President Donald Trump

[Hornsby]

Seriously, we have bigger fish to fry than this. You know what would be great leadership - and this aint ever going to happen. How about HRC step up and say - I lost because I was lazy. I lost because Russia interfered. I lost because somehow I didnt get enough electoral votes to win. I lost - its over. Lets move on with the things that are most important to our country. We are now over a year into one party justifying how the person that bailed their National Party out of debt LOST. Please for the good of our country - admit you lost - put together a group to work on our election process and lets get back to doing things that put America first.

I guess that you missed the part where she wrote a whole book detailing all the reasons that she lost...and admitting many times that she lost.

(CNN)Hillary Clinton admits that she made a series of mistakes during the 2016 election in her newly released memoir, conceding that she did not fully understand the American electorate and failed to muster the anger that many voters wanted to see.

The book is full of Clinton focusing blame elsewhere, but in raw terms -- and with more directness than at any point since Election Day -- the former Democratic nominee admits that she made catastrophic mistakes during the campaign that led to her loss.

"I've tried to learn from my own mistakes," she writes in her author's note. "There are plenty, as you'll see in this book, and they are mine and mine alone."

Clinton's admissions will likely be well received by Democrats who have wanted to hear her -- in unequivocal terms -- admit that she made mistakes that led to Trump's win. Many of those Democrats have been angered by Clinton equivocating at public events across the country about why she lost.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/12/politics/hillary-clinton-what-happened-mistakes/index.html

[gcstomp]

Seriously odd take Bald. I read a bumper sticker today that read same thing as what you are saying "He won. Get over it." As if this report, and this investigation, is about HRC or one party whining. BTW, of course the problems you listed should be the subject, or even very basic governing without threat of government shutdown every 2 months.

Pearl Harbor. Now imagine we simply did not fight back, and the government argued if it really happened, who was really responsible if it did happen, and why cant we just govern and move forward rather than address that we were attacked. If we have an installed stooge in office, verified by following a money trail, you can see this is the single biggest issue in the history of our country.

[Redbirds Fan]

Seriously odd take Bald. I read a bumper sticker today that read same thing as what you are saying "He won. Get over it." As if this report, and this investigation, is about HRC or one party whining. BTW, of course the problems you listed should be the subject, or even very basic governing without threat of government shutdown every 2 months.

Pearl Harbor. Now imagine we simply did not fight back, and the government argued if it really happened, who was really responsible if it did happen, and why cant we just govern and move forward rather than address that we were attacked. If we have an installed stooge in office, verified by following a money trail, you can see this is the single biggest issue in the history of our country.

Of course this is correct, but the President will never take any measures to protect us from further attack, and that is an issue. (To do so would be, for him, an admission that Russia helped him win. Because it is, of course, all about him.)

[chancellor]

That was an error on her part, and the part of her campaign, they were convinced that they had those states in the bag, big mistake. BUT (yeah, that's a big but) I think that it's it's pretty obvious that all of the Russian interference had a lot of effect in such a close election. Rallies, ads, social media postings, all have a swing effect, and it was clear that the Russians wanted HRC to lose.

Actually, there's zippo hard evidence that Russian interference had any effect. Now, not showing up in Wisconsin, barely showing up in Michigan and far too infrequently in Pennsylvania - maybe that didn't have an effect, either, but there's a whole lot of supporting evidence that indicates when a presidential candidate doesn't show up to campaign, that they lose votes.

[Hornsby]

Actually, there's zippo hard evidence that Russian interference had any effect. Now, not showing up in Wisconsin, barely showing up in Michigan and far too infrequently in Pennsylvania - maybe that didn't have an effect, either, but there's a whole lot of supporting evidence that indicates when a presidential candidate doesn't show up to campaign, that they lose votes.

I think that the evidence is slowly coalescing, Mueller is relentless, indictments are starting to pile up, and people are ratting each other out. And I DO believe that sooner rather than later, direct evidence of cooperation by the Trump campaign with the Russians will be found.

Now, I might be a cynic, but when there are hundreds of thousands of votes for 3rd party candidates, and up to 10 percent "undecided" voters, I can see a clear pattern leading to an upset victory. Add in HRC's admitted mistakes, and you have Trump as the 45th President.

[chancellor]

I think that the evidence is slowly coalescing, Mueller is relentless, indictments are starting to pile up, and people are ratting each other out. And I DO believe that sooner rather than later, direct evidence of cooperation by the Trump campaign with the Russians will be found.

You may well be right. I just think it had, relative to the other issues, no effect.

