(03-31-2019 01:37 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-31-2019 10:56 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-31-2019 09:54 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  It is an article of faith to them that there MUST have been cheating, how else could they lose? So if it cannot be found, then think they just need to look harder.

I think among the inner circle were has to be some feeling of, "We cheated with the Russians and still lost. So they must have created more than we did."

I'm reminded of Bear Bryant's comment about paying players, "When it's fourth and goal at the one yard line, how do you know the other team didn't pay them more." I think there's a lot of feeling that the other side must have paid them more.

I don't think the Russian objective was to elect Trump, but rather to sow maximum discord and dissension. When that is the goal, and one candidate has an 80-90% chance of winning, you maximize discord and dissent by supporting the almost certain loser. Only problem is, Trump won. But democrats have so wildly overreacted in the aftermath that the Russians have achieved their goal. Congrats, democrats, you've given "the Russians" exactly what they wanted.

Where democrats go from here is not clear. My guess is that they will go nuts trying to parse the Mueller report for anything that could be played up as potential indicia of wrongdoing by Trump and his campaign, and blaming "redaction" for any inability to do so. My guess is that will be very likely to trigger a massive backlash. I certainly hope so.

I wish the Mueller probe had focused more on "the Russians" and ways to combat their efforts to interfere than I am expecting, instead of turning into what appears to have been a failed Trump lynch mob. Foreign hacking and other interference are serious problems that we have needed to address for decades. Trump drives me up the wall with his insistence that there was no Russian interference. Given the lax security in the Clinton camp, I'm guessing the Russians and the Chinese and a few more hacked somewhere in 2016. They will interfere any way they can in 2020 and beyond, just like they have forever, and we to them. If we want to win that war, and I do, then as a matter of self-defense we need to be able to cut them off at their knees.

I guess where I come down, based solely on what has been leaked, is that I do not see any reasonable case for conspiracy (which is the crime, not "collusion"), but I come closer on conspiracy than I do on obstruction. There are at least some things that could be "collusion" if we had a lot more evidence to go with them, but obstruction is just absurdly out in left field.

There is one other point that I think has gotten insufficient attention. The Clinton camp has almost always acted very cavalierly toward information security--from Sandy Berger stuffing classified information into his socks, to Hillary's server, to the DNC. No, I'm not saying it was their fault that they got hacked, so don't put those words in my mouth, but asking a different question. Does that sloppiness and lack of proper concern for security of sensitive information disqualify Hillary from the presidency? I think it may very well do so. And despite that, she is still my favorite democrat, at least among those who are or might be presidential contenders. My bottom line--Hillary should be in prison, but I still prefer her to any other democrat.

I had heard he shoved papers into his pants, his underwear, as well. And into his jacket.

With all that paper stuffed into his clothes, its a wonder he could walk at all.

Evocative of one or two finals at UH with people sitting next to me that rustled noisily with every body movement,