• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

Barr vs Mueller analysis

Arkage

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2012
2,744
1,572
885
I had originally said Dems shouldn't bother getting mad about Barr's ruling, but apparently Mueller himself thinks Barr was misleading, which makes me substantially more interested in the details in play. Mueller's letter to Barr is here. During Barr's hearing he explained this away as Mueller being upset with the (big bad boogieman) media, not his memo, but the letter clearly states the DoJ's statement itself caused the misleading narrative.

"The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office's work and conclusions. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations."
This is, I believe, directly relevant to the obstruction of justice charge Barr ruled on. The Mueller report makes clear that the primary reason it never declared a verdict on the Obstruction charge, nor even used a criminal framework to begin with, was because Trump is a sitting President. The memo didn't clarify this, and implied that if the President were guilty of a crime, the report would've said as much. This is simply false.

First, a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that “the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions” in violation of the constitutional separation of powers.

The threshold step under the Justice Manual standards is to assess whether a person’s conduct “constitutes a federal offense.” U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Justice Manual § 9-27.220 (2018) (Justice Manual). Fairness concerns counseled against potentially reaching that judgment when no charges can be brought.
"Fairness concerns" only matter if Mueller thought the issue had a good chance of being prosecutable in the first place: a threshold the conspiracy charge never reached. Mueller directly states the obstruction charge was something to either be decided by congress while Trump is a sitting President or through criminal trial after Trump is out of office. Instead Barr took it upon himself to make a ruling on the evidence declaring it insufficient. Barr wrote a memo prior to his appointment stating 1) a President firing and/or "guiding" an investigation into himself isn't obstruction as he controls the executive branch and 2) even if premise (1) is false, collusion is required for an obstruction charge. Thus it's clear from the start how Barr was going to rule on this and why Trump appointed him. But Mueller disagrees with him on these premises in the report:

Disputing Premise 1 said:
At the same time, the President’s position as the head of the Executive Branch provided him with unique and powerful means of influencing official proceedings, subordinate officers, and potential witnesses — all of which is relevant to a potential obstruction-of-justice analysis.
Disputing Premise 1 said:
Under applicable Supreme Court precedent, the Constitution does not categorically and permanently immunize a President for obstructing justice through the use of his Article II powers.
Disputing Premise 2 said:
Although the obstruction statutes do not require proof of such a crime, the absence of that evidence affects the analysis of the President’s intent and requires consideration of other possible motives for his conduct.
Mueller here clearly says that Article 2 powers don't shield the President, and that conspiracy charges aren't required for obstruction (i.e. Martha Stewart), but can help decide intent as it is key to proving "corrupt" intent. Here is where Mueller pulls his biggest move:

Although the series of events we investigated involved discrete acts, the overall pattern of the President’s conduct towards the investigations can shed light on the nature of the President’s acts and the inferences that can be drawn about his intent. In particular, the actions we investigated can be divided into two phases, reflecting a possible shift in the President’s motives. The first phase covered the period from the President’s first interactions with Comey through the President’s firing of Comey. During that time, the President had been repeatedly told he was not personally under investigation. Soon after the firing of Comey and the appointment of the Special Counsel, however, the President became aware that his own conduct was being investigated in an obstruction-of-justice inquiry. At that point, the President engaged in a second phase of conduct, involving public attacks on the investigation, non-public efforts to control it, and efforts in both public and private to encourage witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation. Judgments about the nature of the President’s motives during each phase would be informed by the totality of the evidence.
In other words, Mueller is signaling here that while there would be somewhat weak case for Trump obstructing justice in relation to Russia (Phase 1) through the lens of intent, there is a good case for Trump obstructing justice after finding out he was under personal investigation (Phase 2). The collusion narrative and conclusions are irrelevant in respect to intent to obstruction happening in Phase 2. When phase 2 began, Trump attempted to limit and remove the SC entirely but McGahn, Sessions, and Lewandowski all refused to budge on his various directives. He began to publicly and privately praise witnesses that refused to cooperate, had discussions on pardons, and informed cooperating witnesses they were being "hostile" against him.

