***DONALD J TRUMP HAS OFFICIALLY BEEN IMPEACHED***

1…285286288290291…506

Comments

  • OnWis97
    OnWis97 St. Paul, MN Posts: 5,610
    edited June 2019
    "THE FIELD"
    Jason P said:
    Mueller has already stated he will only make comments on what he wrote in the Mueller report if subpoena is issued for testimony.  
    In theory, though, that could be quite valuable, since it should contradict the things Barr said about it.

    (but, no, this ain't gonna matter)
    Post edited by OnWis97 on
    1995 Milwaukee     1998 Alpine, Alpine     2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston     2004 Boston, Boston     2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)     2011 Alpine, Alpine     
    2013 Wrigley     2014 St. Paul     2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley     2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley     2021 Asbury Park     2022 St Louis     2023 Austin, Austin
    2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,594
    2019
    Jason P said:
    Mueller has already stated he will only make comments on what he wrote in the Mueller report if subpoena is issued for testimony.  
    And most of the country has not read the report so...
    www.myspace.com
  • njnancy
    njnancy Posts: 5,096
    edited June 2019
    2019
    We only need him to state in clear terms the most important parts of the report - both Part 1 (Conspiracy) and Part 2 (Obstruction) -

    If he only reads or answers questions that relate exactly to -

    - Manafort handing over polling data from the crucial states to the Russians at the cigar bar

    - simply stating who took the 5th when questioned leaving him unable to draw conclusions in Part 1

    - the same for people who destroyed evidence, deleted texts and emails or used encrypted apps to communicate (Part 1)

    - pointing out the elements of the 4 or 5 times when Trump met all qualifications for obstruction

    - explaining how he obstructed the other 5 or 6 times and how the only way he didn't successfully obstruct was because he was either an incompetent obstructer or his administration ignored his demands.

    - how many times did people who work for him NOT listen to his orders

    - how many contacts were there between the administration/transition/campaign and Russians

    - how is this number comparable to prior campaigns and is he aware of this occurring in prior campaigns 

    = why did he fail to either indict or exonerate Trump and his family

    - if there was no DOJ policy on indicting a President in office, would he have indicted Trump

    - was there collusion between the Trump gang and Russians

    - when the President says NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION is he correct

    - what happened to the original inquiry into whether there was a criminal conspiracy occuring between the campaign and Russia

    - was Trump ever considered to possibly be an asset of the Russian government 

    - did Trump comply completely with your office as he has stated

    - what was he asked in his written questions, why were there no questions on obstruction and what were his answers

    - do you think that Trump is a national security threat

    - what were the interactions between you and AG Barr and has he misrepresented you or your report in any way

    - did the AG cause you to wrap up your investigation

    - did you have 14 (or 16) angry Democrats working with you against Trump, is this intimidation or tampering

    - make him say that Trump obstructed justice instead of his convoluted if i could exonerate i would. People don't get that.

    - make it clear that collusion DID occur on many occasions but that is not a criminal offense - conspiracy was not met not because it was exhaustively investigated but in part because information was withheld or destroyed.



    They should give the time to the best questioners - Harris, Klobuchar, etc - people who have prosecutorial experience and know how to ask pointed questions in a simple, quick manner which will produce an answer which cannot be danced around. Others can have shorter time to ask a question, but the best should be given more time.  

    The Republicans should go first and do whatever it is that they do and then the Democrats should go. This will erase the inane direction of the Republicans and allow the Democrats to have uninterrupted time to get the facts. The first question the Democrats should ask is if Mueller has any thoughts on why the Republicans have misinterpreted his report.

    A 'you can't handle the truth' moment would be awesome - particularly to that asshole from Ohio (Jim something, brain malfunction), but it won't happen. JIM JORDAN - who doesn't own a suit. (just remembered)

    If he just reads particular parts of the report that are pinpointed by the Democrats - that would be more information of which most Americans are aware. People have no clue what is in there, they think Trump did nothing. 

    His cult will not be swayed, but normal Americans who are not paying attention to the news except for talking points here or there will get the truth instead of what AG Barr and Repubs fed the news.

    It won't be the silver bullet to Trump's ouster, but it will be watched by many millions and people will be more informed. And Mueller is not a witness that they can sully, no matter how hard they will try. 


    It should be pointed out that when he says that his report speaks for itself - not only have most Americans not read it and won't read it but most people in Congress and the administration have not read it, only the summaries if anything.  He cannot expect people to understand over 400 pages of anything, let alone a lot of legal writing. It needs to be explained and he is the man to do it.  

