A well stated OP that I couldnât agree with more. I want our elections to be pureâŚfrom all outside influences and that includes non-citizens voting. This too should be important to everyone.
Thank you. But, unfortunately, what seems to be most valued here is the ability to toss talking points over the wall.
I wrote the IP because I was tired of that. Weâve had two weeks of the Barr âtotal vindicationâ victory lap. Obviously, that collapsed as soon as one saw even the redacted version of Mullerâs report and I could not see the point of arguing with people about how Mueller saying his efforts did not exonerate Trump should not be taken to mean that Muellerâs efforts did exonerate Trump. I was searching for something more productive⌠but I donât think I found it.
Maybe this site just obsessively condemns us to fruitless bashing?
Oh I think there is hope you just wonât see it on print.
Cognitive dissonance has its limitations.
The fact is, when you care about something you want to see it âwinâ. You want to see those who oppose you âloseâ.
In politics, the GOP and Conservatives in general are perpetually disadvantaged in a purely democratic state, so they embrace the face we live in a representative democracy where the will of the individual is blunted over the system in place.
In other words, they use the rules well and to their advantage. Gerrymandering is a good example, voter culling is another. Ramp up the war on drugs to affect minority populations which can strip them of their right to vote. Make polling places for minorities so onerous one does not want to wait 4 hours to cast a ballot. Make registering to vote difficult and demonize those who seek to promote registration.
One aspect of fighting against giving undocumented workers amnesty is surely that they donât want them being able to vote one day. Which is probably why, despite Puerto Rico voted in favor of applying for statehood, the GOP led Senate wonât vote to approve it. Thatâs 10 million votes they donât want to add to the mix and two Senators they wonât be able to win.
In other words they use every trick in the book to overcome the fact that, all things being equal, they are outnumbered.
So, given all this, if Russia wants to help them, and if they already embrace all of these other specious activities, why would they ever refuse it or want to prevent it in the future?
In the end, itâs not about abortion, guns, taxes or anything else. Itâs about winning or losing to their perceived rivals, Democrats and Liberals. Country be damned, integrity be damned. Who cares if folks who want to vote cannot? Who cares that generations of black men languish in jail? Who cares that millions live in the shadow economy that relies on undocumented workers to exist? The only thing that matters is that a Republican is in the White House, it doesnât matter how awful that person is.
Because in their mind, they have won. And thatâs all that matters.
Exonerate is the wrong word for Mueller to have used.
Iâm with Jim Jordan, âjust burn the report.â Iâve not read it, and I donât intend to.
Mark Levin said Part 2 of the report was a political document - a 200 page op-ed, is all it is. He said a prosecutor could be disbarred for producing a report that that because itâs based on allegations - - he said/she said.
"That is why we have a court of law. That is why prosecutors â dammit! â are not supposed to write essays like this⌠[Mueller] didnât have an obstruction case against the president of the United States or he would have brought it. Iâm using plain English so even Joe Scarborough and Jake Tapper can understand this. Volume two is crap. Volume two was written for slip and fall lawyer Nadler, slip and fall lawyer Schiff. Thatâs why he wrote it. He knew the media would run with it.â
Nah I am just looking at things realistically. I donât expect some folks here to change because itâs against your self interest to do so. If it helps you win, you do it. Everything else be damned.
So you are proposing a world in which the only source of truth is whatever an individual wants it to be â essentially a Hobbesian state of nature. No society can exist on that basis.
And Mark Levin should never offered as the arbiter of reality!
Since Part 2 included a substantial discussion of the legal issues surround obstruction of justice and a sitting president, Levinâs comments on it were untruthful. I just watched the video⌠all Levin was doing was promoting his book.
If we are to view Muellerâs report as having no weight because it is âone personâs opinionâ, then we have to apply the same standard to Barrâs summary of the report as equally of no value. That reduces us to a Hobbesian pre-government world.
It would have been there if the President had agreed to meet with Mueller. You are creating impossible standards.
Represent the Presidentâs side, but without the Presidentâs cooperation.
Bring an indictment or the report is meaningless, but you cannot indict a sitting President.
There is an old cliche in law.
When the facts are on your side, pound the facts.
If the facts are not on your side, pound the law
If neither the facts nor the law are on your side, pound the table.