did anyone queue the "What Trump will be doing tonight" gif?

3/25/2019 2:50:20 PM

It's not treason

And definitions are also important in regards to collusion, Trump could have known and been okay with or even aided Russian involvement and without a tacit or explicit agreement with Russia that would not be collusion.

3/25/2019 3:32:22 PM

To be fair to Sarah Sanders, that video is hard to understand but I think she was wrongfully saying that collusion is treason and to insinuate the president did that was saying he commited a crime punishable by death.

I thought initially she said criticizing the POTUS was the actual treason.

She’s wrong, of course, but not as malevolent as I thought.

3/25/2019 3:52:11 PM

in contrast, there actually were reds in the state dept

3/25/2019 9:55:13 PM

Trump moves to weaponize Mueller findings.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/25/politics/donald-trump-mueller-campaign-trail/index.html

3/25/2019 10:11:47 PM

Thanks for the bold Opie. Really drives your point home

3/25/2019 10:24:57 PM

Quote :

"The democratic institutions worked pretty well here. A potential crime by the President was investigated, not suppressed; and when it didn't find anything damning, the investigators didn't make up some shit to get the desired outcome. I'm reasonably satisfied with the democratic institutions on this one."

Well, sure. But your bar for is pretty god-damn low, as evidenced by your desire to prosecute/execute whistleblowers. Let's just entertain the idea that Trump was/is guilty of some sort of high crime tantamount to treason (whatever the fuck that even means in this scenario), rather than just good 'ole fashion rich-people corruption. In this scenario, he, as president, could just classify any damning evidence that would implicate him, and you'd be fine with that, and would want anyone who leaked that information hung (or hanged, rather, as i'm sure pecker size wouldn't preclude someone from leaking). This is the quandary that you would find yourself in: In both wanting to uphold the legitimacy and necessity of state secrets while simultaneously accepting that crooked or corrupt politicians would abuse that power for their own personal gain. Sure, you might say you don't want that power to be abused, but you offer no real form of oversight or corrective measure to reign in that abuse of power. Quite the opposite, in fact, as you still want those who attempt to expose that abuse of power to be punished, and punished harshly. Your sentiment of wanting to limit the abuse of state power is directly at odds with how you want to punish those who expose it.

Quote :

"But I do agree with you that the opposition wasted a lot of time obsessing over this report and hoping it was going to save them."

But to be clear, the crux of my argument about disillusionment was directed at wishy-washy liberals who were just pining for an electoral do-over or some sort of existential explanation to his rise to power instead of using the past two years to reflect on the conditions that made his rise possible to begin with. We can sit here and make the argument that Democrats are capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time, but are they? Are they really? Because any objective measure of mainstream media outlets that are favorable to the Democratic Party (I'm looking at you, Rachel Maddow) shows just how much airtime/ink/whatever was spent on this Russia shit. And that's two years the party can't get back. Two years spent on a story that ultimately went fucking nowhere. And that's two years not focusing on issues that could actually galvanize and energize the party by crafting a vision for a future that doesn't suck as much ass as our current dog-shit society that is rapidly drifting to the right.

3/26/2019 2:43:26 AM

I don’t have any problem at all with demanding the full report be released and I don’t think that precludes Democrats from doing what they have been doing the last year — by and large, running on issues.

Also, we are all extremely online (whether twitter or cable news). It’s easy to forget that Maddow and Twitter are not the entire ideology. It’s a small subset mostly sensationalized.

3/26/2019 8:07:55 AM

Quote :

"In this scenario, he, as president, could just classify any damning evidence that would implicate him, and you'd be fine with that, and would want anyone who leaked that information hung"

I know it's a difficult nuance for you to grasp, but I see a pretty clear difference between leaking national security information and whistleblowing on straight up crime. Sometimes there's overlap, which is part of the reason I moderated my stance on the other thread (which you are inexplicably dragging into this one). When that happens, you've got to take it on a case by case basis.

