• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

General political chat

21stamps

Well-Known Member
The fact that the special counsel released a statement on this, when they never do, says a lot. It’s quite extraordinary.
Chris Cuomo is trying to make sense of it. It’s almost like they’re doubling down.


Let me clarify this a bit... CNN is repeatedly saying ‘the statement doesn’t say it’s all false. It’s carefully worded.’

Cuomo went on to say ‘maybe this shows that all prior news stories were accurate”
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
Time for a controversial statement of my own. The decline in churchgoing in the West has lead to the erosion of traditional Western Values and a decline in morality.

As Russell Kirk wrote in The Conservative MInd-the basis of any conservative order is religious conviction. If some have their way and destroy religion it will totally change this country and we will no longer be the same nation.
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
"In American law, subornation of perjury is the crime of persuading a person to commit perjury, the swearing of a false oath to tell the truth in a legal proceeding, whether spoken or written. According to federal law, the punishment for suborning perjury includes fines and a possible prison sentence of up to five years."
Tick, tock, Donnie.

It is always best to wait for the facts before declaring someone guilty-don't you think that is a good idea.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
I wasn't being serious, of course, just taking a cheap shot at the pseudo-Christian president. Morality and attendance of religious services are unrelated in my view.
@Jim S, is this something we actually agree on? Needless to say, I'm referring to the second sentence. Your like took me by surprise, so forgive me for asking.

ETA: Ah! I missed your reply to EricsBiscuit just above, which clarifies your position. I think you must have liked my post by mistake.
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
Chris Cuomo is trying to make sense of it. It’s almost like they’re doubling down.


Let me clarify this a bit... CNN is repeatedly saying ‘the statement doesn’t say it’s all false. It’s carefully worded.’

Cuomo went on to say ‘maybe this shows that all prior news stories were accurate”

A lot of news outlets including Fox and Bill Hemmer made fools of themselves today. They jumped all over this fake news story.

This is why the press has very little credibility to me. Just about any story has to be verified before I believe them anymore.

Fake news is hurting this nation and no one that can think for themselves should believe otherwise.
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
@Jim S, is this something we actually agree on? Needless to say, I'm referring to the second sentence. Your like took me by surprise, so forgive me for asking.

ETA: Ah! I missed your reply to EricsBiscuit just above, which clarifies your position. I think you must have liked my post by mistake.

No actually I agreed with the part where you stated "morality and attendance at religious services are unrelated in my view".

The temple for all of us is in our heart.
Late edit-religious services are also important but not the be all end all. Just another part of the entire picture.
 
Last edited:

21stamps

Well-Known Member
Cuomo is going on and on and on about how Trump wants “the brown man” to stay out of our country.

He didn’t used to be this bad, maybe he’s hanging out with Lemon too much.
 

SorcererMC

Well-Known Member
They did not say they would correct the Mueller report-they said they should be able to respond to it. What is your source for the info you posted?
Rudy Giuliani, who has referred to both a rebuttal and corrections.
1. Most recently, per Giuliani exclusive interview with the Hill 1/11/19:
"Rudy Giuliani says President Trump's legal team should be allowed to “correct” special counsel Mueller's final report before Congress or the American people get the chance to read it.

The claim, made in a telephone interview with The Hill on Thursday evening, goes further than the president’s legal advisers have ever gone before in arguing they have a right to review the conclusions of Mueller’s probe, which is now in its 20th month.

“As a matter of fairness, they should show it to you — so we can correct it if they’re wrong,” said the former New York City mayor, who is a member of Trump's personal legal team. “They’re not God, after all. They could be wrong.”
[....]
Giuliani repeatedly stressed the importance of protecting executive privilege, however.

“Of course we have to see [the report] before it goes to Congress. We have reserved executive privilege and we have a right to assert it. The only way we can assert it is if we see what is in the report.”

