantive refutations of any of it, either. In any event, investigations of the Trump campaign began well in advance of the compiling of the dossier.
  #35  
Old 01-31-2019, 04:55 AM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is offline
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 36,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
Here's an opinion piece showing well documented reasons Hillary should have been tried for treason, as a Russian asset no less.
https://www.modbee.com/opinion/lette...184639478.html


Doesn't make it any less radically right wing
That's not an opinion piece, that's a letter to the editor. No expertise required.
  #36  
Old 01-31-2019, 05:07 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 23,035
Option 4 is probably closest, although I suspect the headline crimes alleged will be about material obstruction and assorted other lesser infractions rather than collusion. And while a week is too short a period for much action to be taken, a subpoena and House investigation will follow in due course, and thencefore Trump desperately trying to avoid testifying under oath.

Options 1 and 3 aren't happening. Whatever the outcome, Mueller's investigation is rock solid.
  #37  
Old 01-31-2019, 05:22 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
Lol, idk if I had to guess I'd say the boards run around 75 percent hardcore leftists.
With another 10 solidly left and maybe 5 leaning left.

So idk lays maybe?
I've read this description before but don't believe it to be accurate. Hard-core leftists here are definitely outnumbered by moderates who vote Democratic.

Was there a public poll recently where Dopers were asked to identify their political bent?

Just now I clicked on some recent "Who posted" links to make a list of the frequent posters in the Elections forum. About 25% to 30% were obvious right-wingers, regardless of what cut-off I used (5 out of the top 16 posters, or 15 out of the top 48). And those were just posters who've presented very right-wing views, and/or who have supported Trump. Among the remaining 70% to 75%, there are some who've described themselves with something like "I used to be a moderate Republican but the party moved too far away from me." (There may even be some less familiar right-wingers I overlooked.)

(Admittedly, right-wing posters may feel a need to post more as compensation for the perceived left-wing bias.)
__________________
Some or all of the above statements may be intended as sarcastic.
.
andros had more faith in an American jury than I had; and he was right. I'm happy to lose a bet and hope this trend continues.
  #38  
Old 01-31-2019, 06:38 AM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
I've read this description before but don't believe it to be accurate. Hard-core leftists here are definitely outnumbered by moderates who vote Democratic.

Was there a public poll recently where Dopers were asked to identify their political bent?

Just now I clicked on some recent "Who posted" links to make a list of the frequent posters in the Elections forum. About 25% to 30% were obvious right-wingers, regardless of what cut-off I used (5 out of the top 16 posters, or 15 out of the top 48). And those were just posters who've presented very right-wing views, and/or who have supported Trump. Among the remaining 70% to 75%, there are some who've described themselves with something like "I used to be a moderate Republican but the party moved too far away from me." (There may even be some less familiar right-wingers I overlooked.)

(Admittedly, right-wing posters may feel a need to post more as compensation for the perceived left-wing bias.)
Yet you can post that the president is a Russian spy and get zero opposition from " moderate Democrats" actually looks like basically everyone agrees with that statement.
That's a moderate?
  #39  
Old 01-31-2019, 06:48 AM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
And I find myself constantly in defense of moderate left and moderate right ideals i don't even agree with because the bias is so extremely left.

But it is entertaining, and I've learned a lot.
  #40  
Old 01-31-2019, 06:57 AM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post
That's not an opinion piece, that's a letter to the editor. No expertise required.
Ok no problem, if I have to make a full case against Hillary to prove it's a radical right ideal
I don't support i'll have to go digging around and do some homework.

Guess I'll need a day to catch up .
I'm sure it won't be real difficult.
  #41  
Old 01-31-2019, 07:03 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 23,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
Yet you can post that the president is a Russian spy and get zero opposition from " moderate Democrats" actually looks like basically everyone agrees with that statement.
That's a moderate?
That's hyperbolic (and also a position that you'll find very few seriously hold here) but reality-based . Trump is not a "spy" in any sense. He doesn't really need to be, since he can - and almost certainly has - simply hand over sensitive government information directly to the Russians. Note that some of our allies literally consider him to be a security risk.