    Post edited by njnancy on
  • njnancy
    njnancy Posts: 5,096
    2019
    Most Americans wouldn't read my entire post above, so reading the Report is a ridiculous ask.
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,594
    edited June 2019
    2019
    njnancy said:
    We only need him to state in clear terms the most important parts of the report - both Part 1 (Conspiracy) and Part 2 (Obstruction) -

    If he only reads or answers questions that relate exactly to -

    - Manafort handing over polling data from the crucial states to the Russians at the cigar bar

    - simply stating who took the 5th when questioned leaving him unable to draw conclusions in Part 1

    - the same for people who destroyed evidence, deleted texts and emails or used encrypted apps to communicate (Part 1)

    - pointing out the elements of the 4 or 5 times when Trump met all qualifications for obstruction

    - explaining how he obstructed the other 5 or 6 times and how the only way he didn't successfully obstruct was because he was either an incompetent obstructer or his administration ignored his demands.

    - how many times did people who work for him NOT listen to his orders

    - how many contacts were there between the administration/transition/campaign and Russians

    - how is this number comparable to prior campaigns and is he aware of this occurring in prior campaigns 

    = why did he fail to either indict or exonerate Trump and his family

    - if there was no DOJ policy on indicting a President in office, would he have indicted Trump

    - was there collusion between the Trump gang and Russians

    - when the President says NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION is he correct

    - what happened to the original inquiry into whether there was a criminal conspiracy occuring between the campaign and Russia

    - was Trump ever considered to possibly be an asset of the Russian government 

    - did Trump comply completely with your office as he has stated

    - what was he asked in his written questions, why were there no questions on obstruction and what were his answers

    - do you think that Trump is a national security threat

    - what were the interactions between you and AG Barr and has he misrepresented you or your report in any way

    - did the AG cause you to wrap up your investigation

    - did you have 14 (or 16) angry Democrats working with you against Trump, is this intimidation or tampering

    - make him say that Trump obstructed justice instead of his convoluted if i could exonerate i would. People don't get that.

    - make it clear that collusion DID occur on many occasions but that is not a criminal offense - conspiracy was not met not because it was exhaustively investigated but in part because information was withheld or destroyed.



    They should give the time to the best questioners - Harris, Klobuchar, etc - people who have prosecutorial experience and know how to ask pointed questions in a simple, quick manner which will produce an answer which cannot be danced around. Others can have shorter time to ask a question, but the best should be given more time.  

    The Republicans should go first and do whatever it is that they do and then the Democrats should go. This will erase the inane direction of the Republicans and allow the Democrats to have uninterrupted time to get the facts. The first question the Democrats should ask is if Mueller has any thoughts on why the Republicans have misinterpreted his report.

    A 'you can't handle the truth' moment would be awesome - particularly to that asshole from Ohio (Jim something, brain malfunction), but it won't happen. JIM JORDAN - who doesn't own a suit. (just remembered)

    If he just reads particular parts of the report that are pinpointed by the Democrats - that would be more information of which most Americans are aware. People have no clue what is in there, they think Trump did nothing. 

    His cult will not be swayed, but normal Americans who are not paying attention to the news except for talking points here or there will get the truth instead of what AG Barr and Repubs fed the news.

    It won't be the silver bullet to Trump's ouster, but it will be watched by many millions and people will be more informed. And Mueller is not a witness that they can sully, no matter how hard they will try. 


    It should be pointed out that when he says that his report speaks for itself - not only have most Americans not read it and won't read it but most people in Congress and the administration have not read it, only the summaries if anything.  He cannot expect people to understand over 400 pages of anything, let alone a lot of legal writing. It needs to be explained and he is the man to do it.  

    THIS is what matters most....always has.
    www.myspace.com
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    njnancy said:
    We only need him to state in clear terms the most important parts of the report - both Part 1 (Conspiracy) and Part 2 (Obstruction) -

    If he only reads or answers questions that relate exactly to -

    - Manafort handing over polling data from the crucial states to the Russians at the cigar bar

    - simply stating who took the 5th when questioned leaving him unable to draw conclusions in Part 1

    - the same for people who destroyed evidence, deleted texts and emails or used encrypted apps to communicate (Part 1)

    - pointing out the elements of the 4 or 5 times when Trump met all qualifications for obstruction

    - explaining how he obstructed the other 5 or 6 times and how the only way he didn't successfully obstruct was because he was either an incompetent obstructer or his administration ignored his demands.

