(02-21-2018 03:29 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-21-2018 02:48 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-21-2018 02:39 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  FWIW - I've said on record probably a dozen times that I do not want him impeached. I'd rather he just resign in disgrace.
Additionally, if the Mueller investigation ends with no finding of collusion, I have no problem whatsoever agreeing with that decision as long as nothing shady is unearthed...and I don't expect there to be.

In that case, would you conclude that it was a useful expenditure of time and money? Just asking.

Based on the indictment of the 13 Russians and those 3 companies. YOU BETCHA! As was mentioned earlier or in another thread, this investigation was into Russian meddling, not trump collusion.

Hopefully we got this and will get the rest done in time to try and limit the Russian impact this November. That is if our worthless excuse for a defender of America and the Constitution president actually follows his oath of office!

Link to the bold part? or maybe I was mistaken?

Quote:https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/po...ation.html

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department appointed Robert S. Mueller III, a former F.B.I. director, as special counsel on Wednesday to oversee the investigation into ties between President Trump’s campaign and Russian officials, dramatically raising the legal and political stakes in an affair that has threatened to engulf Mr. Trump’s four-month-old presidency.

The decision by the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, came after a cascade of damaging developments for Mr. Trump in recent days, including his abrupt dismissal of the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, and the subsequent disclosure that Mr. Trump asked Mr. Comey to drop the investigation of his former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn.

Mr. Rosenstein had been under escalating pressure from Democrats, and even some Republicans, to appoint a special counsel after he wrote a memo that the White House initially cited as the rationale for Mr. Comey’s dismissal.
By appointing Mr. Mueller, a former federal prosecutor with an unblemished reputation, Mr. Rosenstein could alleviate uncertainty about the government’s ability to investigate the questions surrounding the Trump campaign and the Russians.

Mr. Rosenstein said in a statement that he concluded that “it is in the public interest for me to exercise my authorities and appoint a special counsel to assume responsibility for this matter.”

(02-22-2018 03:55 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(02-21-2018 03:29 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-21-2018 02:48 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-21-2018 02:39 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  FWIW - I've said on record probably a dozen times that I do not want him impeached. I'd rather he just resign in disgrace.
Additionally, if the Mueller investigation ends with no finding of collusion, I have no problem whatsoever agreeing with that decision as long as nothing shady is unearthed...and I don't expect there to be.

In that case, would you conclude that it was a useful expenditure of time and money? Just asking.

Based on the indictment of the 13 Russians and those 3 companies. YOU BETCHA! As was mentioned earlier or in another thread, this investigation was into Russian meddling, not trump collusion.

Hopefully we got this and will get the rest done in time to try and limit the Russian impact this November. That is if our worthless excuse for a defender of America and the Constitution president actually follows his oath of office!

Link to the bold part? or maybe I was mistaken?

Quote:https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/po...ation.html

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department appointed Robert S. Mueller III, a former F.B.I. director, as special counsel on Wednesday to oversee the investigation into ties between President Trump’s campaign and Russian officials, dramatically raising the legal and political stakes in an affair that has threatened to engulf Mr. Trump’s four-month-old presidency.

The decision by the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, came after a cascade of damaging developments for Mr. Trump in recent days, including his abrupt dismissal of the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, and the subsequent disclosure that Mr. Trump asked Mr. Comey to drop the investigation of his former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn.

Mr. Rosenstein had been under escalating pressure from Democrats, and even some Republicans, to appoint a special counsel after he wrote a memo that the White House initially cited as the rationale for Mr. Comey’s dismissal.
By appointing Mr. Mueller, a former federal prosecutor with an unblemished reputation, Mr. Rosenstein could alleviate uncertainty about the government’s ability to investigate the questions surrounding the Trump campaign and the Russians.

Mr. Rosenstein said in a statement that he concluded that “it is in the public interest for me to exercise my authorities and appoint a special counsel to assume responsibility for this matter.”

https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-releas...1/download

However, while not specifically named, collusion was a subset of the original appointment.