Now, I might be a cynic, but when there are hundreds of thousands of votes for 3rd party candidates, and up to 10 percent "undecided" voters, I can see a clear pattern leading to an upset victory. Add in HRC's admitted mistakes, and you have Trump as the 45th President.

Well, I'd venture to say my point of view is those thousands of votes for 3rd party candidates were much more caused by how the DNC screwed Sanders, and how much contempt the DNC had for Sanders and his supporters. Even the Clinton-supporting NY Times noted how bad it was here: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/u...s-clinton.html

And, I found it especially interesting (or ironic, or both) that when John Podesta was on Face The Nation on Sunday, he was asked this by Nancy Cordes (ahem, who is maybe just a touch to the right of Vladimir Lenin): "How is it that these Russian operatives knew to focus on purple states like Michigan and Wisconsin and your campaign didn’t?"

[Bernie Brewer]

You may well be right. I just think it had, relative to the other issues, no effect.



Well, I'd venture to say my point of view is those thousands of votes for 3rd party candidates were much more caused by how the DNC screwed Sanders, and how much contempt the DNC had for Sanders and his supporters. Even the Clinton-supporting NY Times noted how bad it was here: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/u...s-clinton.html

And, I found it especially interesting (or ironic, or both) that when John Podesta was on Face The Nation on Sunday, he was asked this by Nancy Cordes (ahem, who is maybe just a touch to the right of Vladimir Lenin): "How is it that these Russian operatives knew to focus on purple states like Michigan and Wisconsin and your campaign didn’t?"

Chance, STOP! You’re making way too much sense and we don’t need that. We’ve all made up our minds. CNN already convicted Trump and all of his administration, all we’re waiting for now is for Mueller to catch up.

To recap: We have three fairly minor plea deals. Papadopolous really doesn’t seem to know much more than he lied under questioning, Flynn failed to file paperwork appropriately and likely purposely did not do so. And he probably lied to the FBI about it. Gates will break on Manafort for money laundering. One indictment of a US citizen, for actions unrelated to Trump. Manafort got caught money laundering and will likely go down hard. We have 13 Russian people and 3 Russian entities indicted. An indictment that states no American acted wittingly with these individuals or entities and that the goal was to foment conflict between US citizens.

I’m not seeing the coalescing that Horns is seeing. I’m not seeing “vindication” for that matter either. So again, although it is apparently an unpopular opinion, I’ll just wait to see this goes from here.

[Redbirds Fan]

The problem is illustrated when even some of our smartest posters (chance, bernie) follow the talking points. Guys, I love both of you, but you are killing me.

I believe you guys are playing naive on purpose just for effect. I believe you both know the point isn't whether the Russian interference changed the outcome of the election, although it is unclear whether that happened or not.

You can, just like I can, go back and read the posts here on this site and see the dozens of times our own people regurgitated anti-Hillary rants we now know were straight out of the Kremlin.

There is seldom 'hard evidence' in conspiracy cases, especially when the parties in power are desperate to cover it up. The evidence is sometimes circumstantial, but nonetheless compelling in context. The context is building, and it is getting harder to ignore the trend. It isn't clear yet, but to conclude as does Trump that the cases and indictments so far vindicate him is evidence of his hubris.

[Bernie Brewer]

The problem is illustrated when even some of our smartest posters (chance, bernie) follow the talking points. Guys, I love both of you, but you are killing me.

I believe you guys are playing naive on purpose just for effect. I believe you both know the point isn't whether the Russian interference changed the outcome of the election, although it is unclear whether that happened or not.

You can, just like I can, go back and read the posts here on this site and see the dozens of times our own people regurgitated anti-Hillary rants we now know were straight out of the Kremlin.

There is seldom 'hard evidence' in conspiracy cases, especially when the parties in power are desperate to cover it up. The evidence is sometimes circumstantial, but nonetheless compelling in context. The context is building, and it is getting harder to ignore the trend. It isn't clear yet, but to conclude as does Trump that the cases and indictments so far vindicate him is evidence of his hubris.

Red, I just finished an article on Politico that kind of sums up my feelings. I haven’t said nothing happened, I’ve said it’s not adding up to what everyone here seems to what it to be.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...skeptic-217024

No, I’m not denying the voluminous evidence that Russia, at Kremlin strongman Vladimir Putin’s personal direction, sought to meddle in the 2016 election, and that Donald Trump was clearly his man. The indictment on Friday of 13 Russians—and the incredible forensic detail in the 37-page complaint filed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team—ought to have convinced any reasonable person that the Russia investigation is definitely a somethingburger. But what kind of somethingburger is it?

What kind of somethingburger is it? I’m am still very unsure.

I keep coming back the slapdash nature of Trump’s 2016 operation, and the chaos and dysfunction that everyone who covered that campaign saw play out each day. Like the Trump White House, the Trump campaign was a viper’s nest of incompetence and intrigue, with aides leaking viciously against one another almost daily. So much damaging information poured out of Trump Tower that it’s hard to believe a conspiracy to collude with Moscow to win the election never went public. If there was such a conspiracy, it must have been a very closely guarded secret.

My thoughts exactly. And, we know Trump can’t keep a secret, so maybe even he doesn’t know!

And, I don’t speak emoji. What does the dancing pickle mean?

[chancellor]

The problem is illustrated when even some of our smartest posters (chance, bernie) follow the talking points. Guys, I love both of you, but you are killing me.

Oh, sure, tempt me further.

I believe you guys are playing naive on purpose just for effect.

In my case, it's simply Idon'tcarism versus naivete.

I believe you both know the point isn't whether the Russian interference changed the outcome of the election, although it is unclear whether that happened or not.

Actually, that is the important point for me. Damnum absque injuria and all. Also, I keep looking at people claiming Hillary lost due to Russian interference and can't help challenge the abject stupidity of that claim. It's like looking at a fantasy pitcher who tanked, and claiming it's because his K rate went from 9.0/9 to 8.8/9 while his walk rate went up by 50%, fly ball rate increased by 8%, and HR/9 rate doubled.

You can, just like I can, go back and read the posts here on this site and see the dozens of times our own people regurgitated anti-Hillary rants we now know were straight out of the Kremlin.

If only I were paid 1/1000th of what Mark Zuckerberg was for the same service.

There is seldom 'hard evidence' in conspiracy cases, especially when the parties in power are desperate to cover it up.

No argument, though I do like the juxtaposition of "Trump is stupid" with Trump outwitting the DNC, who, while not illegal to my knowledge, certainly conspired to screw over Sanders. And was totally busted.

[Hornsby]

Actually, that is the important point for me. Damnum absque injuria and all. Also, I keep looking at people claiming Hillary lost due to Russian interference and can't help challenge the abject stupidity of that claim. It's like looking at a fantasy pitcher who tanked, and claiming it's because his K rate went from 9.0/9 to 8.8/9 while his walk rate went up by 50%, fly ball rate increased by 8%, and HR/9 rate doubled.

Well sir, I do take exception to the "abject stupidity" comment, I think that there's abundant evidence, albeit circumstantial, that the Russian efforts certainly hurt HRC's campaign, and helped out Trumps. To what extent it's impossible to say right now, but I have confidence that Mueller is gathering facts that we're simply not aware of. And the hours and hours of testimony contain things that we may not know for months...

[baldgriff]

Pearl Harbor. Now imagine we simply did not fight back, and the government argued if it really happened, who was really responsible if it did happen, and why cant we just govern and move forward rather than address that we were attacked. If we have an installed stooge in office, verified by following a money trail, you can see this is the single biggest issue in the history of our country.

Pearl Harbor?? Really, you know that site where there was tangible physical evidence that a foreign country actually bombing us. Hell, there is still conjecture that we showed the enemy how to attack us.

Currently we still have a great deal of conjecture, what if's and more finger pointing about Russia.

So lets play this out a bit and we find out that we were duped and a foreign power interfered in our election.... What then?

I dont believe that there is a provision for a "redo". So we cant just have a new election, or install the loser. We are already a year removed from the election and still really dont know - though we have a idea.

Do you want to call it an act of war? Probably dont want to have 2 of the top military powers on the planet squaring off.

We dont have to agree that one party is pushing this to justify how it lost. Im fine with that. However, the more effort we continue to publicly wrangle over this the more we continue to act in a divided manner - taking "sides" as it where on whose fault it is. At this point - Move on is actually in my mind the better policy and we should be spending more time of fixing this the gaps.

I dont believe that it is the single biggest issue, because I believe in our Constitution and the various checks and balances that are supposed to be in place to stop one stooge from running over the legislative and judicial branches of our government. Of course, now that there has been such large precedence for executive fiat which started prior to our current President - maybe I should be more concerned and rethink this.

[Redbirds Fan]

Oh, sure, tempt me further.



In my case, it's simply Idon'tcarism versus naivete.



Actually, that is the important point for me. Damnum absque injuria and all. Also, I keep looking at people claiming Hillary lost due to Russian interference and can't help challenge the abject stupidity of that claim. It's like looking at a fantasy pitcher who tanked, and claiming it's because his K rate went from 9.0/9 to 8.8/9 while his walk rate went up by 50%, fly ball rate increased by 8%, and HR/9 rate doubled.