    - how many times did people who work for him NOT listen to his orders

    - how many contacts were there between the administration/transition/campaign and Russians

    - how is this number comparable to prior campaigns and is he aware of this occurring in prior campaigns 

    = why did he fail to either indict or exonerate Trump and his family

    - if there was no DOJ policy on indicting a President in office, would he have indicted Trump

    - was there collusion between the Trump gang and Russians

    - when the President says NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION is he correct

    - what happened to the original inquiry into whether there was a criminal conspiracy occuring between the campaign and Russia

    - was Trump ever considered to possibly be an asset of the Russian government 

    - did Trump comply completely with your office as he has stated

    - what was he asked in his written questions, why were there no questions on obstruction and what were his answers

    - do you think that Trump is a national security threat

    - what were the interactions between you and AG Barr and has he misrepresented you or your report in any way

    - did the AG cause you to wrap up your investigation

    - did you have 14 (or 16) angry Democrats working with you against Trump, is this intimidation or tampering

    - make him say that Trump obstructed justice instead of his convoluted if i could exonerate i would. People don't get that.

    - make it clear that collusion DID occur on many occasions but that is not a criminal offense - conspiracy was not met not because it was exhaustively investigated but in part because information was withheld or destroyed.



    They should give the time to the best questioners - Harris, Klobuchar, etc - people who have prosecutorial experience and know how to ask pointed questions in a simple, quick manner which will produce an answer which cannot be danced around. Others can have shorter time to ask a question, but the best should be given more time.  

    The Republicans should go first and do whatever it is that they do and then the Democrats should go. This will erase the inane direction of the Republicans and allow the Democrats to have uninterrupted time to get the facts. The first question the Democrats should ask is if Mueller has any thoughts on why the Republicans have misinterpreted his report.

    A 'you can't handle the truth' moment would be awesome - particularly to that asshole from Ohio (Jim something, brain malfunction), but it won't happen. JIM JORDAN - who doesn't own a suit. (just remembered)

    If he just reads particular parts of the report that are pinpointed by the Democrats - that would be more information of which most Americans are aware. People have no clue what is in there, they think Trump did nothing. 

    His cult will not be swayed, but normal Americans who are not paying attention to the news except for talking points here or there will get the truth instead of what AG Barr and Repubs fed the news.

    It won't be the silver bullet to Trump's ouster, but it will be watched by many millions and people will be more informed. And Mueller is not a witness that they can sully, no matter how hard they will try. 


    It should be pointed out that when he says that his report speaks for itself - not only have most Americans not read it and won't read it but most people in Congress and the administration have not read it, only the summaries if anything.  He cannot expect people to understand over 400 pages of anything, let alone a lot of legal writing. It needs to be explained and he is the man to do it.  

    TLDR
  • njnancy
    njnancy Posts: 5,096
    2019
    dignin said:
    njnancy said:
    We only need him to state in clear terms the most important parts of the report - both Part 1 (Conspiracy) and Part 2 (Obstruction) -

    If he only reads or answers questions that relate exactly to -

    - Manafort handing over polling data from the crucial states to the Russians at the cigar bar

    - simply stating who took the 5th when questioned leaving him unable to draw conclusions in Part 1

    - the same for people who destroyed evidence, deleted texts and emails or used encrypted apps to communicate (Part 1)

    - pointing out the elements of the 4 or 5 times when Trump met all qualifications for obstruction

    - explaining how he obstructed the other 5 or 6 times and how the only way he didn't successfully obstruct was because he was either an incompetent obstructer or his administration ignored his demands.

    - how many times did people who work for him NOT listen to his orders

    - how many contacts were there between the administration/transition/campaign and Russians

    - how is this number comparable to prior campaigns and is he aware of this occurring in prior campaigns 

    = why did he fail to either indict or exonerate Trump and his family

    - if there was no DOJ policy on indicting a President in office, would he have indicted Trump

    - was there collusion between the Trump gang and Russians

    - when the President says NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION is he correct

    - what happened to the original inquiry into whether there was a criminal conspiracy occuring between the campaign and Russia

    - was Trump ever considered to possibly be an asset of the Russian government 

    - did Trump comply completely with your office as he has stated

    - what was he asked in his written questions, why were there no questions on obstruction and what were his answers

    - do you think that Trump is a national security threat

    - what were the interactions between you and AG Barr and has he misrepresented you or your report in any way

    - did the AG cause you to wrap up your investigation

    - did you have 14 (or 16) angry Democrats working with you against Trump, is this intimidation or tampering

    - make him say that Trump obstructed justice instead of his convoluted if i could exonerate i would. People don't get that.

    - make it clear that collusion DID occur on many occasions but that is not a criminal offense - conspiracy was not met not because it was exhaustively investigated but in part because information was withheld or destroyed.



    They should give the time to the best questioners - Harris, Klobuchar, etc - people who have prosecutorial experience and know how to ask pointed questions in a simple, quick manner which will produce an answer which cannot be danced around. Others can have shorter time to ask a question, but the best should be given more time.  