Now do I think Dems should spend time impeaching? Not really. It's politically unfeasible and distracts from winning points Dems can make against Trump. But it should be clear that Barr and Trump purposefully mischaracterized Mueller's findings in service to a "no collusion no conspiracy" spin. Consider the Gaf poll showing over 50% here think Trump is totally vindicated and innocent based upon the report's conclusions and it's no wonder why Barr did what he did.
 
Last edited:
Jun 26, 2018
2,247
1,443
385
Milwaukee, WI
During Barr's hearing he explained this away as Mueller being upset with the (big bad boogieman) media, not his memo, but the letter clearly states the DoJ's statement itself caused the misleading narrative.
Both men agreed that getting as much of the report out and as soon as possible would alleviate the concerns that Mueller had. Barr subsequently released 99.999% of the report to leaders of Congress.

Mueller also said he did not disagree or find anything factually inaccurate in Barr's letter.

This is a HUGE nothing-burger.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/andrew-mccarthy-mueller-letter-barr-report-washington-post

“Mueller complained to Barr about memo on key findings.” That’s the banner headline at the top of the Washington Post’s website Wednesday. But when you click your way to the actual story, it turns out that the headline is not true. Special Counsel Mueller’s complaint, which targeted Attorney General Barr’s March 24 letter explaining the report, is not about the “key findings.” It’s about the narrative.

Barr and Mueller spoke by phone the day after Mueller sent his letter. If you wade through the first 13 paragraphs of the Post’s story, you finally find the bottom line:

"When Barr pressed Mueller on whether he thought Barr’s memo to Congress was inaccurate, Mueller said he did not but felt that the media coverage of it was misinterpreting the investigation, officials said."

Before Attorney General Barr issued his letter outlining the special counsel’s conclusions, Mueller was invited to review it for accuracy. Mueller declined. After Barr explained that Mueller had not decided the obstruction question, the press reported on this dereliction. Mueller is miffed about the press coverage … but he can’t say Barr misrepresented his findings.

Like the Mueller investigation, this episode is designed to fuel a political narrative. But we don’t need a narrative – we don’t even need anyone to explain the report plainly. That’s because we now have the report. We can read it for ourselves. The rest is noise.
 
Last edited:

Arkage

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2012
2,744
1,572
885
Both men agreed that getting as much of the report out and as soon as possible would alleviate the concerns that Mueller had. Barr subsequently released 99.999% of the report to leaders of Congress.

Mueller also said he did not disagree or find anything factually inaccurate in Barr's letter.

This is a HUGE nothing-burger.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/andrew-mccarthy-mueller-letter-barr-report-washington-post

“Mueller complained to Barr about memo on key findings.” That’s the banner headline at the top of the Washington Post’s website Wednesday. But when you click your way to the actual story, it turns out that the headline is not true. Special Counsel Mueller’s complaint, which targeted Attorney General Barr’s March 24 letter explaining the report, is not about the “key findings.” It’s about the narrative.

Barr and Mueller spoke by phone the day after Mueller sent his letter. If you wade through the first 13 paragraphs of the Post’s story, you finally find the bottom line:

"When Barr pressed Mueller on whether he thought Barr’s memo to Congress was inaccurate, Mueller said he did not but felt that the media coverage of it was misinterpreting the investigation, officials said."

Before Attorney General Barr issued his letter outlining the special counsel’s conclusions, Mueller was invited to review it for accuracy. Mueller declined. After Barr explained that Mueller had not decided the obstruction question, the press reported on this dereliction. Mueller is miffed about the press coverage … but he can’t say Barr misrepresented his findings.

Like the Mueller investigation, this episode is designed to fuel a political narrative. But we don’t need a narrative – we don’t even need anyone to explain the report plainly. That’s because we now have the report. We can read it for ourselves. The rest is noise.
The memo literally says Barr “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office's work and conclusions” and that this is why the public was confused. This is not the same as claiming there are falsehoods or inaccuracies. It’s the difference between a lie and a significant mischaracterization.

And considering their clear division on what constitutes obstruction of justice as outlined in the other 90% of my post that you ignored, it makes sense that Mueller would find Barr’s memo a deep mischaracterization of the Reports conclusions. Even Chris Wallace at Fox News admits there is clear division between the two and criticized the professional opinionators at Fox for downplaying it.

Trump didn't collude. The end. And him wanting to shut down a clearly partisan witch hunt was not, in and of itself, obstruction. The end. Move on with your pathetic little life already.



And what are those? Post birth abortions? Open borders? Tax raises? Democrats don't have any "winning points" against Trump. You're living in some warped version of reality.
You truly contribute nothing of value.
 
Last edited:
Jan 18, 2019
249
361
270
Trump didn't collude. The end. And him wanting to shut down a clearly partisan witch hunt was not, in and of itself, obstruction. The end. Move on with your pathetic little life already.

winning points Dems can make against Trump.
And what are those? Post birth abortions? Open borders? Tax raises? Democrats don't have any "winning points" against Trump. You're living in some warped version of reality.
 

JORMBO

Darkness no more
Mar 5, 2009
7,094
4,869
1,400
I tend to tune out the news when it becomes too centered around Washington DC soap opera stories. Just mentioning that since I may be missing some details from the past week here.

But why is there so much drama over the summary right now? We have the full report out (minus a few redactions). Anyone can read it. If the Democrats feel there is enough there they can push forward. If not then shut up and move on.
 

Teletraan1

Member
May 17, 2012
6,304
3,314
670
Canada
I love this whole angle that the white house and the DOJ were pushing a narrative that existed for like 3 weeks. There was no factually incorrect statements in the Barr letter, the summary information was quoted directly from the report, he was not required to release it, the redacted version where none of the conclusions are redacted is available for anyone to read, the unredacted version is available to congress. Like there wasn't a narrative that existed for like 3 years that the Trump administration were treasonous Putin puppets. This is all just butthurt over not being able to control the narrative by the Dems and their media arm. Plus it shows you how disingenuous Bob Mueller is by claiming it mischaracterized his report but does not elucidate exactly what those mischaracterizations are.

The poll you are citing here was bullshit. There were no middle of the road answers, it was either full vindication or lock him up in terms of obstruction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigedole
Jun 26, 2018
2,247
1,443
385
Milwaukee, WI
The memo literally says Barr “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office's work and conclusions” and that this is why the public was confused.
And when pressed, Mueller did NOT disagree with the conclusion of the Barr letter. He was upset at the way it was being portrayed by the media. You're being intentionally obtuse.

Even Cris Wallace at Fox News admits there is clear division between the two and criticized the professional opinionators at Fox for downplaying it.
Chris Wallace was owned by Laura Ingraham. 99.999% of the report is available to Congressional leaders. Mueller was upset at the way it was being portrayed by the media.
 
Last edited:

Arkage

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2012
2,744
1,572
885
And when pressed, Mueller did NOT disagree with the conclusion of the Barr letter. He was upset at the way it was being portrayed by the media. You're being intentionally obtuse.



Chris Wallace was owned by Laura Ingraham. 99.999% of the report is available to Congressional leaders. Mueller was upset at the way it was being portrayed by the media.
The obtuse one here is clearly the one unable to differentiate between a lie and a mischaracterization due to feeding directly from the mouth of Fox News opinion staff like Ingraham.
 
Last edited:

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
6,939
9,045
640
Mueller is a big boy adult. He is a member of the FBI. If he was investigating someone for 2 years and found 100% evidence of a crime he would be compelled to say so. He did not.

All this talk of Barr misrepresenting the report is #resistance dead-enders clinging to the only shred left to support their theory. Again, Mueller is a big boy, he can speak for himself if there is something of utmost importance. His relative silence speaks volumes

The sad truth is that their vaunted hero failed them. But like all cultist true believers who lived through a prophecied apocalypse date, they have no other choice but to double down in paranoia and conspiracy.

Only real question is how much they will let this destroy their chances in 2020
 
Last edited:

lefty1117

Member
Mar 20, 2017
542
220
250
The most important person in all of this is the person we haven't heard from yet, which is Bob Mueller. He needs to come in and answer questions so we can finally put this to rest.

As far as why is congress spending time parsing the report and parsing Barr's framing of it? Because they are refusing to cooperate in any of the congressional inquiries, and in fact people in the administration have been instructed not to comply with subpoenas. They certainly aren't acting as if this was a big nothing-burger. Don't try to explain it away as wanting to protect their own privacy because if the shoe was on the other foot and people were withholding information on behalf of the Obama administration, for example, we'd be hearing the same cries from republicans.

Mueller needs to talk, then this can finally be put to rest (or further actioned if there is really something there). The public won't trust the word of an AG who appears to have been brought in specifically to do what he has done - frame the report and guide public opinion.
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
5,452
4,335
735
Both men agreed that getting as much of the report out and as soon as possible would alleviate the concerns that Mueller had. Barr subsequently released 99.999% of the report to leaders of Congress.

Mueller also said he did not disagree or find anything factually inaccurate in Barr's letter.

This is a HUGE nothing-burger.
Yep. This is nothing more than PR from people who hate Trump and cannot stomach that he came out virtually unscathed after two years of impeachment speculation. They are twisting Mueller's desire to release more information sooner into headlines suggesting that Barr's summary was full of lies. Sickening.
 

Xenon

Member
Yep. This is nothing more than PR from people who hate Trump and cannot stomach that he came out virtually unscathed after two years of impeachment speculation. They are twisting Mueller's desire to release more information sooner into headlines suggesting that Barr's summary was full of lies. Sickening.
They would impeach Trump for jaywalking if they could get away with it.
 
Jan 18, 2019
249
361
270
The most important person in all of this is the person we haven't heard from yet, which is Bob Mueller.
We already have his report. Fuck off.

He needs to come in and answer questions so we can finally put this to rest.
What you mean is "so Democrats can get their soundbites in and cut him off if he ever starts saying something they don't like."

As far as why is congress spending time parsing the report and parsing Barr's framing of it?
Because they're partisan trash playing to their base of retards. "Did you not look at every piece of underlying evidence?" "No, that's what Mueller was hired to do and we took his summaries as true." "OMG YOU DIDN'T LOOK AT THE UNDERLYING EVIDENCE WTF REEEEEEEEEEESIGN!"

Mueller needs to talk, then this can finally be put to rest
Bullshit. Your kind will then demand we drag every one of the Democrat investigators up. And then we'll need to drag up every witness. It's clear as fucking hell your kind just want to drag this shit out because you have nothing else to run on besides collusion obstruction.

The public won't trust the word of an AG who appears to have been brought in specifically to do what he has done - frame the report and guide public opinion.
What you mean is "left wing propaganda outlets masquerading as news won't believe anything said by anybody that doesn't immediately lead to ORANGE MAN BAD being driven from office." Your kind didn't give a shit when Eric Holder called himself Obama's wingman. So keep your cockhole shut.
 
Last edited:

lefty1117

Member
Mar 20, 2017
542
220
250
We already have his report. Fuck off.



What you mean is "so Democrats can get their soundbites in and cut him off if he ever starts saying something they don't like."



Because they're partisan trash playing to their base of retards. "Did you not look at every piece of underlying evidence?" "No, that's what Mueller was hired to do and we took his summaries as true." "OMG YOU DIDN'T LOOK AT THE UNDERLYING EVIDENCE WTF REEEEEEEEEEESIGN!"



Bullshit. Your kind will then demand we drag every one of the Democrat investigators up. And then we'll need to drag up every witness. It's clear as fucking hell your kind just want to drag this shit out because you have nothing else to run on besides collusion obstruction.



What you mean is "left wing propaganda outlets masquerading as news won't believe anything said by anybody that doesn't immediately lead to ORANGE MAN BAD being driven from office." Your kind didn't give a shit when Eric Holder called himself Obama's wingman. So keep your cockhole shut.
What are you afraid of?

Why not just release the information?

Why hide the summaries that Mueller's team wrote?

