DON"T jump the gun on Russia investigation

[bill718]

I see a lot of posts here from both sides making lot's of claims on the Russian investigation. BOTH sides are making their cases without all the facts. I doubt many folks here have top secret security clearance, nor do many folks here know everything that Robert Mueller knows. Donald Trump may be completely innocent, and he may be guilty of many things...we just don't know yet. Let Mr. Mueller do his job, then let us judge, until then I'd suggest both sides find something else to debate.

 

[Ted Frazier]

Democrats are more likely to follow your advice than Republicans. I don't know whether Trump or his associates committed a crime, but I believe one of them will be indicted. We'll see. I'll wait and see, as you suggest.
But Trumpsters want to tell you that this is a "witch-hunt:" and Trump is innocent period.

 

[Siete]

there MAY or MAY NOT be any criminal actions uncovered by the investigation.

try and explain " on going" to idiot Trumpdrones . I dare you.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Democrats are more likely to follow your advice than Republicans. I don't know whether Trump or his associates committed a crime, but I believe one of them will be indicted. We'll see. I'll wait and see, as you suggest.
But Trumpsters want to tell you that this is a "witch-hunt:" and Trump is innocent period.

Democrats are more likely to follow your advice than Republicans.

Here, that's probably so. In D.C., the people who matter, on both sides of the aisle, are "chillin'" until Mueller issues his report or allows to leak something of note.

Living as I do in "social Washington," a decent share of scuttlebutt comes my way sooner or later, and let me tell you, there's effectively no "scuttle" that's "butting" its head outside of Mueller and his team's offices.

 

[TNHarley]

Democrats are more likely to follow your advice than Republicans. I don't know whether Trump or his associates committed a crime, but I believe one of them will be indicted. We'll see. I'll wait and see, as you suggest.
But Trumpsters want to tell you that this is a "witch-hunt:" and Trump is innocent period.

Democrats are more likely to follow your advice than Republicans.

Here, that's probably so. In D.C., the people who matter, on both sides of the aisle, are "chillin'" until Mueller issues his report or allows to leak something of note.

Living as I do in "social Washington," a decent share of scuttlebutt comes my way sooner or later, and let me tell you, there's effectively no "scuttle" that's "butting" its head outside of Mueller and his team's offices.

"the people who matter"
Using subjectivity to confirm your bullshit?

 

[Aldo Raine]

I see a lot of posts here from both sides making lot's of claims on the Russian investigation. BOTH sides are making their cases without all the facts. I doubt many folks here have top secret security clearance, nor do many folks here know everything that Robert Mueller knows. Donald Trump may be completely innocent, and he may be guilty of many things...we just don't know yet. