Skip to main content

Reply to "Say Something Completely Random And Off Topic"

napacat posted:
bman posted:
napacat posted:

 according to the AG and deputy AG, no obstruction.  

My point was just about Trump's despicable attack on McCain, but since you raised the Mueller report, I'll get to that in a minute.  Meanwhile, you made a factual error in saying that McCain "peddled"  the dossier in question.  Here is what actually happened, according to the Arizona AG (a Republican):  "He got the information and he read it and it's pretty explosive. He immediately delivered it to the FBI and said this is for you all to deal with. That's what a statesman does. That's what a good American does. And that's what John McCain did. "  No "peddling" involved.  He received a document worthy of investigation by law enforcement on its merits and did the right thing with it.

As for the Mueller report, you made another factual error, Napa.  You said there was no obstruction but that's not what the report said:  

""Mr. Barr also said that Mr. Mueller’s team drew no conclusions about whether Mr. Trump illegally obstructed justice. Mr. Barr and the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, determined that the special counsel’s investigators lacked sufficient evidence to establish that Mr. Trump committed that offense, but added that Mr. Mueller’s team stopped short of exonerating Mr. Trump.

“While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,” Mr. Barr quoted Mr. Mueller as writing.""

It's pretty obvious to everyone Napa, from the terminology you use above, that you take your so-called "facts" from Fox, or perhaps Breitbart and other right-wing Trump sycophants rather than from credible objective sources.  You may wish to check out reporting from the BBC, CBC or another foreign source that is not in the camp of either side of the American political divide.

Finally, how is something that has led the conviction of several of Trump's top campaign people, and dozens of Russians, BS or a sham?  Any patriotic American would be pleased to see these attacks on democracy and criminals exposed.  Which says a lot about your hero Trump!

Bman, there are a lot of things wrong with your post.  Peddling may have been the wrong word...but I don't think McCain had the document first.  It was a bunch of unsubstantiated drivel and was purely fake.  That document did not warrant investigation by law enforcement if they would have done any research and saw where it derived from, they would have disregarded it.

Correct that the Mueller report did not absolve of obstruction...however, if you read my post...I stated that the AG and Deputy AG concluded there was not enough information for a charge on obstruction.  

Lastly, your statement that this investigation led to the conviction of several of Trump's top campaign people...none of the convictions had anything to do with Russian collusion. Don't mislead...a complete farce. 

Napa, you can't even read your own words?    You said; "according to the AG and deputy AG, no obstruction" and now you deny saying it? It's right there for God's sake!  Have some intellectual integrity please!

As for the document, if it was fake the only way to know would be an investigation by law enforcement.  The information was assembled by a credible source (a former intelligence official if I recall correctly) whatever Fox news says, and included allegations that any law enforcement agency would feel it necessary to investigate.

As for your last statement above, wrong again.  Several were convicted for lying to Congress and/or law enforcement, and it seems pretty clear that those lies pertained to Russian collusion.  Why would they have lied if they didn't?  

In any case, the Mueller investigation is anything but a farce.  Even if it had revealed nothing it was necessary given the events that led to its creation.  Again, try watching other news sources to get a balanced view of things.  I don't get Fox news here in Canada (I could, but won't pay for the, umm, "privilege") but I do check out their website and Breitbart's too, from time to time.  I suggest you do the same with BBC or CBC or The Economist or some other objective source.