    The Republicans should go first and do whatever it is that they do and then the Democrats should go. This will erase the inane direction of the Republicans and allow the Democrats to have uninterrupted time to get the facts. The first question the Democrats should ask is if Mueller has any thoughts on why the Republicans have misinterpreted his report.

    A 'you can't handle the truth' moment would be awesome - particularly to that asshole from Ohio (Jim something, brain malfunction), but it won't happen. JIM JORDAN - who doesn't own a suit. (just remembered)

    If he just reads particular parts of the report that are pinpointed by the Democrats - that would be more information of which most Americans are aware. People have no clue what is in there, they think Trump did nothing. 

    His cult will not be swayed, but normal Americans who are not paying attention to the news except for talking points here or there will get the truth instead of what AG Barr and Repubs fed the news.

    It won't be the silver bullet to Trump's ouster, but it will be watched by many millions and people will be more informed. And Mueller is not a witness that they can sully, no matter how hard they will try. 


    It should be pointed out that when he says that his report speaks for itself - not only have most Americans not read it and won't read it but most people in Congress and the administration have not read it, only the summaries if anything.  He cannot expect people to understand over 400 pages of anything, let alone a lot of legal writing. It needs to be explained and he is the man to do it.  

    TLDR
    No need to let me know, just go to next post. 

    I will post how I post and you will read as you read.
  • njnancy
    njnancy Posts: 5,096
    2019
    njnancy said:
    dignin said:
    njnancy said:
    We only need him to state in clear terms the most important parts of the report - both Part 1 (Conspiracy) and Part 2 (Obstruction) -

    If he only reads or answers questions that relate exactly to -

    - Manafort handing over polling data from the crucial states to the Russians at the cigar bar

    - simply stating who took the 5th when questioned leaving him unable to draw conclusions in Part 1

    - the same for people who destroyed evidence, deleted texts and emails or used encrypted apps to communicate (Part 1)

    - pointing out the elements of the 4 or 5 times when Trump met all qualifications for obstruction

    - explaining how he obstructed the other 5 or 6 times and how the only way he didn't successfully obstruct was because he was either an incompetent obstructer or his administration ignored his demands.

    - how many times did people who work for him NOT listen to his orders

    - how many contacts were there between the administration/transition/campaign and Russians

    - how is this number comparable to prior campaigns and is he aware of this occurring in prior campaigns 

    = why did he fail to either indict or exonerate Trump and his family

    - if there was no DOJ policy on indicting a President in office, would he have indicted Trump

    - was there collusion between the Trump gang and Russians

    - when the President says NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION is he correct

    - what happened to the original inquiry into whether there was a criminal conspiracy occuring between the campaign and Russia

    - was Trump ever considered to possibly be an asset of the Russian government 

    - did Trump comply completely with your office as he has stated

    - what was he asked in his written questions, why were there no questions on obstruction and what were his answers

    - do you think that Trump is a national security threat

    - what were the interactions between you and AG Barr and has he misrepresented you or your report in any way

    - did the AG cause you to wrap up your investigation

    - did you have 14 (or 16) angry Democrats working with you against Trump, is this intimidation or tampering

    - make him say that Trump obstructed justice instead of his convoluted if i could exonerate i would. People don't get that.

    - make it clear that collusion DID occur on many occasions but that is not a criminal offense - conspiracy was not met not because it was exhaustively investigated but in part because information was withheld or destroyed.



    They should give the time to the best questioners - Harris, Klobuchar, etc - people who have prosecutorial experience and know how to ask pointed questions in a simple, quick manner which will produce an answer which cannot be danced around. Others can have shorter time to ask a question, but the best should be given more time.  

    The Republicans should go first and do whatever it is that they do and then the Democrats should go. This will erase the inane direction of the Republicans and allow the Democrats to have uninterrupted time to get the facts. The first question the Democrats should ask is if Mueller has any thoughts on why the Republicans have misinterpreted his report.

    A 'you can't handle the truth' moment would be awesome - particularly to that asshole from Ohio (Jim something, brain malfunction), but it won't happen. JIM JORDAN - who doesn't own a suit. (just remembered)

    If he just reads particular parts of the report that are pinpointed by the Democrats - that would be more information of which most Americans are aware. People have no clue what is in there, they think Trump did nothing. 

    His cult will not be swayed, but normal Americans who are not paying attention to the news except for talking points here or there will get the truth instead of what AG Barr and Repubs fed the news.

    It won't be the silver bullet to Trump's ouster, but it will be watched by many millions and people will be more informed. And Mueller is not a witness that they can sully, no matter how hard they will try. 