(02-22-2018 04:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-22-2018 03:55 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(02-21-2018 03:29 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-21-2018 02:48 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-21-2018 02:39 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  FWIW - I've said on record probably a dozen times that I do not want him impeached. I'd rather he just resign in disgrace.
Additionally, if the Mueller investigation ends with no finding of collusion, I have no problem whatsoever agreeing with that decision as long as nothing shady is unearthed...and I don't expect there to be.

In that case, would you conclude that it was a useful expenditure of time and money? Just asking.

Based on the indictment of the 13 Russians and those 3 companies. YOU BETCHA! As was mentioned earlier or in another thread, this investigation was into Russian meddling, not trump collusion.

Hopefully we got this and will get the rest done in time to try and limit the Russian impact this November. That is if our worthless excuse for a defender of America and the Constitution president actually follows his oath of office!

Link to the bold part? or maybe I was mistaken?

Quote:https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/po...ation.html

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department appointed Robert S. Mueller III, a former F.B.I. director, as special counsel on Wednesday to oversee the investigation into ties between President Trump’s campaign and Russian officials, dramatically raising the legal and political stakes in an affair that has threatened to engulf Mr. Trump’s four-month-old presidency.

The decision by the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, came after a cascade of damaging developments for Mr. Trump in recent days, including his abrupt dismissal of the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, and the subsequent disclosure that Mr. Trump asked Mr. Comey to drop the investigation of his former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn.

Mr. Rosenstein had been under escalating pressure from Democrats, and even some Republicans, to appoint a special counsel after he wrote a memo that the White House initially cited as the rationale for Mr. Comey’s dismissal.
By appointing Mr. Mueller, a former federal prosecutor with an unblemished reputation, Mr. Rosenstein could alleviate uncertainty about the government’s ability to investigate the questions surrounding the Trump campaign and the Russians.

Mr. Rosenstein said in a statement that he concluded that “it is in the public interest for me to exercise my authorities and appoint a special counsel to assume responsibility for this matter.”

https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-releas...1/download

However, while not specifically named, collusion was a subset of the original appointment.

If we go by your link...it's directly opposite of the bold part I asked for a link to.

Let me quote you again..."this investigation was into Russian meddling, not trump collusion"

Below is a copy and paste from your link and

(i) was the reason for the investigation to see if anyone from Trumps team, including Trump concluded with the Russian Government.



(ii) & (ii) are any overt acts from (i)



The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confinned by then-FBI
Director James 8. Corney in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:
(i) any links and/or coordination bet ween the Russian government and individuals
associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).

I was going by the title of the order signed by Rosenstein

Quote:APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS

As I said, collusion (while not named) was a subset of the order...read as Related Matters.

Apologies if I was misleading.

(02-22-2018 04:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I was going by the title of the order signed by Rosenstein

Quote:APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS

As I said, collusion (while not named) was a subset of the order...read as Related Matters.

Apologies if I was misleading.

Bottom line---what is being pushed and fed to the American public by the media is vastly different from what you find if you actually sit down and follow the dots in the actual source material. I have never seen a media so intensely wed to narrative they failed to let the written facts deter them. What we are seeing in the media today is truly what we were warned of in the book "1984". The funny thing is--it aint the government misleading us and I dont see any way to fix it.

(02-22-2018 06:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-22-2018 04:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I was going by the title of the order signed by Rosenstein

Quote:APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS

As I said, collusion (while not named) was a subset of the order...read as Related Matters.

Apologies if I was misleading.

Bottom line---what is being pushed and fed to the American public by the media is vastly different from what you find if you actually sit down and follow the dots in the actual source material. I have never seen a media so intensely wed to narrative they failed to let the written facts deter them. What we are seeing in the media today is truly what we were warned of in the book "1984". The funny thing is--it aint the government misleading us and I dont see any way to fix it.

Not sure which media you've been watching recently, but from the little I see on MSNBC and the even littler I see on CNN, they've pretty much all moved on from the collusion charges until Mueller is done and actually reports some evidence. It's mostly all about obstruction now along with the actual meddling from Russia.

