Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Robert Mueller Delivers Report to Attorney General
According to news reports, Robert Mueller has delivered a report to Attorney General Bill Barr. Fox News:
Special Counsel Robert Mueller has submitted to Attorney General Bill Barr his long-awaited report on the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential race and possible collusion with Trump associates — marking the end of the politically explosive probe and the beginning of a new battle over its contents and implications. Mueller is “not recommending any further indictments,” a senior DOJ official told Fox News.
The next steps are up to Attorney General Barr, and we look forward to the process taking its course. The White House has not received or been briefed on the Special Counsel’s report.
— Sarah Sanders (@PressSec) March 22, 2019
Published in Politics
There’s a complication using the Trump Tower meeting as the thrown bone. The head of Fusion GPS met with the Russian woman before and after the TT meeting, as I recall. It was a set-up. And if it weren’t for MSM water-carriers, it would be known as a very clumsy one.
No problem – you just ignore the GPS Fusion connection! It’s worked so far.
You voted for it.
You voted for it.
You voted for it.
You know, 123 comments is an awful lot, for a post that merely informs us that the Mueller report was delivered to the AG, without any information about the contents of the report.
You’d think that in 123 comments, we could expect LaRoche to have posted at least one picture of some Texas cheerleaders.
He is his father’s son.
And speaking of institutional checks — what about checks on the FBI, DOJ, Secretary Clinton, Lois Lerner at IRS, Barack Obama’s wing man, Eric Holder, and wing woman, Loretta Lynch?? Seriously, if you’re not outraged by the injustices perpetrated by Obama-era officials, I question your character.
I’ve heard that jibe before. On Facebook, I was told that since I had voted for Evan McMullin and not Hillary, “You voted for Trump!” I have systemically unfriended people who had told me that I had voted for Trump because I couldn’t bring myself to vote for Hillary.
To be fair to Gary, these things weren’t being advocated by any Democrats during the last election; were they?
Democrats didn’t just suddenly go crazy in the last two years either. If you didn’t like Donald Trump, you always have the choice of abstaining. But no one can say they didn’t know what they were voting for when they put Democrats in power.
The Green New Deal, the Anti-Semitism, and abortion until birth are all part of the most extreme left, and do not enjoy anything near to majority support. The 40 Dems who flipped seats are among the most conservative parts of the Democratic caucus. See Lamb, Brian (D-PA).
All I can say is that the Democrats’ leap since the election towards full-on socialism, anti-Semitism, and abortion available up until the mother gives birth has certainly taken me by surprise. Sure, I knew that there were people in the party who advocated those positions; but I didn’t expect the (seemingly) entire party to lurch (at the moment, anyway) that direction. So yes, I think you can say that many who voted for them didn’t know what they were voting for when they put the Democrats in power. I think they simply expected them to give Trump more grief.
(I could be wrong about that, of course. Despite my participation here, I don’t follow politics all that closely in my 3D life, so I could have easily missed out on some pretty obvious signs that they would lunge for the left like they have. But I don’t think I did.)
You’ve just confirmed what I’ve long suspected about Nevers and liberals who still vote for Democrats. You don’t know what we’re up against with the Left — the most ruthless, power-mad, self-justified (self-important), ends-justify-the-means people on the planet. You don’t know the enemy.
I repeat this to the point of obnoxiousness — at the height of the Soviet Union, only 10% of the population belonged to the Communist Party. It doesn’t take a majority to end up in tyranny. It only takes enough naive people to put the most ruthless in power to get there.
Do you realize that many liberals see Republicans, especially during the time of Trump, to be the most ruthless, power-mad, self-justified (self-important), ends-justify-the means, dishonest, planet killers, and racists on the planet.
Yes, as I said, liberals are naive. They don’t realize Democrat lefties (who predominate in the party pretty much since Joe Lieberman retired/was forced out) are their enemy, too.
These false equivalencies are tiresome. But go ahead. Keep repeating Democrat talking points. It’s a free(er) country (with Trump as president).
I see. Better to bring back Obama as a leader because we won historic victories during that time.
I’d rather debunk the Trump is a racist traitor charges and see how that affects our chances.
And Reagan was going to blow up the planet by starting World War III at 12:02 p.m. on 1/20/81 if he was elected, as soon as he took his hand off the Bible Chief Justice Burger was holding. The most rabidly partisan Democrats brought the crazy 39 years ago — there just weren’t as many media outlets, let alone social media sites, for the volume to be as loud as it is today.
I don’t believe that conservatives like you and me are ruthless, power-mad, self-justified (self-important), ends-justify-the-means, dishonest planet killers and racists. I am just saying that many liberals believe that.
My point is that both parties see the worst of each other, and that often they have the same viewpoints about each other. This feels pretty doggone toxic to me.
No. I am suggesting that Trump is a massive albatross around our necks.
What if there is an element of truth about Trump being a racialist, and the whiff of kompromat? That would make it much harder to debunk.
I remember worrying about Reagan before his election.
NBC has buried the Jean Doumanian/Fall 1980 SNL episodes due to their all-around awfulness, but the pre-election political skits treated Reagan about the way the current SNL treats Trump today.
There is no purpose to debunking elements of truth or whiffs of this or that. Even the court of public opinion requires some substance.
The question is which viewpoint is true. We can’t know what’s in someone’s heart. We can deduce where they stand on an issue by what they advocate, support, and in some cases give aid and comfort – but that last one is subject to contortions, depending on who’s reporting and how the quotes are edited.
Which party has embraced an intersectional doctrine that categorizes one’s individual standing in society based on skin color?
Which party has its presidential candidates falling over one another to disavow AIPAC?
Which party is eager to extract property from one racial group to give it another?
Which party wishes to sweep away the mechanisms of the Republic to transform us to a direct democracy – ends justifying the means, in other words?
What the left has to say about the right contains no small amount of projection.
Every local news report I have seen so far first states that the Mueller Report has been issued. The second sentence then states that 34 indictments have been handed down including 6 people related to the Trump campaign. None of the news reports placed the indictments in context. None.
None stated that the majority of indictments were of Russians in Russia who remotely performed the 2016 equivalent of handing out pamphlets on street corners. None stated that the most serious of indictments were of actions that had nothing to do with Trump or the campaign. None stated that the remaining indictments were of process crimes that exist only because of the investigation process.
The law is on the president’s side and the Democrats are blocking the wall for strictly political reasons.
I’m not going to get in a big argument about it, but I really think you have a very excessively idealistic view of the way things are now.
All of this centralized power and multiculturalism started getting dysfunctional in the 90s. The media fuels it.
We are no longer in the system that the Founders set up. It tipped over in the 90s.
I just cannot relate to this at all.
Is there any thread that doesn’t become Gary-focused? Gary-centric? Gary Gary, quite contrary, how do your opinions grow?
That is why I always refer to it as The Department of inJustice.
Here’s my idea to get a Republican sweep in 2020:
How to end our national nightmare — probe Hillary Clinton again
Journalists gonna journalism.