If you want to argue about that, let's do it in the other thread. For now, I'll just say that if Trump classified a bunch of shit in this case, it would be a tacit admission of wrongdoing which would lead to electoral defeat, at which point the next president would declassify and prosecute. If it made it that far - classification is no sure protection from Congress, whose members have their own clearances and subpoena power, thereby allowing elected officials to act.

Quote :

" the crux of my argument about disillusionment was directed at wishy-washy liberals who were just pining for an electoral do-over or some sort of existential explanation to his rise to power instead of using the past two years to reflect on the conditions that made his rise possible to begin with."

Broadly I agree with you here; a lot of Democrats were hoping for a deus ex machina to undo 2016, and a lot of them agonized over endless electoral post mortems and, worst of all, journalistic safaris into Trump country, just trying to understand how such an unexpected outcome came to pass. I understand that impulse, but the time for indulging it is long passed.

3/26/2019 9:41:55 AM

What is the likelihood that William Barr's memo misrepresented the conclusions of the Special Counsel's report, and what is the likelihood that the Special Counsel would openly correct the record to the public if that were the case?

3/26/2019 10:02:49 AM

I dont think Mueller would go to the press or anything, but I would expect that he answers honestly when questioned by Congress if he needs to clarify anything

3/26/2019 10:05:48 AM

Quote :

"Also, we are all extremely online (whether twitter or cable news). It’s easy to forget that Maddow and Twitter are not the entire ideology. It’s a small subset mostly sensationalized."

She has the most popular cable news show, though. Her reach isn't tiny. Most people absorb an hour or two of news and that's it. The way she obsessed over this was shameful, and it hurts grassroots organizers and agitators, in my opinion

3/26/2019 12:43:01 PM

https://t.co/tjifm3CwhM?amp=1

Possible silver lining for Dems here

Focus groups show “independent” voters are not viewing trump as being exonerated

3/26/2019 4:21:30 PM

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-mueller-obstruction-regulations-defective-1374829

Former Robert Mueller asssitant not happy with the way things played out with Barr

Seems like, as the hints in Barr’s letter indicate, Mueller would have wanted an obstruction charge to move forward.

3/26/2019 4:35:42 PM

The Mueller report will reportedly pass through the White House in order to make redactions under executive privilege before making the report public.

3/26/2019 4:48:44 PM

I can’t believe I still have to protest this shit.

3/26/2019 6:17:22 PM

Quote :

"For now, I'll just say that if Trump classified a bunch of shit in this case, it would be a tacit admission of wrongdoing which would lead to electoral defeat, at which point the next president would declassify and prosecute."

I distinctly remember Obama "looking forward, and not backward" whenever it was brought up that he should prosecute the previous administration on account of lying about WMD's as a pretext to invading Iraq. He then went on to prosecute more people under the espionage act than all of the previous presidents combined. Your hypothetical is pure wishful thinking.

Quote :

"I see a pretty clear difference between leaking national security information and whistleblowing on straight up crime"

Yes, I understand your position. But again, those who are most likely to abuse this executive privilege do not value this distinction that you've crafted entirely in your head. They see this executive privilege as something to be abused for their own gain.

You are operating under the assumption that genuinely noble and patriotic (whatever that means) people are in charge of this privilege and would never dare abuse this power, which is a crazy assumption to have in a world where Donald Trump is president. It's almost quaint, if not entirely naive.

He's about to be given the opportunity to censure the very document that was compiled to expose any potential criminal wrongdoing on his part.

C'mon, man, clearly you have to admit that this is bananas. And sadly, it will be more fodder for misdirected liberal outrage for all the wrong reasons, as they'll focus more on him as a bad person rather than critiquing the corruption that is embedded within these institutions.

3/26/2019 11:30:22 PM

Quote :

"Yes, I understand your position."

Maybe you do, but since you go on to reference a bunch of things other than my position, let me state it clearly: I do not think we should prosecute people who leak evidence of crimes, I think we should prosecute people who leak national security information based on their personal interpretation of its moral qualities.

You do not need to convince me that Donald Trump or others in government would attempt to use classification to conceal criminal wrongdoing; I readily admit it.