And while you hate it, thank God the media is there or else all of this may have been never uncovered and/or swept under the rug by this administration. This is proof positive of the continued need for a free press.

(02-23-2018 09:18 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-22-2018 06:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-22-2018 04:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I was going by the title of the order signed by Rosenstein

Quote:APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS

As I said, collusion (while not named) was a subset of the order...read as Related Matters.

Apologies if I was misleading.

Bottom line---what is being pushed and fed to the American public by the media is vastly different from what you find if you actually sit down and follow the dots in the actual source material. I have never seen a media so intensely wed to narrative they failed to let the written facts deter them. What we are seeing in the media today is truly what we were warned of in the book "1984". The funny thing is--it aint the government misleading us and I dont see any way to fix it.

Not sure which media you've been watching recently, but from the little I see on MSNBC and the even littler I see on CNN, they've pretty much all moved on from the collusion charges until Mueller is done and actually reports some evidence. It's mostly all about obstruction now along with the actual meddling from Russia.

And while you hate it, thank God the media is there or else all of this may have been never uncovered and/or swept under the rug by this administration. This is proof positive of the continued need for a free press.

The two you mentioned or in full hate Trump mode. Snickering and eye rolling is the high school acts of the day for these nut jobs. Many times outright laughter can be heard coming from outside the camera view when the administration is being ‘reported’ on. It is not journalism any longer. It is hate speech passing as such.

(02-23-2018 09:32 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 09:18 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-22-2018 06:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-22-2018 04:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I was going by the title of the order signed by Rosenstein

Quote:APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS

As I said, collusion (while not named) was a subset of the order...read as Related Matters.

Apologies if I was misleading.

Bottom line---what is being pushed and fed to the American public by the media is vastly different from what you find if you actually sit down and follow the dots in the actual source material. I have never seen a media so intensely wed to narrative they failed to let the written facts deter them. What we are seeing in the media today is truly what we were warned of in the book "1984". The funny thing is--it aint the government misleading us and I dont see any way to fix it.

Not sure which media you've been watching recently, but from the little I see on MSNBC and the even littler I see on CNN, they've pretty much all moved on from the collusion charges until Mueller is done and actually reports some evidence. It's mostly all about obstruction now along with the actual meddling from Russia.

And while you hate it, thank God the media is there or else all of this may have been never uncovered and/or swept under the rug by this administration. This is proof positive of the continued need for a free press.

The two you mentioned or in full hate Trump mode. Snickering and eye rolling is the high school acts of the day for these nut jobs. Many times outright laughter can be heard coming from outside the camera view when the administration is being ‘reported’ on. It is not journalism any longer. It is hate speech passing as such.

True. They are just consumed by hatred.

(02-23-2018 09:32 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 09:18 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-22-2018 06:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-22-2018 04:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I was going by the title of the order signed by Rosenstein

Quote:APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS

As I said, collusion (while not named) was a subset of the order...read as Related Matters.

Apologies if I was misleading.

Bottom line---what is being pushed and fed to the American public by the media is vastly different from what you find if you actually sit down and follow the dots in the actual source material. I have never seen a media so intensely wed to narrative they failed to let the written facts deter them. What we are seeing in the media today is truly what we were warned of in the book "1984". The funny thing is--it aint the government misleading us and I dont see any way to fix it.

Not sure which media you've been watching recently, but from the little I see on MSNBC and the even littler I see on CNN, they've pretty much all moved on from the collusion charges until Mueller is done and actually reports some evidence. It's mostly all about obstruction now along with the actual meddling from Russia.

And while you hate it, thank God the media is there or else all of this may have been never uncovered and/or swept under the rug by this administration. This is proof positive of the continued need for a free press.

The two you mentioned or in full hate Trump mode. Snickering and eye rolling is the high school acts of the day for these nut jobs. Many times outright laughter can be heard coming from outside the camera view when the administration is being ‘reported’ on. It is not journalism any longer. It is hate speech passing as such.

Perhaps you can post a couple videos of those for us? Since it's so prevalent and all. Thanks.

(02-23-2018 10:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Perhaps you can post a couple videos of those for us? Since it's so prevalent and all. Thanks.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/3084...umps-plane

https://boingboing.net/2017/05/31/report...er-fo.html

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ric...ement-joke

(02-23-2018 10:24 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 10:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Perhaps you can post a couple videos of those for us? Since it's so prevalent and all. Thanks.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/3084...umps-plane

https://boingboing.net/2017/05/31/report...er-fo.html

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ric...ement-joke

So three stories from last January or earlier, so prevalent.

(02-23-2018 10:27 AM)tennis2k4 Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 10:24 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 10:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Perhaps you can post a couple videos of those for us? Since it's so prevalent and all. Thanks.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/3084...umps-plane

https://boingboing.net/2017/05/31/report...er-fo.html

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ric...ement-joke

So three stories from last January or earlier, so prevalent.

So are you trying to tell us the MSM is fair & balanced when it comes to Trump? Holds him in high esteem? Asking for a friend.

(02-23-2018 10:30 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 10:27 AM)tennis2k4 Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 10:24 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 10:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Perhaps you can post a couple videos of those for us? Since it's so prevalent and all. Thanks.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/3084...umps-plane

https://boingboing.net/2017/05/31/report...er-fo.html

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ric...ement-joke

So three stories from last January or earlier, so prevalent.

So are you trying to tell us the MSM is fair & balanced when it comes to Trump? Holds him in high esteem? Asking for a friend.

The MSM is fairly close...and certainly mirrors the balance of the country's opinion of him. MSNBC and CNN are not the MSM.

(02-23-2018 10:36 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 10:30 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 10:27 AM)tennis2k4 Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 10:24 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 10:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Perhaps you can post a couple videos of those for us? Since it's so prevalent and all. Thanks.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/3084...umps-plane

https://boingboing.net/2017/05/31/report...er-fo.html

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ric...ement-joke

So three stories from last January or earlier, so prevalent.

So are you trying to tell us the MSM is fair & balanced when it comes to Trump? Holds him in high esteem? Asking for a friend.

The MSM is fairly close...and certainly mirrors the balance of the country's opinion of him. MSNBC and CNN are not the MSM.

Speaking of those two asswipes:

Quote:Byron York: Harvard study: CNN, NBC Trump coverage 93 percent negative

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-...le/2623641

(02-23-2018 10:36 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  The MSM is fairly close...and certainly mirrors the balance of the country's opinion of him. MSNBC and CNN are not the MSM.

Quote:The Harvard scholars analyzed the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and the main newscasts (not talk shows) of CBS, CNN, Fox and NBC during Trump's initial time in office. They found, to no one's surprise, that Trump absolutely dominated news coverage in the first 100 days. And then they found that news coverage was solidly negative — 80 percent negative among those outlets studied, versus 20 percent positive.

The numbers for previous presidents: Barack Obama, 41 percent negative, 59 percent positive; George W. Bush, 57 percent negative, 43 percent positive; and Bill Clinton, 60 percent negative, 40 percent positive.

That said, the coverage of some news organizations was so negative, according to the Harvard study, that it seems hard to argue that the coverage was anywhere near a neutral presentation of facts. Assessing the tone of news coverage, the Harvard researchers found that CNN's Trump coverage was 93 percent negative, and seven percent positive. The researchers found the same numbers for NBC.

Others were slightly less negative. The Harvard team found that CBS coverage was 91 percent negative and 9 percent positive. New York Times coverage was 87 percent negative and 13 percent positive. Washington Post coverage was 83 percent negative and 17 percent positive. Wall Street Journal coverage was 70 percent negative and 30 percent positive. And Fox News coverage also leaned to the negative, but only slightly: 52 percent negative to 48 percent positive.

It's fair and balanced for those who do not like Trump. Under a different administration it was all puppy dogs and rainbows and Fox News was racist.