Mueller Investigation

A Gunt is large trophy, but it can’t be handed to you. It’s something you must work hard for day in and day out.

A gunt is earned through perseverance.

It’s a lifetime achievement of sorts. A gunt represents years of dedication.

Sort of like how the President has a gunt after eating cheeseburgers every day for 60 years?

yahtzee

It doesn’t help when your facts are very often wrong because you didn’t do the investigation part.

No wonder CNN sucks.

To be perfectly honest I'm glad of the verdict, assuming its' honesty.

I'd not see a verdict of collusion as being a victory for anyone. The idea that this is a defeat for "the left" presumes that partisan domestic politics should be considered more important than the truth of the situation and if Trump is innocent the fact you don't effectively have a Russian agent as the POTUS is cause for relief, not bickering.

So well done Trump on not being as corrupt as we had suspected.

On the other hand (and this isn't a swipe at our right leaning members), what does it suggest about his competence in office if he was effectively surrounded by people who were breaking the law and making deals with Russian officials yet really was oblivious to the fact?

How much confidence does that inspire knowing someone who completely failed to detect or act on that is now numero uno in the white House?

It has been the single biggest issue for the political classes for the last two years. It has wasted a tremendous amount of political capital.

Agreed, but there are some people on the left who seem to be seeing the finding that POTUS didn't commit treason as a bad thing.

Perspective. Keep some.

This, it all seems like the trumpistas have completely forgotten that a bunch of people have been convicted and that it only seems that they didn't make a deal because they were already doing the same thing. So it is sort of like if priests were going to bribe Alabama republican Roy Moore to help them out in child molestation cases, but found out he already liked molesting children so they both just laughed and went on molesting children without making any deals.

So could @Zombie ,@Dayton3 ,@Tuttle ,@Marso or one of the other alt right minions clarify something for me.

If I am president, and I shoot my opponents in the face, and then I appoint an AG that thinks a president cannot be indicted for murder, and he is approved by the senate full of my people, then I am completely innocent of murder and any other crime because the justice department won't indict me no matter how much evidence there is?

I am trying to wrap my head around your idea of innocent and being a person who uses logic and reason I am having some trouble warping my thoughts to understand your definitions. I could use a little more explanation of how innocent works in your universe.

Of course the president in such a case is NOT innocent.

He simply can not be indicted while in office.

He can be impeached and removed from office, he can resign, his term can run out.

As soon as he is out of office he can and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

That's why I didn't bother to answer that retard.

That question has been asked to death and answered in this thread already multiple times.

Yeah. These people love to infer that just because a president can't be indicted while in office means people who believe this want to simply "let them go".

By the way, what is the significance about "shooting someone in the face"? Does that make a murder any worse than shooting someone in the chest, stomach, groin or for that matter in the thigh?

Just like they love to say "Donald Trump cheated on his PREGNANT wife!!" How does the wife being pregnant make sexual infidelity worse?

This. It shows where this debate has ended up that it takes @Dayton3 to clear things up.

Trump's management style seems to be "I don't care how you get it done, just get it done. Don't bother me with details."

True. But in all fairness there are a lot of people like that. Including several presidents we've had.

I thought it was more like "I don't care if you get anything done, just tell me you love me."

That's exactly what they're going to have to do to have a shot at winning. John Kerry ran as "Not-Bush" in '04 and that didn't end well for the Democrats. John McCain ran as "Not-Obama" in '12 and that didn't end well for the Republicans.

I don't know if this has already been provided, but:

"The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks."

Source

I agree, candidates should run on their own merits, not the failings of their opponents. "At least I'm not as bad as the other guy" is pretty poor form when running for such a high profile position. It suggests you have nothing positive to offer and that your strategies in office will be similarly derisive.

Sounds like my news director.

I'm thinking getting shot in the face leaves the victim visibly disfigured for life if they survive, so it's crueler?

Because being pregnant sucks ass, and it's the husbands fault she has to suffer through the pregnancy while he's out getting his dick wet. And if he's cheating because he doesn't find his pregnant wife attractive anymore, that's an extra dickish move.

Yeah, that's not quite the same as what you said.

Oh, so Wikileaks didn't disseminate information given to them by Russian government actors (aka Russian Intelligence) that was obtained illegally by Russian government actors (aka Russian Intelligence). How silly of me to read that sentence that way. Mea culpa. [/sarcasm]

All the celebrating from Trump and his sycophants reminds me of football players who start waving the ball around in celebration before they cross the goal line. Usually it turns out okay, but sometimes the premature celebrant ends up looking like a real idiot. Was it Gandalf who said "the hasty stroke oft goes astray?" Waiting until the actual full text comes out would seem to me to be more prudent...but whatever.

You mean Mitt Romney?


To be fair, Romney, Kerry, and Dole (that's as far back as I remember) only got their nominations because the heavy hitter candidates wanted to wait and not challenge an incumbent. Hillary might well have defeated Bush in '04, Trump could have had a decent shot against Obama in '12.

I lived by the same motto as a teenager.

Anyone and everyone hacked that server.

If you work with servers for a living then you know that even the “secure” ones receive multiple threats per day.

In other words, Russia may have provided the data to WikiLeaks. To my knowledge, they are the only cited hackers of the server. But the general public doesn’t realize that there were likely tens-of-thousands of data-breaches over the course of several years on an unsecured server belonging to SecState.

Wrong server.