3/27/2019 9:38:40 AM

https://www.emptywheel.net/2019/03/27/the-roger-stone-indictment-makes-it-clear-barrs-memo-understates-trump-flunkies-complicity/

Assuming Barr didn’t blatantly lie about the Mueller report I’m intrigued to know how this doesn’t count as conspiracy with trump’s campaign and Russia

Also I didn’t realize Barr doesn’t intend to send the report to Congress but instead another summary

It really looks like they’re going to maybe be successful in burying this. I’m thinking we don’t see it for another year

[Edited on March 27, 2019 at 10:40 AM. Reason : ]

3/27/2019 10:35:51 AM

that's why it's important to remember that in a footnote, barr said that Mueller had defined coordination as an “agreement—tacit or express—between the Trump campaign and the Russian government on election interference.”

there could be all kinds of knowledge and interaction but without an agreement it's not coordination

3/27/2019 11:17:58 AM

The intellectual dishonesty in some corners claiming total vindication in this whole affair is breathtaking from the same people who pushed Seth Rich and “it wasn’t Russia” disinformation for two years.

[Edited on March 27, 2019 at 11:56 AM. Reason : Tune into Tucker tonight for these “voices from the left”]

3/27/2019 11:56:16 AM

Greenwald is a fool for going on Tucker's show because he's being used to score points against the left on a white nationalists platform that has no interest in discussing the issue in good faith. But he's factually correct in his critique of the media hyping this story up.

3/28/2019 12:50:36 AM

“the media”

it’s an all encompassing phrase that needs specific targets to have actual teeth

3/28/2019 1:22:03 AM

Rachel Maddow.

There. You happy?

3/28/2019 1:28:02 AM

Honest question since I don’t watch her (only time I did was the disastrous Trump tax return and I found her tedious). Is she even claiming to be a journalist? I always thought she ran a Hannity-ish opinion show.

Also, Greenwald et al were consistently wrong about the hacking and about election interference. The Barr summary even mentioned that explicitly but yet no mea culpa.

3/28/2019 6:44:18 AM

Quote :

"they will absolutely go up"

Shockingly approval polls done since the Barr memo are flat.

3/28/2019 8:45:22 AM

they've been slowly rising for the past week

3/28/2019 8:48:50 AM

I’m more or less agnostic towards Adam Schiff but why are all the Republicans demanding he resign? It’s just weird.

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1111265723790385153?s=21

[Edited on March 28, 2019 at 9:58 AM. Reason : Jesus Christ, this is straight gaslighting]

3/28/2019 9:46:49 AM

^^
No

538`s aggregate
3/22 41.9
3/23 41.9
3/24 42.1
3/25 42.3
3/26 41.9
3/27 41.9

Also polls that asked have shown that most people didn't care about the report, based on votes or approval
https://twitter.com/NumbersMuncher/status/1111019571505442817?s=19
https://twitter.com/EricLevitz/status/1110670474546241541?s=19

3/28/2019 10:20:00 AM

^^ It definitely seems like congressional gaslighting.

I'm not sure if the GOP just has no endgame strategy or if their expectation is that the full Mueller report won't be released to the public any time soon, but I feel like they may be overplaying their hand.

[Edited on March 28, 2019 at 10:20 AM. Reason : ]

3/28/2019 10:20:17 AM

Schiff giving a very powerful and impassioned speech about how the Barr summary doesn't seem to comport with what's publicly known.

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1111259975714828289

3/28/2019 12:50:11 PM

Here's another clip of that statement from the CSPAN feed:

https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1111263599165665280

3/28/2019 1:02:29 PM

I, too, think they are overplaying their hand.

I can’t tell if

-they know something (or think they know something) the rest of us don’t
-they’re just making hay while the sun is still shining
-they’re basically sharks that smell their opponents blood in the water, their eyes roll back in their heads and they just go into attack mode while ignoring everything else.


Most likely they just understand that their base won’t hold them accountable for any of this, and the possibility of being primaried for not being Trumpy enough outways all other considerations.