    It should be pointed out that when he says that his report speaks for itself - not only have most Americans not read it and won't read it but most people in Congress and the administration have not read it, only the summaries if anything.  He cannot expect people to understand over 400 pages of anything, let alone a lot of legal writing. It needs to be explained and he is the man to do it.  

    TLDR
    No need to let me know, just go to next post. 

    I will post how I post and you will read as you read.
    njnancy said:
    Most Americans wouldn't read my entire post above, so reading the Report is a ridiculous ask.

  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    njnancy said:
    dignin said:
    njnancy said:
    We only need him to state in clear terms the most important parts of the report - both Part 1 (Conspiracy) and Part 2 (Obstruction) -

    If he only reads or answers questions that relate exactly to -

    - Manafort handing over polling data from the crucial states to the Russians at the cigar bar

    - simply stating who took the 5th when questioned leaving him unable to draw conclusions in Part 1

    - the same for people who destroyed evidence, deleted texts and emails or used encrypted apps to communicate (Part 1)

    - pointing out the elements of the 4 or 5 times when Trump met all qualifications for obstruction

    - explaining how he obstructed the other 5 or 6 times and how the only way he didn't successfully obstruct was because he was either an incompetent obstructer or his administration ignored his demands.

    - how many times did people who work for him NOT listen to his orders

    - how many contacts were there between the administration/transition/campaign and Russians

    - how is this number comparable to prior campaigns and is he aware of this occurring in prior campaigns 

    = why did he fail to either indict or exonerate Trump and his family

    - if there was no DOJ policy on indicting a President in office, would he have indicted Trump

    - was there collusion between the Trump gang and Russians

    - when the President says NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION is he correct

    - what happened to the original inquiry into whether there was a criminal conspiracy occuring between the campaign and Russia

    - was Trump ever considered to possibly be an asset of the Russian government 

    - did Trump comply completely with your office as he has stated

    - what was he asked in his written questions, why were there no questions on obstruction and what were his answers

    - do you think that Trump is a national security threat

    - what were the interactions between you and AG Barr and has he misrepresented you or your report in any way

    - did the AG cause you to wrap up your investigation

    - did you have 14 (or 16) angry Democrats working with you against Trump, is this intimidation or tampering

    - make him say that Trump obstructed justice instead of his convoluted if i could exonerate i would. People don't get that.

    - make it clear that collusion DID occur on many occasions but that is not a criminal offense - conspiracy was not met not because it was exhaustively investigated but in part because information was withheld or destroyed.



    They should give the time to the best questioners - Harris, Klobuchar, etc - people who have prosecutorial experience and know how to ask pointed questions in a simple, quick manner which will produce an answer which cannot be danced around. Others can have shorter time to ask a question, but the best should be given more time.  

    The Republicans should go first and do whatever it is that they do and then the Democrats should go. This will erase the inane direction of the Republicans and allow the Democrats to have uninterrupted time to get the facts. The first question the Democrats should ask is if Mueller has any thoughts on why the Republicans have misinterpreted his report.

    A 'you can't handle the truth' moment would be awesome - particularly to that asshole from Ohio (Jim something, brain malfunction), but it won't happen. JIM JORDAN - who doesn't own a suit. (just remembered)

    If he just reads particular parts of the report that are pinpointed by the Democrats - that would be more information of which most Americans are aware. People have no clue what is in there, they think Trump did nothing. 

    His cult will not be swayed, but normal Americans who are not paying attention to the news except for talking points here or there will get the truth instead of what AG Barr and Repubs fed the news.

    It won't be the silver bullet to Trump's ouster, but it will be watched by many millions and people will be more informed. And Mueller is not a witness that they can sully, no matter how hard they will try. 


    It should be pointed out that when he says that his report speaks for itself - not only have most Americans not read it and won't read it but most people in Congress and the administration have not read it, only the summaries if anything.  He cannot expect people to understand over 400 pages of anything, let alone a lot of legal writing. It needs to be explained and he is the man to do it.  

    TLDR
    No need to let me know, just go to next post. 

    I will post how I post and you will read as you read.
    I was a actually thinking dignin was joking, given your comment about most Americans not reading it, but I could be wrong. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    oftenreading said:
    njnancy said:
    dignin said:
    njnancy said:
    We only need him to state in clear terms the most important parts of the report - both Part 1 (Conspiracy) and Part 2 (Obstruction) -

    If he only reads or answers questions that relate exactly to -

    - Manafort handing over polling data from the crucial states to the Russians at the cigar bar

    - simply stating who took the 5th when questioned leaving him unable to draw conclusions in Part 1

    - the same for people who destroyed evidence, deleted texts and emails or used encrypted apps to communicate (Part 1)

    - pointing out the elements of the 4 or 5 times when Trump met all qualifications for obstruction

    - explaining how he obstructed the other 5 or 6 times and how the only way he didn't successfully obstruct was because he was either an incompetent obstructer or his administration ignored his demands.