Why not have the people who were involved come out and speak about it so we can put all the questions and analysis to rest?

Like you, I don't want this to drag on forever either, but the signals of obfuscation and cover up are clear and if you're not seeing it that's your problem I suppose. At the end of the day, releasing the info and interviewing all of the people so that the public understanding is clear is what needs to happen to move on from this episode. By withholding info, by failing to appear at hearings, by ignoring subpoenas, it simply adds to the confusion rather than clear it up. And you would agree that clarity is the end goal, wouldn't you?
 
Last edited:
Jan 18, 2019
249
361
270
What are you afraid of?
I'm not 'afraid' of anything. Simply tired of this clearly partisan witch hunt being used as a distraction while elected officials abdicate their responsibility. You were put in DC to help Americans. Not to grandstand on imaginary collusion/obstruction while doing nothing to secure the borders, nothing to stop IP theft from foreign countries, etc.
 

Pumpkin Seeds

Member
Jul 13, 2018
621
733
365
There is only public confusion because the media and friends lied to the people about Russiagate for years. There was never any chance they'd find that. People were fed a national hysteria and it's a hard come down from such a crazy state of mind.

I'm sorry, but it really is just Mueller trying to the animosity pointed in a different direction. Every sane person is at least slightly scared of the hysterical mob at this point.



There's an entire nation of that and it frightens me. They had their anger set on Mueller. He didn't want that shit.
 
Last edited:

Cucked SoyBoy

Member
Dec 18, 2018
512
717
290
This shit is hilarious. After two years of Democrats telling us "once the Mueller report drops Trump is fucked" now we have the report and there's no crime. Rachel Maddow's been saying for two years that the Trump presidency is literally a Russian intelligence operation and "any day now we'll have the Mueller report to prove me right!" Saturday Night Live was doing "A Very Mueller Christmas" skits predicting that Trump would be dragged out of the White House in handcuffs FFS.

Well, we got the report and it sounded a lot like "Womp, womp, waaaahhhh." Now you want to move the goalposts and say that because Trump complained on Twitter that the investigation was unfair or took too long, that this is obstruction. Y'all are at the point where you're throwing the gun at the Terminator because you ran out of bullets.

Tell you what, if you have a problem with Barr's handling of this, how about you appoint another special prosecutor so he can spend $30 million and come back in two years with another whole lotta nothin'.
 

montgomery

Banned
Apr 21, 2019
33
4
80
Frankly Americans, your entire political system is fatally corrupted now. Trump has gained control over the Scotus and is defying the law as regards Congress.

I think that maybe the embracing of Trump could have something to do with Americans coming together to wave the flag as the rest of the world draws away from America.

And of course, America must finally throw out the failed American way and start to accept socially responsible capitalism, as is practiced in the rest of the world. The common people aren't going to be able to endure much more hardship that is brought on by the greedy 1% or 2% of the wealthiest.
 
Jun 26, 2018
2,247
1,443
385
Milwaukee, WI
And of course, America must finally throw out the failed American way and start to accept socially responsible capitalism, as is practiced in the rest of the world. The common people aren't going to be able to endure much more hardship that is brought on by the greedy 1% or 2% of the wealthiest.
You forgot the /s.
 

Dev1lXYZ

Member
Sep 1, 2017
788
536
380
Frankly Americans, your entire political system is fatally corrupted now. Trump has gained control over the Scotus and is defying the law as regards Congress.

I think that maybe the embracing of Trump could have something to do with Americans coming together to wave the flag as the rest of the world draws away from America.

And of course, America must finally throw out the failed American way and start to accept socially responsible capitalism, as is practiced in the rest of the world. The common people aren't going to be able to endure much more hardship that is brought on by the greedy 1% or 2% of the wealthiest.
Well, I wish the best of luck to the rest of the world then. They won’t be missed by anyone here in the United States.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ConnorDuffy1977

infinitys_7th

Gold Member
Oct 1, 2006
5,177
5,678
1,560
Barr and Trump purposefully mischaracterized Mueller's findings in service to a "no collusion no conspiracy" spin.
Nothing you quote Mueller on with regards to Barr has anything to do with collusion. There was no collusion. Get over it and quit trying to rope it into your arguments about obstruction as if there is something there.
 

infinitys_7th

Gold Member
Oct 1, 2006
5,177
5,678
1,560
Frankly Americans, your entire political system is fatally corrupted now. Trump has gained control over the Scotus and is defying the law as regards Congress.