Conversely, denying that Trump isn't actively aiding and aided by Russia isn't a moderate position given the information we actually have at this point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
And I find myself constantly in defense of moderate left and moderate right ideals i don't even agree with because the bias is so extremely left.
In much the same way California is an eastern coast of America when viewed from Guam.

And good luck on demonstrating that the uranium deal, which didn't involve either Clinton or the person who donated to her foundation (who wasn't even with Uranium One at the time of the deal) and didn't involve "uranium production leaving our shores", demonstrates that Clinton is corrupt. Do be sure to provide evidence for the "hundreds of millions dollars in bribes and kickbacks", the "dozens of major felony laws [that] were broken" and the "countless congressional subpoenas [that] were ignored". Because I suspect you'll find that these are as imaginary as the three million illegal voters that voted for Clinton in the last election.
  #42  
Old 01-31-2019, 07:13 AM
Ancient Erudite is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
Option 4 is probably closest, although I suspect the headline crimes alleged will be about material obstruction and assorted other lesser infractions rather than collusion. And while a week is too short a period for much action to be taken, a subpoena and House investigation will follow in due course, and thencefore Trump desperately trying to avoid testifying under oath.

Options 1 and 3 aren't happening. Whatever the outcome, Mueller's investigation is rock solid.
That's what they said about Trump winning there Presidency. ( 1 & 3 )

We might see some procedural issues. The Christopher Steele dossier is fishy. The unverified Trump-Russia collusion charges made their way into election news stories and Clinton talking points. Some say it was bought and paid from by the Clinton campaign.

As for Mueller charging Trump with someone flimsy, I would say that is the least likely of the four options, however, given the political pressure on him, I would not rule it out.

Whatever the report says, Trump's legal team who we have not heard from outside of the media talking points, can and will shoot it down the BS.

My educated guess is there is no collusion the the Mueller report will be a significant disappointment to the left. If there were, we would have heard of it long ago. Trump met with the Russians. So? Lots of successful people and politicians meet with the Russians too. In the end, a rat like Cohen goes to prison. Mueller seemed to shift his focus away from Trump to go after others who did not pay their taxes. I suppose if there is a sizeable investigation on any political fund raising, you'll see the same regardless of political party.
  #43  
Old 01-31-2019, 07:13 AM
JB99 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 870
I choose 5: Mueller has hard evidence on collusion, including emails, and recordings. Republicans refuse to acknowledge it, blame Hillary for everything, and do nothing.
  #44  
Old 01-31-2019, 07:16 AM
Littleman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
That's not what Snopes says, at all. Please read the article again, take notes, and come back when you can show where Hillary gave uranium to Russia.


For clarity:

"the U.S. government has not authorized any country to re-transfer U.S. uranium to Russia."



From 2015 (three years AFTER Hilary Clinton was no longer SoS):

"In a June 2015 letter to Rep. Peter Visclosky, the NRC said it granted RSB Logistics Services an amendment to its export license in 2012 to allow the Kentucky shipping company to export uranium to Canada from various sources — including from a Uranium One site in Wyoming. The NRC said that the export license allowed RSB to ship uranium to a conversion plant in Canada and then back to the United States for further processing."


But please, continue spreading factually incorrect information and posting "Letters to the Editor" as cites. Your opinion will be given due weight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen ubal View Post
Speaking of factually incorrect information, nowhere in that Washington Post article I cited references the Steele dossier. All of the references are to publicly available sources.
For that matter, the Steele dossier, while not completely confirmed, has been corroborated on a number of points. I'm not aware of any substantive refutations of any of it, either. In any event, investigations of the Trump campaign began well in advance of the compiling of the dossier.
So...if I'm just one of nine people responsible for transferring shares of a uranium company to Russia and i get my campaign info from actual Russian spies Then I'm factually innocent and definitely not colluding?