If only I were paid 1/1000th of what Mark Zuckerberg was for the same service.



No argument, though I do like the juxtaposition of "Trump is stupid" with Trump outwitting the DNC, who, while not illegal to my knowledge, certainly conspired to screw over Sanders. And was totally busted.

Ah, a great legal concept.

But while Hillary may have suffered no actionable injury, We The People most certainly did.

Should MS-13 execute a drive-by and send a few rounds flying through someone's living room, would you say they suffered no injury because nobody was struck by the bullets? Of course not.

Pointing to the few who say that Hillary should be declared the winner is like me pointing to the tin-foil crowd who say Obama wasn't born a citizen. It is not a mainstream position and it diverts attention from the serious argument at hand.

Even today, the leaders of the intelligence community shake their heads in wonder and admit that our President has given no orders to do what they can to stop the Russians from repeating their attacks against the upcoming election. Why do we stand around and wait?

No sanctions? No preparations for new attacks on our elections? I'd like to hear some theories besides the obvious (that don't involve 'secret plans').

[Redbirds Fan]

Red, I just finished an article on Politico that kind of sums up my feelings. I haven’t said nothing happened, I’ve said it’s not adding up to what everyone here seems to what it to be.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...skeptic-217024



What kind of somethingburger is it? I’m am still very unsure.



My thoughts exactly. And, we know Trump can’t keep a secret, so maybe even he doesn’t know!

And, I don’t speak emoji. What does the dancing pickle mean?

Nothing, I was thinking back about some of the crazy anti-HRC rants (not from you guys) that used to get posted. Just vile, nasty stuff, that nobody who had every met her or for that matter had a clue about her would believe, and the dancing pickle popped into my head. You'd see the same thing on facebook from what turned out later to be the russian bots and the Kremlin sponsored sites, most of them posing as pro-Bernie or pro-Stein sites or supporters.

I know you guys didn't spend much time on facebook with the Bernie supporters, but the level of vitriol from what we thought at the time were Bernie people (and Stein people) was amazing. I watched otherwise moderate people get caught up in it, as it went from #nevertrump to #anyonebuthillary. That's when the prospects of a Trump presidency became real to me. That's also when I began to sour on Bernie, once he became no longer viable but did so little to bring his supporters to the table. Hillary was definitely the mother of this nightmare, and she earned the "L", but Bernie could have pitched some late innings of great relief had he wanted to do so.

And that's part of the thing. You guys get your girdle knotted up if anyone tries to mention anything else that contributed to this dumpster fire. It was a close game. There were many plays which, had they gone Hillary's way, would have made the difference. Almost everything had to break against her for Trump to win, and it did. So, people talked about it. They will probably continue to talk about it. Get over it. It won't change the outcome, but it is inevitable.

Trump could probably stop people from talking about the election two ways: 1) Quit talking about it himself; and 2) Don't be such a dick.

[Bernie Brewer]

Nothing, I was thinking back about some of the crazy anti-HRC rants (not from you guys) that used to get posted. Just vile, nasty stuff, that nobody who had every met her or for that matter had a clue about her would believe, and the dancing pickle popped into my head. You'd see the same thing on facebook from what turned out later to be the russian bots and the Kremlin sponsored sites, most of them posing as pro-Bernie or pro-Stein sites or supporters.

I know you guys didn't spend much time on facebook with the Bernie supporters, but the level of vitriol from what we thought at the time were Bernie people (and Stein people) was amazing. I watched otherwise moderate people get caught up in it, as it went from #nevertrump to #anyonebuthillary. That's when the prospects of a Trump presidency became real to me. That's also when I began to sour on Bernie, once he became no longer viable but did so little to bring his supporters to the table. Hillary was definitely the mother of this nightmare, and she earned the "L", but Bernie could have pitched some late innings of great relief had he wanted to do so.

And that's part of the thing. You guys get your girdle knotted up if anyone tries to mention anything else that contributed to this dumpster fire. It was a close game. There were many plays which, had they gone Hillary's way, would have made the difference. Almost everything had to break against her for Trump to win, and it did. So, people talked about it. They will probably continue to talk about it. Get over it. It won't change the outcome, but it is inevitable.

Trump could probably stop people from talking about the election two ways: 1) Quit talking about it himself; and 2) Don't be such a dick.

One of my biggest issues with Trump, and there are many, is he just can’t let anything go! The size of his hands, his very smart brain, the Largest/biggest/best ____(crowd, viewership, button, etc)___ ever. It’s all nonsense and his ego is so easily bruised.