(03-24-2019 11:00 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 09:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 08:55 PM)Boston Owl Wrote:  Democrat here.
I am glad that Mueller did not find that the President or his campaign conspired with the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election. The alternative is too frightening to contemplate.
But let's not lose sight of the big picture.
Mueller found, as all of us know, that the Russians interfered in the 2016 election. Trump denied it for years. Why?

What difference does it make?

Quote:Trump asked Russia, on TV, to hack Clinton's emails during the campaign. Russia tried to do so that same day. What's up with that?

I've heard enough of this. There are problems all over it. First, if you are conspiring, you do it secretly and privately. Saying it on TV almost invalidates the idea of a conspiracy. Second, I got the distinct impression tat it was a punch line designed to get the crowd riled up, and it did. Third, Trump "asked" "the Russians" (or more correctly, stated that he hoped they would) to find Hillary's missing emails, not hack the DNC. Fourth, we don't know for sure that it was "the Russians" who hacked the DNC. There is some indication that the data transfer rates detected were consistently not with hacking but with downloading to a stick drive. Fifth, and this one really strikes me as absurd, attaching any kind of importance to the date implies that somehow "the Russians" didn't hack anything until Trump "asked" them to, and somehow they got everything in place immediately to do it as soon as he "asked." That is just patently absurd in so many ways. I still think the problem that democrats have is that if you acknowledge that "the Russians" have been hacking us for years, then it becomes difficult not to admit that they almost certainly hacked Hillary's non-secure server and messages transmitted over non-secure circuits. So "the Russians" only hacked us because of some quid pro quo with Trump? Really? I was born at night, but not last night.

Quote:Trump's campaign manager gave a Russian intelligence agent 75 pages of polling data during the campaign. Why?

Why not? It was his information to share with whomever he pleased, was he not? And the "Russian intelligence agent" was Manafort's business partner at the time, right? And exactly what was his position in Russian intelligence at the time? Manafort appears tone a sleaze, and Trump probably should never have hired him, but Trump also find him, and you can't attribute his actions Trump.

Quote:Trump pursued a business deal in Russia during the campaign and lied about it. Why?

Who lied to whom, under what conditions? Cohen may have lied about it, but Cohen lied about all sorts of things. Then again it may very well have been Cohen pursuing the deal as a lone wolf. And what is wrong with a private citizen pursuing a business deal? Does he have to stop making a living to run for president?

Quote:Trump and his cronies lied about the Trump Tower meeting with the Russians. Why?

Who told what lie about what, when and where and under what conditions?

Quote:Trump loves Russia. He licked Putin's boots in Helsinki. He tried to eliminate the sanctions against Russia. Etc. Why?

The general rule of diplomacy is that you make nice at summit conferences.

Trump sent US warships into the Black Sea as a demonstration of force against goings-on in Crimea. When did Shrub or Zero do that? By the way, I'm not a fan of that move. I think geography and the Montreux Convention pretty much mean that it is strategically and tactically risky, at best, to try to anything in the Black Sea, which is why I did not get more excited when Shrub and Zero sat on their hands. Trump has been anything but Putin's puppet. He has done any number of things, from encouraging Western Europe to find other energy sources to reduce their dependence on Russian oil, to asking them to step unto the plate defensively, to turning our military loose in Syria, to take a stronger stand against Putin than did his predecessors. He certainly has not asked anyone to "tell Vladimir that I will have more flexibility after the election." He has done enough in this regard that Poland, one of the countries most treated by Russia, wants to name an army base Fort Trump. I really don't see tat Trump has been a pushover for Putin.

Quote:Trump obstructed justice. Oh, sorry, he "fought back." Why?

Exactly what did he do to obstruct justice? Keep in mind what elements are legally required to constitute obstruction of justice. When, where, and how did he exhibit all the required elements? He didn't. He took certain actions that he is constitutionally empowered to do. You have to prove a lot of facts not in evidence to ratchet that up to obstruction. It's not like wiping servers or smashing smart phones.

Quote:My Trump-loving friends have no answers to these questions. I'm waiting. I'm guessing it will be a while.

I'm no Trump lover, so maybe it doesn't count, but I am a lover of the law. Either way, your wait is over.

BO has no answer for any of your points. Since he thinks the AG is a hack, I would just point out that Mueller, with a staff of dozens(almost all of them Democrats), a giant budget, subpoena power, and two years to look into it, could not find enough to charge anybody with obstruction, but BO can just look into the sky and know the truth.

He doesnt have to look into the sky to relate his tone-changing insights. I gave him the email contact for the special counsel's office above.