2. Per Business Insider: "Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's lead defense lawyer, told INSIDER last year [4 Sept 2018] that the White House wants to review and edit the special counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian election interference before it's released to the public." 4 Sept 2018: As prosecutors put together the report, Trump's current and former lawyers have said that the information contained in it is protected by executive privilege. For that reason, they say the White House needs to sign off on the report's final version in the event that deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein — who is overseeing Mueller — chooses to release it to Congress or the public.
Giuliani said Tuesday that Trump's team would waive executive privilege if "we had an adequate opportunity to review the report before it was released to the public; if we felt that — even if we disagreed with its findings — it was fair; and if we had the chance to release a rebuttal report simultaneously that addresses all of Mueller's allegations."
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
Rudy Giuliani, who has referred to both a rebuttal and corrections.
1. Most recently, per Giuliani exclusive interview with the Hill 1/11/19:
"Rudy Giuliani says President Trump's legal team should be allowed to “correct” special counsel Mueller's final report before Congress or the American people get the chance to read it.

The claim, made in a telephone interview with The Hill on Thursday evening, goes further than the president’s legal advisers have ever gone before in arguing they have a right to review the conclusions of Mueller’s probe, which is now in its 20th month.

“As a matter of fairness, they should show it to you — so we can correct it if they’re wrong,” said the former New York City mayor, who is a member of Trump's personal legal team. “They’re not God, after all. They could be wrong.”
[....]
Giuliani repeatedly stressed the importance of protecting executive privilege, however.

“Of course we have to see [the report] before it goes to Congress. We have reserved executive privilege and we have a right to assert it. The only way we can assert it is if we see what is in the report.”

2. Per Business Insider: "Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's lead defense lawyer, told INSIDER last year [4 Sept 2018] that the White House wants to review and edit the special counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian election interference before it's released to the public." 4 Sept 2018: As prosecutors put together the report, Trump's current and former lawyers have said that the information contained in it is protected by executive privilege. For that reason, they say the White House needs to sign off on the report's final version in the event that deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein — who is overseeing Mueller — chooses to release it to Congress or the public.
Giuliani said Tuesday that Trump's team would waive executive privilege if "we had an adequate opportunity to review the report before it was released to the public; if we felt that — even if we disagreed with its findings — it was fair; and if we had the chance to release a rebuttal report simultaneously that addresses all of Mueller's allegations."

You have given the impression they could change the report-they should have the right to edit the report. Maybe it is just a misconception about edit and change. Basically they want to see the report before it is released because that would only be fair.
They have not given the me the impression they are going to alter the report but they should be able to challenge any misinformation.

The shameless way Mueller has conducted this investigation is the least that should be done.. Mueller not protecting the information on the cell phones of the Trump haters Page and Strzok should be investigated. Mueller knows better and he should be held accountable.

The fact Bruce Ohr informed Andrew Weissman that the Steele dossier basically should not be used is mind boggling. Mueller and Weissmen both have to account for that abuse of justice. Did Weissmen inform Mueller of that information? One or both of them
should be investigated. At the least they should have investigated Clinton, Steele, and Fusion GPS is they were interested in "Russian collusion."
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
No actually I agreed with the part where you stated "morality and attendance at religious services are unrelated in my view".

The temple for all of us is in our heart.
Late edit-religious services are also important but not the be all end all. Just another part of the entire picture.
A rare point of convergence for us! Thank you for clarifying.
 

The Empress Lilly

Well-Known Member
No actually I agreed with the part where you stated "morality and attendance at religious services are unrelated in my view".

The temple for all of us is in our heart.
Late edit-religious services are also important but not the be all end all. Just another part of the entire picture.
That's the Protestant in you speaking. ;)

Services, outward displays, and communal rites are more central to most other Christian denominations.
Neither is better or worse. I do notice the effect between having to fulfill your moral and religious duties as a public display, with all the accompanying hypocrisy but which results in one the strongest aspects of organised religion: a sense of community and belonging; and the duties performed for internal reasons, in direct relationship to God: an invariable sense of moral superiority, of assuming a direct connection between fortune or misfortune and morality, but more individualism (positive or negative, although I tend to the former), less attachment to hierarchy.
 