Because I claim " I didn't know"
Same excuse for breaking national security protocols.

But getting business financing from rusian investors definitely makes you a Russian spy.

These all seem right around the same degree of party bias to me.
  #45  
Old 01-31-2019, 07:37 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littleman View Post
So...if I'm just one of nine people responsible for transferring shares of a uranium company to Russia


Guys... It's been two years since this scandal was completely debunked. It's a big fat stupid hoax that never made any sense. I don't think it makes any sense to repeatedly go over this nonsense over and over again. Clinton was not "one of nine people". She wasn't even involved. Someone working beneath her in the state department was someone from one of the nine federal agencies (not people, agencies) who signed off on the deal, along with the US nuclear regulatory commission and the nuclear regulator of the state of Utah.

Quote:
But getting business financing from rusian investors definitely makes you a Russian spy.
Are you aware that Donald Trump Jr. met with Russian intelligence to discuss dirt on Hillary Clinton?

Are you aware that Giuliani has moved from "no collusion" to "collusion isn't a crime"? (Ancient Erudite clearly isn't.)

Are you aware that Trump has been acting really weird towards Russia since his campaign, and that we know full well that Russia was responsible for hacking Clinton's email servers, and that they started doing so around the same time as he asked them to? Are you aware that Trump has repeatedly denied the claims of his own intelligence agencies that Russia was behind that hack, and instead opted to take Putin's word for it?

People saying that Trump is a Russian asset are not simply going off his business deals. They're going off his continued behavior.

You're coming into this discussion without really understanding the basics or the background. While there's nothing wrong with that, maybe it would be better to ask questions, rather than act like you already understand everything about it.

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 01-31-2019 at 07:37 AM.
  #46  
Old 01-31-2019, 07:39 AM
YamatoTwinkie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,241
I think regardless if there's a mountain of evidence or not, If Trump is charged with a crime, many of the right wing types out there (including posters on this board) will immediately claim #3 and declare victory. All evidence will be discounted and rationalized away as either:

"manufactured by Mueller and his 27+ angry democrats, part of a deep state conspiracy!"
"perjury trap! Is lying to the FBI really a crime when the FBI already knows the answers ahead of time?"
"Hillary did the same thing, she was never charged!"
"evidence was FRUIT OF POISON TREE, since it relied on the dodgy dossier!"
  #47  
Old 01-31-2019, 07:39 AM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 22,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancient Erudite View Post
Wow, I know this board learns to the left, but the choice of #4 is a long shot. People are going to be upset here.
I mean....

https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/s...455953413?s=19
  #48  
Old 01-31-2019, 07:47 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
There will be plenty of evidence he's a criminal, but he won't be arrested or subpoenaed. That's the job of Congress.
Only by tradition, not law. And what does tradition mean with this guy, anyway?

The Constitution specifically separates impeachment from the criminal process. Nothing prevents a sitting federal official from prosecution.

Last edited by ElvisL1ves; 01-31-2019 at 07:49 AM.
  #49  
Old 01-31-2019, 07:59 AM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,825
None of the above:

Mueller has hard evidence of Trump business-related crimes but no evidence of collusion or even hints of Trump being “asset” of Putin.

Mueller will nonetheless weave Russia into the narrative of his case, though he will have to prove none of it. Media will fixate on the narrative elements and casual observers will really think Trump is being charged with having illegal or nontoward Russian connections.

Trump will be impeached and removed from office.
  #50  
Old 01-31-2019, 08:00 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 38,944
I vote -
  1. No matter what the report says, Republicans will claim it exonerates Trump
  2. No matter what the report says, Democrats will claim it proves criminal collusion beyond any shadow of a doubt, and
  3. Democrats will open another investigation.
Regards,
Shodan
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:10 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017