    - how many times did people who work for him NOT listen to his orders

    - how many contacts were there between the administration/transition/campaign and Russians

    - how is this number comparable to prior campaigns and is he aware of this occurring in prior campaigns 

    = why did he fail to either indict or exonerate Trump and his family

    - if there was no DOJ policy on indicting a President in office, would he have indicted Trump

    - was there collusion between the Trump gang and Russians

    - when the President says NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION is he correct

    - what happened to the original inquiry into whether there was a criminal conspiracy occuring between the campaign and Russia

    - was Trump ever considered to possibly be an asset of the Russian government 

    - did Trump comply completely with your office as he has stated

    - what was he asked in his written questions, why were there no questions on obstruction and what were his answers

    - do you think that Trump is a national security threat

    - what were the interactions between you and AG Barr and has he misrepresented you or your report in any way

    - did the AG cause you to wrap up your investigation

    - did you have 14 (or 16) angry Democrats working with you against Trump, is this intimidation or tampering

    - make him say that Trump obstructed justice instead of his convoluted if i could exonerate i would. People don't get that.

    - make it clear that collusion DID occur on many occasions but that is not a criminal offense - conspiracy was not met not because it was exhaustively investigated but in part because information was withheld or destroyed.



    They should give the time to the best questioners - Harris, Klobuchar, etc - people who have prosecutorial experience and know how to ask pointed questions in a simple, quick manner which will produce an answer which cannot be danced around. Others can have shorter time to ask a question, but the best should be given more time.  

    The Republicans should go first and do whatever it is that they do and then the Democrats should go. This will erase the inane direction of the Republicans and allow the Democrats to have uninterrupted time to get the facts. The first question the Democrats should ask is if Mueller has any thoughts on why the Republicans have misinterpreted his report.

    A 'you can't handle the truth' moment would be awesome - particularly to that asshole from Ohio (Jim something, brain malfunction), but it won't happen. JIM JORDAN - who doesn't own a suit. (just remembered)

    If he just reads particular parts of the report that are pinpointed by the Democrats - that would be more information of which most Americans are aware. People have no clue what is in there, they think Trump did nothing. 

    His cult will not be swayed, but normal Americans who are not paying attention to the news except for talking points here or there will get the truth instead of what AG Barr and Repubs fed the news.

    It won't be the silver bullet to Trump's ouster, but it will be watched by many millions and people will be more informed. And Mueller is not a witness that they can sully, no matter how hard they will try. 


    It should be pointed out that when he says that his report speaks for itself - not only have most Americans not read it and won't read it but most people in Congress and the administration have not read it, only the summaries if anything.  He cannot expect people to understand over 400 pages of anything, let alone a lot of legal writing. It needs to be explained and he is the man to do it.  

    TLDR
    No need to let me know, just go to next post. 

    I will post how I post and you will read as you read.
    I was a actually thinking dignin was joking, given your comment about most Americans not reading it, but I could be wrong. 
    I thought it was obvious, guess not.
  • njnancy
    njnancy Posts: 5,096
    edited June 2019
    2019
    dignin said:
    oftenreading said:
    njnancy said:
    dignin said:
    njnancy said:
    We only need him to state in clear terms the most important parts of the report - both Part 1 (Conspiracy) and Part 2 (Obstruction) -

    If he only reads or answers questions that relate exactly to -

    - Manafort handing over polling data from the crucial states to the Russians at the cigar bar

    - simply stating who took the 5th when questioned leaving him unable to draw conclusions in Part 1

    - the same for people who destroyed evidence, deleted texts and emails or used encrypted apps to communicate (Part 1)

    - pointing out the elements of the 4 or 5 times when Trump met all qualifications for obstruction

    - explaining how he obstructed the other 5 or 6 times and how the only way he didn't successfully obstruct was because he was either an incompetent obstructer or his administration ignored his demands.

    - how many times did people who work for him NOT listen to his orders

    - how many contacts were there between the administration/transition/campaign and Russians

    - how is this number comparable to prior campaigns and is he aware of this occurring in prior campaigns 

    = why did he fail to either indict or exonerate Trump and his family

    - if there was no DOJ policy on indicting a President in office, would he have indicted Trump

    - was there collusion between the Trump gang and Russians

    - when the President says NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION is he correct

    - what happened to the original inquiry into whether there was a criminal conspiracy occuring between the campaign and Russia

    - was Trump ever considered to possibly be an asset of the Russian government 

    - did Trump comply completely with your office as he has stated

    - what was he asked in his written questions, why were there no questions on obstruction and what were his answers

    - do you think that Trump is a national security threat

    - what were the interactions between you and AG Barr and has he misrepresented you or your report in any way

    - did the AG cause you to wrap up your investigation

    - did you have 14 (or 16) angry Democrats working with you against Trump, is this intimidation or tampering

    - make him say that Trump obstructed justice instead of his convoluted if i could exonerate i would. People don't get that.

    - make it clear that collusion DID occur on many occasions but that is not a criminal offense - conspiracy was not met not because it was exhaustively investigated but in part because information was withheld or destroyed.



    They should give the time to the best questioners - Harris, Klobuchar, etc - people who have prosecutorial experience and know how to ask pointed questions in a simple, quick manner which will produce an answer which cannot be danced around. Others can have shorter time to ask a question, but the best should be given more time.  

    The Republicans should go first and do whatever it is that they do and then the Democrats should go. This will erase the inane direction of the Republicans and allow the Democrats to have uninterrupted time to get the facts. The first question the Democrats should ask is if Mueller has any thoughts on why the Republicans have misinterpreted his report.

    A 'you can't handle the truth' moment would be awesome - particularly to that asshole from Ohio (Jim something, brain malfunction), but it won't happen. JIM JORDAN - who doesn't own a suit. (just remembered)

    If he just reads particular parts of the report that are pinpointed by the Democrats - that would be more information of which most Americans are aware. People have no clue what is in there, they think Trump did nothing. 

    His cult will not be swayed, but normal Americans who are not paying attention to the news except for talking points here or there will get the truth instead of what AG Barr and Repubs fed the news.

    It won't be the silver bullet to Trump's ouster, but it will be watched by many millions and people will be more informed. And Mueller is not a witness that they can sully, no matter how hard they will try. 


    It should be pointed out that when he says that his report speaks for itself - not only have most Americans not read it and won't read it but most people in Congress and the administration have not read it, only the summaries if anything.  He cannot expect people to understand over 400 pages of anything, let alone a lot of legal writing. It needs to be explained and he is the man to do it.  

    TLDR
    No need to let me know, just go to next post. 

    I will post how I post and you will read as you read.
    I was a actually thinking dignin was joking, given your comment about most Americans not reading it, but I could be wrong. 
    I thought it was obvious, guess not.
    Sorry dignin. I didn't even think of that. (and I had to google TLDR, lol)
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    njnancy said:
    dignin said:
    oftenreading said:
    njnancy said:
    dignin said:
    njnancy said:
    We only need him to state in clear terms the most important parts of the report - both Part 1 (Conspiracy) and Part 2 (Obstruction) -

    If he only reads or answers questions that relate exactly to -

    - Manafort handing over polling data from the crucial states to the Russians at the cigar bar

    - simply stating who took the 5th when questioned leaving him unable to draw conclusions in Part 1

    - the same for people who destroyed evidence, deleted texts and emails or used encrypted apps to communicate (Part 1)

    - pointing out the elements of the 4 or 5 times when Trump met all qualifications for obstruction

    - explaining how he obstructed the other 5 or 6 times and how the only way he didn't successfully obstruct was because he was either an incompetent obstructer or his administration ignored his demands.

    - how many times did people who work for him NOT listen to his orders

    - how many contacts were there between the administration/transition/campaign and Russians

    - how is this number comparable to prior campaigns and is he aware of this occurring in prior campaigns 

    = why did he fail to either indict or exonerate Trump and his family

    - if there was no DOJ policy on indicting a President in office, would he have indicted Trump

    - was there collusion between the Trump gang and Russians

    - when the President says NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION is he correct

    - what happened to the original inquiry into whether there was a criminal conspiracy occuring between the campaign and Russia

    - was Trump ever considered to possibly be an asset of the Russian government 

    - did Trump comply completely with your office as he has stated

    - what was he asked in his written questions, why were there no questions on obstruction and what were his answers

    - do you think that Trump is a national security threat

    - what were the interactions between you and AG Barr and has he misrepresented you or your report in any way

    - did the AG cause you to wrap up your investigation

    - did you have 14 (or 16) angry Democrats working with you against Trump, is this intimidation or tampering

    - make him say that Trump obstructed justice instead of his convoluted if i could exonerate i would. People don't get that.

    - make it clear that collusion DID occur on many occasions but that is not a criminal offense - conspiracy was not met not because it was exhaustively investigated but in part because information was withheld or destroyed.



    They should give the time to the best questioners - Harris, Klobuchar, etc - people who have prosecutorial experience and know how to ask pointed questions in a simple, quick manner which will produce an answer which cannot be danced around. Others can have shorter time to ask a question, but the best should be given more time.  