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
That's the Protestant in you speaking. ;)

Services, outward displays, and communal rites are more central to most other Christian denominations.
Neither is better or worse. I do notice the effect between having to fulfill your moral and religious duties as a public display, with all the accompanying hypocrisy but which results in one the strongest aspects of organised religion: a sense of community and belonging; and the duties performed for internal reasons, in direct relationship to God: an invariable sense of moral superiority, of assuming a direct connection between fortune or misfortune and morality, but more individualism (positive or negative, although I tend to the former), less attachment to hierarchy.
Yes, Christians are all hypocrites.

We all strive to be without sin, however, we are ultimately sinful no matter what we do.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
That's the Protestant in you speaking. ;)

Services, outward displays, and communal rites are more central to most other Christian denominations.
Neither is better or worse. I do notice the effect between having to fulfill your moral and religious duties as a public display, with all the accompanying hypocrisy but which results in one the strongest aspects of organised religion: a sense of community and belonging; and the duties performed for internal reasons, in direct relationship to God: an invariable sense of moral superiority, of assuming a direct connection between fortune or misfortune and morality, but more individualism (positive or negative, although I tend to the former), less attachment to hierarchy.
I agree with this. It was one of my least favorite things about the Catholic Church. Go to mass, give money.. do your duty. I would placate my parents by going to Christmas Mass with them when visiting.. but outside of that I stopped going after age 18.

I had my kid baptized at almost 4 years old..but we still didn’t attend regularly. Then, when I enrolled him in a Catholic school we started going every weekend. I actually enjoy it now. He does too. Prior to first communion the Priest would call all of the kids to the alter, and then a volunteer would take them to a room to read religious stories and talk about them. (I wish the would have done that when I was a kid). Now, since he’s had his first communion, he stays up the whole mass, and he listens intently to the sermon. He loves the songs and sings along with all of them. On Sunday mornings there’s coffee, donuts and bagels after mass, it’s nice to attend and chat with fellow parishioners and their kids.

We have a very young pastor, younger than me. He’s amazing, his sermons feel like they’re talking to us, not at us, and he involves children quite often. There’s a shortage of Priests right now in the Catholic Church, so our pastor is the only full time priest at our church, and then we have traveling priests. The past few months our traveling priest is from Kenya, and we also have a seminary student to help.

All 3 went to DC for March for Life, I’m excited to hear them talk about it when they return.

It’s funny though, i remember when I thought that mass was boring.. I don’t know if I’ve changed, or the sermons have changed, but I like the quiet elegance of Catholic Mass. I’ve been to non denominational churches, their services are a little too loud for me.lol.

I don’t think that showing up to a church determines if someone is a good person or not... I don’t even think it says if you’re a good Catholic or not. My least favorite part is the envelopes mailed to me monthly, one for every week.. I give when I go, but we attend a different church often as well.. Sunday night mass without music, kiddo isn’t a fan of that as much, but it’s the only one that can fit in our schedule sometimes, we just give cash there. I always wonder what kind of records churches keep for the envelopes, and if our business manager is like “oh that family isn’t coming here often enough, and not giving their share. That mom isn’t a good Catholic” ;) I don’t know why we have to have our names on the envelopes. That’s the only thing I wish would change.
 
Last edited:

SorcererMC

Well-Known Member
You have given the impression they could change the report-they should have the right to edit the report. Maybe it is just a misconception about edit and change. Basically they want to see the report before it is released because that would only be fair.
They have not given the me the impression they are going to alter the report but they should be able to challenge any misinformation.
I copy and pasted directly from the articles that quoted him directly on separate occasions. That the White House would attempt to redact or change portions of the report before it is to be made public is in itself interference with the investigation. Release of the report to the public (and reporting to Congress) falls under the purview of the Attorney General and Mueller per 28 CFR 600.9 (c). I'm aware that Giuliani and Trump have also claimed that they would issue their own report.

The fact Bruce Ohr informed Andrew Weissman that the Steele dossier basically should not be used is mind boggling. Mueller and Weissmen both have to account for that abuse of justice. Did Weissmen inform Mueller of that information? One or both of them
should be investigated. At the least they should have investigated Clinton, Steele, and Fusion GPS is they were interested in "Russian collusion."
I don't think it's mind boggling because the dossier is raw intel (ie hasn't been vetted or verified); it was already known it was widely shared. AFAIK per his testimony Ohr said that he informed FBI officials that it was source info. Steele was considered a credible source given his track record. Further, the FBI does not need to independently corroborate information, where it is already consistent with existing information or intelligence.

