Mueller submits full Russia investigation report to DOJ

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

Just now, channonc said:

I think there is an important element here that no one is talking about. The report, along with the indictments, has proven that Russia did meddle in the election and was favoring Trump. With another election coming up, I would hope (but of course not expect) that we can start discussing some solutions around cybersecurity, and liability of social media in hopes of curbing them or another state in the future from doing the same.

This is far too reasonable and a central part of why Mueller was assigned this investigation in the first place.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

10 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

No dude.  It's the actual Barr report.  Click the show more tabs.  It's also all we have at the moment.

Well boy you implied it was THE Mueller report not the Barr summary. call it what you want but I don't think you can call the Barr summary a report.

[homersapien 11,366]

8 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

 

I shouldnt buy into the hype? Wait....What????

For two fricking years, I have been laughing at you buying into all this hype. 
This may be the Post of the Year...
Me buying into the hype?...this couldnt be a better statement of the level of delusion you live with daily. 

David, now you are lying again. 

Just like I never said Trump will be impeached because of Russion collusion (conspiracy), I have never guaranteed the Mueller report would conclude that he did. 

Now personally, I think the "Russian tower meeting" - along with the cover-up - qualifies as collusion.  It certainly reflects a willingness and agreement to accept Russian help (which was obtained by illegal hacking).

Unfortunately, the legal term is "conspiracy" and it apparently requires a lot more evidence than what happened in the tower meeting.

Regardless, I never expressed any confidence about the outcome of the Mueller report, even though I was eager to see it.

You're characterization of my views on this are false.

So take your schadenfreude and shove it.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 minute ago, Proud Tiger said:

Well boy you implied it was THE Mueller report not the Barr summary. call it what you want but I don't think you can call the Barr summary a report.

You inferred incorrectly (and are the only one to do so).  I've repeatedly in this thread said Barr report.  Sorry that I didn't use the word "summary" instead.  Either way, the point still stands.

[DKW 86 7,419]

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

David, now you are lying again. 

Just like I never said Trump will be impeached because of Russion collusion (conspiracy), I have never guaranteed the Mueller report would conclude that he did. 

Now personally, I think the way the "Russian tower meeting" - along with the cover-up - qualifies as collusion.  It certainly reflects a willingness and agreement to accept Russian help (which was obtained by illegal hacking).

Unfortunately, the legal term is "conspiracy" and it apparently requires a lot more evidence than what happened in the tower meeting.

Regardless, I never expressed any confidence about the outcome of the Mueller report, even though I was eager to see it.

You're characterization of my views on this are false.

 

[homersapien 11,366]

19 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

And not one of the Russians will ever answer even one of those indictments.

Indictments do not mean guilt. Ham sandwiches etc.

Indictments are a very important indicator of criminal activity, even if the persons indicted avoid trial.  That's very important in this politically laden circumstance.

And it at least it keeps them from setting foot in the US.

[homersapien 11,366]

I've noticed that Liars lean heavily on the gifs when caught.  And the bigger the better.   

It's their of avoiding the presentation of evidence to validate their claims. 

David's a prime example.

[DKW 86 7,419]

Just now, homersapien said:

Indictments are a very important indicator of criminal activity, even if the persons indicted avoid trial.  That's very important in this politically laden circumstance.

And it at least it keeps them from setting foot in the US.

It does none of that. You can indict a ham sandwich... These guys havent quit laughing at this nothing burger either. An Indictment means slightly more than nothing...It is a recommendation to proceed with charges etc. The DA doesnt even have to proceed. It may just mean that the DA is off the hook for filing the charges. Anyone here thinks they will ever be tried?? How many think they will be found guilty? How many think they will ever payout a $ in fines or court costs? 

 

[homersapien 11,366]

17 minutes ago, channonc said:

I think there is an important element here that no one is talking about. The report, along with the indictments, has proven that Russia did meddle in the election and was favoring Trump. With another election coming up, I would hope (but of course not expect) that we can start discussing some solutions around cybersecurity, and liability of social media in hopes of curbing them or another state in the future from doing the same.

Trump will never acknowledge the Russians were trying to help him.  He cares more about himself than the country.

[homersapien 11,366]

1 minute ago, DKW 86 said:

It does none of that. You can indict a ham sandwich... These guys havent quit laughing at this nothing burger either. An Indictment means slightly more than nothing...It is a recommendation to proceed with charges etc. The DA doesnt even have to proceed. It may just mean that the DA is off the hook for filing the charges. Anyone here thinks they will ever be tried?? How many think they will be found guilty? How many think they will ever payout a $ in fines or court costs? 

 

You sort of missed my point.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

22 minutes ago, channonc said:

I think there is an important element here that no one is talking about. The report, along with the indictments, has proven that Russia did meddle in the election and was favoring Trump. With another election coming up, I would hope (but of course not expect) that we can start discussing some solutions around cybersecurity, and liability of social media in hopes of curbing them or another state in the future from doing the same.