3/28/2019 1:18:03 PM

Well, the easy response would be "Sure, I'll resign, as long as every Republican member of Congress who pushed Benghazi or Hillary's emails for 4 years joins me.". That would be ..... *checks notes* ..... all of them.

3/28/2019 1:21:53 PM

^ i don't like that response personally, because it draws equivalency between the benghazi investigations, where were purely politically motivated witch hunts, and the russian investigation which has ensnared many of the top people in Trump's campaign. There completely different. There's obviously a political element to the russia investigation, but it's a legitimate issue and major problem if presidential campaigns are now free to seek help from foreign governments to hack opponents' email.

3/28/2019 2:10:30 PM

Yeah, gotta say, Schiff's actual response was on point. They definitely miscalculated going after him, he's actually a serious person who isn't just looking to raise his profile for a future cable news career like Gowdy and Chaffetz did.

3/28/2019 3:03:05 PM

Just caught that trump told hannity that devin Nunes should be viewed as a hero by history...

3/28/2019 9:10:59 PM

Quote :

"Barr says his letter was not actually a "summary" of Mueller's report, just a report on its "principal conclusions": "the bottom line." He says he didn't think it'd be in the "public interest" to try to summarize a 400-page report. Barr: "My March 24 letter was not, and did not purport to be, an exhaustive recounting of the Special Counsel's investigation or report." He says it was a summary of the big conclusions, yes, but it's "mischaracterizing" to call it a summary of the report or investigation. On "summary": in Barr's original letter, he said, "Although my review is ongoing, I believe that it is in the public interest to describe the report and to summarize the principal conclusions reached by the Special Counsel and the results of his investigation.""

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1111710488172339201

3/29/2019 6:35:58 PM

Some outlets are rightfully footnoting their articles now with corrections after running with Barr’s summary as the actual Mueller report. Notably WaPo.

Narrative is pretty much set, though.

4/1/2019 8:10:14 AM

Yep, nobody remembers a correction.

4/1/2019 8:56:59 AM

I can't find where I read it but somebody said national media is pot committed since they printed "no collusion". They'll now need indisputable evidence to change that conclusion.


Also, after a week, approval ratings are flat from the Barr report

4/1/2019 8:59:52 AM

https://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/93/2018/12/The-IRA-Social-Media-and-Political-Polarization.pdf

It's definitely worth your time to scroll through this report and just look at the charts. They have some good ones showing IRA social media volume with notable campaign happenings from 2015 - 2017.

4/2/2019 8:08:41 AM

Trump’s timeline the last 24 hours definitely reads like a guy who thinks the Mueller report was a complete and total exoneration.

4/2/2019 9:02:25 AM

Quote :

"-they’re just making hay while the sun is still shining"

More like they're trying to keep the sun shining as long as they can. This is Trump's big win and they will do anything to keep it on top of the news cycle for as long as they can. If that means baying for Schiff's blood, so be it. Only a fool would let another story start to dominate (cue Trump on healthcare, closing the border, etc.)

4/2/2019 11:10:29 AM

It really isn't even a win, just a stalemate. Hasn't helped him at all so far. Clouds remain and approval hasn't changed.

4/2/2019 12:59:10 PM

https://www.npr.org/2019/04/03/709404618/house-judiciary-approves-subpoena-for-full-mueller-report-in-party-line-vote

4/3/2019 12:59:55 PM

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/us/politics/william-barr-mueller-report.html

Quote :

"WASHINGTON — Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations. At stake in the dispute — the first evidence of tension between Mr. Barr and the special counsel’s office — is who shapes the public’s initial understanding of one of the most consequential government investigations in American history. Some members of Mr. Mueller’s team are concerned that, because Mr. Barr created the first narrative of the special counsel’s findings, Americans’ views will have hardened before the investigation’s conclusions become public."

4/3/2019 9:36:17 PM

Let’s jist go ahead and wait until we see the Mueller report!

4/4/2019 6:25:23 AM

i imagine the protests today because of the missed deadline won't be very large

4/4/2019 9:59:31 AM

I bet any protests are because they want to make sure the public sees the COMPLETE AND TOTAL exoneration of the President.

4/4/2019 10:13:42 AM