It's hard for me to get at your other questions because what is the timeline here, with respect to Weissman and Mueller?
It is Trump himself who claims that the Steele dossier was used to open the counterintelligence investigation(s) into the Trump campaign (eg Carter Page and George Papadopolous). A dubious and not credible claim given the source and given that the unredacted portions of the released Carter Page FISA application shows that the FBI suspected him of acting as a foreign agent aka probable cause.

The shameless way Mueller has conducted this investigation is the least that should be done.. Mueller not protecting the information on the cell phones of the Trump haters Page and Strzok should be investigated. Mueller knows better and he should be held accountable.
What does Mueller have to do with a software update failure that occurred months before he was appointed? On what grounds would Mueller need to be held accountable? The OIG reports says that the FBI did NOT have a policy mandating text message retention.
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
I copy and pasted directly from the articles that quoted him directly on separate occasions. That the White House would attempt to redact or change portions of the report before it is to be made public is in itself interference with the investigation. Release of the report to the public (and reporting to Congress) falls under the purview of the Attorney General and Mueller per 28 CFR 600.9 (c). I'm aware that Giuliani and Trump have also claimed that they would issue their own report.


I don't think it's mind boggling because the dossier is raw intel (ie hasn't been vetted or verified); it was already known it was widely shared. AFAIK per his testimony Ohr said that he informed FBI officials that it was source info. Steele was considered a credible source given his track record. Further, the FBI does not need to independently corroborate information, where it is already consistent with existing information or intelligence.

It's hard for me to get at your other questions because what is the timeline here, with respect to Weissman and Mueller?
It is Trump himself who claims that the Steele dossier was used to open the counterintelligence investigation(s) into the Trump campaign (eg Carter Page and George Papadopolous). A dubious and not credible claim given the source and given that the unredacted portions of the released Carter Page FISA application shows that the FBI suspected him of acting as a foreign agent aka probable cause.


What does Mueller have to do with a software update failure that occurred months before he was appointed? On what grounds would Mueller need to be held accountable? The OIG reports says that the FBI did NOT have a policy mandating text message retention.



I can't address all of your post but as Andy McCabe testified the Steele dossier was the primary reason they went to the FISA court to get a warrant on Carter Page (He has never been charged nor will be charged) George Papdapolous is the democrats dream that was absolutely nothing. Just more fake news. McCabe claims without the Steele Dossier there was basically nothing to investigate. Recommended reading is Greg Jarrett's best seller. Would clear up a lot of misconceptions and misinformation. It is all factual. Try Smith, Soloman, Carter, Dershowitz, etc for actual factual based information.

Strzok and Page worked for Mueller (have you read their text before they went to work for Mueller?). They were fired by Mueller for those text which were under investigation by the IG. Mueller should have preserved their phones and he knows better than to destroy them or whatever happened to them. He should have immediately grabbed their phones-he was the formed head of the FBI and knew they were potential evidence that should have been preserved.

Without the Steele dossier there never would have been an investigation. There was no crime and political hatred of an opponent is not cause for an investigation. You have to be concerned about the criminalization of politics-that is all this appears to be.

Bruce Ohr testimony is damaging to this whole sorry investigation. They all knew the Steele Dossier was unverified and salacious-even Comey knew that. Why would they take that to a FISA court to spy on Carter Page? Really it was to get to Trump.
Mueller will have to throw some red meat out there and once he is done it will be non-stop investigations by the house. Mueller is just passing the baton off to them.

This investigation has hurt our country and some very nasty corrupt people thinking Hilary was going to win keep spinning and twisting trying to continue the deception. Some of them need to be indicted.

McCabe and Baker under criminal investigation and all of the firings, resignations, demotions, etc in the FBI doesn't concern you. That many people leaving an agency has never happened in our history as far as I know. It is complicated and most people don't follow it but it has not been justice and certainly not equal justice.
 
Top Bottom