    The Republicans should go first and do whatever it is that they do and then the Democrats should go. This will erase the inane direction of the Republicans and allow the Democrats to have uninterrupted time to get the facts. The first question the Democrats should ask is if Mueller has any thoughts on why the Republicans have misinterpreted his report.

    A 'you can't handle the truth' moment would be awesome - particularly to that asshole from Ohio (Jim something, brain malfunction), but it won't happen. JIM JORDAN - who doesn't own a suit. (just remembered)

    If he just reads particular parts of the report that are pinpointed by the Democrats - that would be more information of which most Americans are aware. People have no clue what is in there, they think Trump did nothing. 

    His cult will not be swayed, but normal Americans who are not paying attention to the news except for talking points here or there will get the truth instead of what AG Barr and Repubs fed the news.

    It won't be the silver bullet to Trump's ouster, but it will be watched by many millions and people will be more informed. And Mueller is not a witness that they can sully, no matter how hard they will try. 


    It should be pointed out that when he says that his report speaks for itself - not only have most Americans not read it and won't read it but most people in Congress and the administration have not read it, only the summaries if anything.  He cannot expect people to understand over 400 pages of anything, let alone a lot of legal writing. It needs to be explained and he is the man to do it.  

    TLDR
    No need to let me know, just go to next post. 

    I will post how I post and you will read as you read.
    I was a actually thinking dignin was joking, given your comment about most Americans not reading it, but I could be wrong. 
    I thought it was obvious, guess not.
    Sorry dignin. I didn't even think of that. (and I had to google TLDR, lol)
    Haha, no problem. Sorry my joke was shit and went over like a lead balloon.
  • Meltdown99
    Meltdown99 None Of Your Business... Posts: 10,739


    LOL.  I had to post this here.  At least (so far) Trump has not said this.
    Give Peas A Chance…
  • CM189191
    CM189191 Posts: 6,927

  • Meltdown99
    Meltdown99 None Of Your Business... Posts: 10,739
    Bump.  So when are they starting impeachment hearings?  
    Give Peas A Chance…
  • jeffbr
    jeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    2017
    As soon as Pelosi grows a pair. She got spanked on immigration last week by Trump. He is currently schooling her, and it isn't a good look. At some point Dems in the House need to revisit their leadership. I thought Pelosi was standing up to him for a while. Now I think she's broken and defeated. Maybe just old. Time for some new, fresh, aggressive leadership. There are a couple of committee chairmen who seem to enjoy sticking it to Trump. Perhaps one of them would be better suited for the House leadership role.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 42,105
    jeffbr said:
    As soon as Pelosi grows a pair. She got spanked on immigration last week by Trump. He is currently schooling her, and it isn't a good look. At some point Dems in the House need to revisit their leadership. I thought Pelosi was standing up to him for a while. Now I think she's broken and defeated. Maybe just old. Time for some new, fresh, aggressive leadership. There are a couple of committee chairmen who seem to enjoy sticking it to Trump. Perhaps one of them would be better suited for the House leadership role.
    I think you’re going to see movement after Team Mueller testifies and some of the other outstanding issues come to a head. Things like Team Trump Treason’s tax returns, emoluments clause violations and other nefarious doings, currently classified and investigations ongoing. “You don’t sell a war in August.”
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Spiritual_Chaos
    Spiritual_Chaos Posts: 31,465
    CM189191 said:

    He's just bitter:

    You People Made Me Give Up My Peanut Farm Before I Got To Be President


    https://www.theonion.com/you-people-made-me-give-up-my-peanut-farm-before-i-got-1819585048
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • njnancy
    njnancy Posts: 5,096
    2019
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    jeffbr said:
    As soon as Pelosi grows a pair. She got spanked on immigration last week by Trump. He is currently schooling her, and it isn't a good look. At some point Dems in the House need to revisit their leadership. I thought Pelosi was standing up to him for a while. Now I think she's broken and defeated. Maybe just old. Time for some new, fresh, aggressive leadership. There are a couple of committee chairmen who seem to enjoy sticking it to Trump. Perhaps one of them would be better suited for the House leadership role.
    I think you’re going to see movement after Team Mueller testifies and some of the other outstanding issues come to a head. Things like Team Trump Treason’s tax returns, emoluments clause violations and other nefarious doings, currently classified and investigations ongoing. “You don’t sell a war in August.”
    The lawyers have stated that if he refuses to give the tax returns after he loses the tax return lawsuit (shall means shall), then that would be a true Constitutional crisis and impeachment would have to begin. 
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,594
    2019
    Something to keep an eye on...

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/jeffrey-epstein-arrested-for-sex-trafficking-of-minors-source
    www.myspace.com

Categories