1. I think it proved that the Russians did meddle but maybe I missed it that they were favoring Trump. But it shouldn't have taken two years and $125M to find that out. It has been know for a long time that the Russians were "meddling" in our elections.

2. I sure agree we need to stop it but I assume we have been trying and haven't succeeded.

[DKW 86 7,419]

Just now, homersapien said:

You sort of missed my point.

No, I ignored your nonsensical point. Guaranteed? That is a very strange, very odd choice of word in your post above. I dont know of one post in this forum declaring you guaranteed anything. I know I never used the term. Why would you choose such an odd phrase? Maybe so you could deny something that was never said of you? homey you are the biggest and worst liar I have ever known. Truly...no one compares to you...

[DKW 86 7,419]

We meddle in all elections. The Russians and The Chinese meddle in elections. It is what nations due in foreign affairs etc. This is nothing new and nothing shocking. We spent multiple Millions of dollars ($25M to $125M) to find out that the Russians may have spent $1.3M on FB adds? Really? 

[Zeek 16,649]

1 minute ago, DKW 86 said:

We meddle in all elections. The Russians and The Chinese meddle in elections. It is what nations due in foreign affairs etc. This is nothing new and nothing shocking. We spent multiple Millions of dollars ($25M to $125M) to find out that the Russians may have spent $1.3M on FB adds? Really? 

Kind of hilarious in a sad way lol

[SaltyTiger 7,790]

3 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

We meddle in all elections. The Russians and The Chinese meddle in elections. It is what nations due in foreign affairs etc. This is nothing new and nothing shocking. We spent multiple Millions of dollars ($25M to $125M) to find out that the Russians may have spent $1.3M on FB adds? Really? 

The Russians have been meddling in elections since 1948. Funny how it suddenly became so important.

[kd4au 1,145]

1 hour ago, Brad_ATX said:

Did any of y'all actually read the Barr report or are you just spewing nonsense?  Mueller did not implicate or exonerate Trump on obstruction.  He said there wasn't enough to make a clear determination one way or another.

How is this so hard to understand?

Don't you think if they had found any tiny bit of evidence on Trump there would have been charges?

[Zeek 16,649]

1 minute ago, SaltyTiger said:

The Russians have been meddling in elections since 1948. Funny how it suddenly became so important.

I just want a better definition of "meddle". It's not like they were stuffing ballot boxes in south Florida.

[Zeek 16,649]

Just now, kd4au said:

Don't you think if they had found any tiny bit of evidence on Trump there would have been charges?

Hell yes they would have nutted at the opportunity to charge him.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 minute ago, kd4au said:

Don't you think if they had found any tiny bit of evidence on Trump there would have been charges?

Please read through the thread first before commenting.  I have no intention of re-litigating what I've already said here 

[SaltyTiger 7,790]

14 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Trump will never acknowledge the Russians were trying to help him.

and you nor the media will ever apologize to us good and decent people for all the lies and collusion crap. Two and half years of it. Precious time wasted.

[homersapien 11,366]

15 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

The Russians have been meddling in elections since 1948. Funny how it suddenly became so important.

Well, largely due to the way the internet has changed the political environment, and the closeness of the election, this is probably the first one they had a real possibility of actually influencing.

That gets people's attention.

 

[homersapien 11,366]

10 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

and you nor the media will ever apologize to us good and decent people for all the lies and collusion crap. Two and half years of it. Precious time wasted.

So are you denying the Russians tried to help Trump defeat Clinton?

And seriously, "apologize" for investigating it??

[homersapien 11,366]

15 minutes ago, kd4au said:

Don't you think if they had found any tiny bit of evidence on Trump there would have been charges?

Nope.  "Tiny bits" of evidence don't generate indictments. 

Of course, DOJ policy holds Trump immune from indictment in the first place.

[homersapien 11,366]

31 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

No, I ignored your nonsensical point. Guaranteed? That is a very strange, very odd choice of word in your post above. I dont know of one post in this forum declaring you guaranteed anything. I know I never used the term. Why would you choose such an odd phrase? Maybe so you could deny something that was never said of you? homey you are the biggest and worst liar I have ever known. Truly...no one compares to you...

Just because you don't understand someone's point doesn't mean it's a lie. The appropriate response is to ask for clarification.

And it's possible to disagree with someone's point when you do understand it without calling them a liar.

And calling someone a liar - in particular the worst liar you have ever known - without actually producing the lie is nothing more than pathetic poo flinging.

You are one strange dude.  Fortunately, you are self-revealing.

[DKW 86 7,419]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

Just because you don't understand someone's point doesn't mean it's a lie. 

You are one strange dude.  Fortunately, you are self-revealing.

But revealing your points and very odd methods does reveal you as a liar.