I think that maybe the embracing of Trump could have something to do with Americans coming together to wave the flag as the rest of the world draws away from America.

And of course, America must finally throw out the failed American way and start to accept socially responsible capitalism, as is practiced in the rest of the world. The common people aren't going to be able to endure much more hardship that is brought on by the greedy 1% or 2% of the wealthiest.
Lol, the average European is not significantly more better off than the average American.
 

montgomery

Banned
Apr 21, 2019
33
4
80
Your suffering is yours alone Americans.

And your military might has been brought to a standstill because of the nuclear threat. It's called MAD. (mutually assured destruction)

Obama hijacked his country when he made the deal with Putin to eliminate Syria's chem/bio weapons. And Assad gleefully agreed because it took away America's chance of playing the same WMD's lies as that which worked in Iraq.

Does that make Obama a hero or a traitor? That's for Americans to decide. But one thing is for sure and that is that Russia was enabled and has now stopped all US momentum in the ME as was planned in the PNAC agenda.

Yes, the rest of the world can afford to look away now.
 

Corderlain

Member
Jun 12, 2018
607
727
325
Pretty impressive he can obstructe justice over a non-existent crime. That's some next level shit
 

montgomery

Banned
Apr 21, 2019
33
4
80
Lol, the average European is not significantly more better off than the average American.
Well, you're simply wrong about that. Averages in the US are skewed because of the huge income inequality. My only argument needed to illustrate that to you Americans is for now just pointing you at a link on the world's happiest countries. Your internal poverty problems are more visible to you than to me, a Canadian.
 

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
6,939
9,045
640
Hearing “your political system is corrupt now” is hilarious if you are actually an American who has lived through the election of 2000. Just huge lolz @ “now”

You wonder why over half the country doesn’t vote? Cos they KNOW it is corrupt and has been for a long time.

This isn’t a new thingy. You get your choice of A or B and if you dare to vote C you are branded an insane lunatic. This is no democracy
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ConnorDuffy1977

infinitys_7th

Gold Member
Oct 1, 2006
5,177
5,678
1,560
Your suffering is yours alone Americans.

And your military might has been brought to a standstill because of the nuclear threat. It's called MAD. (mutually assured destruction)

Obama hijacked his country when he made the deal with Putin to eliminate Syria's chem/bio weapons. And Assad gleefully agreed because it took away America's chance of playing the same WMD's lies as that which worked in Iraq.

Does that make Obama a hero or a traitor? That's for Americans to decide. But one thing is for sure and that is that Russia was enabled and has now stopped all US momentum in the ME as was planned in the PNAC agenda.

Yes, the rest of the world can afford to look away now.
Have fun when your astronomical taxes go even higher to fund your military because you will not be leeching off the US anymore.

Hopefully Trump deals with the US subsidizing your drug costs as well. Time to pay your fair share.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ConnorDuffy1977
Jun 26, 2018
2,247
1,443
385
Milwaukee, WI
My only argument needed to illustrate that to you Americans is for now just pointing you at a link on the world's happiest countries.
What a crock of shit. Nobody wants to live in Finland or Iceland. Their professional sports are shit and their entertainment industry is shit. So is Canada's.
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
7,070
8,225
880
What a crock of shit. Nobody wants to live in Finland or Iceland. Their professional sports are shit and their entertainment industry is shit. So is Canada's.
woah woah woah

Bryan Adams? Corey Hart? Safety Dance?

And we have the CFL as well!
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Joe T.

eclipze

Member
Mar 30, 2007
365
96
990
Looking forward to hearing Mueller testify and clear up all of the confusion caused by Barr.
 

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
6,939
9,045
640
What on Earth does “your military might has been brought to a standstill” even mean? You do realize that even in this environment military budgets are climbing and signed by both Ds and Rs?

In my wildest dreams our military expansion is at a stand still and that money is going to my health care instead. But only in dreams. In reality US military budgets keep climbing, even as one side swears the commander in chief is a secret Manchurian candidate dictator. they sign the bills anyways
 
Last edited:

montgomery

Banned
Apr 21, 2019
33
4
80
Looking forward to hearing Mueller testify and clear up all of the confusion caused by Barr.
I wouldn't. There's only false hope in waiting for either of the major political parties doing something good for the people. The Dem establishment side might win this fight but that just solidifies the establishment hold on the people.

You need a breakaway movement that has their first interest in coming to the rescue of the people. This is all about universal health care as well as socially responsible government on many social issues. The American people are being cheated out of a piece of the American pie.
The poverty and despair of ordinary Americans can't be hidden any longer. It's being broadcast to the world with the outrageous demonstrations of Trump and the fighting back of the other side.
 

montgomery

Banned
Apr 21, 2019
33
4
80
What on Earth does “your military might has been brought to a standstill” even mean? You do realize that even in this environment military budgets are climbing and signed by both Ds and Rs?

In my wildest dreams our military expansion is at a stand still and that money is going to my health care instead. But only in dreams. In reality US military budgets keep climbing, even as one side swears the commander in chief is a secret Manchurian candidate dictator. they sign the bills anyways
You misunderstand what I said but you understand how the situation is so dismal.

I didn't suggest that military spending is stopped or even lowered. I said that the US military is ineffective now because the next planned wars are going to have Nuclear armed nations standing in the way. US military might is ineffective in the face of MAD. (mutually assured destruction)

Syria has been lost to Russia. Venezuela is at a standstill because of Russia's and China's stand with Maduro.

But you do get it right on your health care and how your interests are sacrificed for the military.

luv from Canada.
 

Cucked SoyBoy

Member
Dec 18, 2018
512
717
290
US military might is indeed suffering. We are stretched way too thin by having bases and troops in every country from Spain to Korea. If it was up to me I'd bring them all home and put them to work patrolling our own borders. We also waste a ton of money on useless soldiers that don't do anything (women etc).


As far as "poverty" yeah when you import millions of poor people every year, with no job skills from all over the world who don't speak English, you're going to end up with a lot of poverty.
 
Last edited:

nemiroff

Member
Feb 19, 2018
387
476
295
Looking forward to hearing Mueller testify and clear up all of the confusion caused by Barr.
What confusion? Even as an outsider in another country and language I find all of this relatively simple to understand. Even the "confusion" regarding the Mueller letter to Barr that for some reason the OP can't decode, is straight forward stuff: Because the press is stupid, Mueller wanted Barr to release his summaries (which are in the full report). But Barr just wanted to release the full report to avoid a partisan press frenzy. Simple enough if you ask me..
 

montgomery

Banned
Apr 21, 2019
33
4
80
US military might is indeed suffering. We are stretched way too thin by having bases and troops in every country from Spain to Korea. If it was up to me I'd bring them all home and put them to work patrolling our own borders. We also waste a ton of money on useless soldiers that don't do anything (women etc).


As far as "poverty" yeah when you import millions of poor people every year, with no job skills from all over the world who don't speak English, you're going to end up with a lot of poverty.
US military might isn't suffering at all. The US continues to draw away from all other world powers as regards military strength.

My point seems to fly over everybody's head so far. US military might is of no significance in the face of challenges by other nuclear powers.

Maybe none of you have heard of MAD? (mutually assured destruction)

The quick explanation of why it matters is in the fact that the US hasn't invaded and destroyed Russia and/or China.
 

infinitys_7th

Gold Member
Oct 1, 2006
5,177
5,678
1,560
Looking forward to hearing Mueller testify and clear up all of the confusion caused by Barr.
The only "confusion" is with regards to obstruction that no one cares about beyond claiming it makes Trump even more Orange Bad Mannish.

Still no collusion. Two years and completely clear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam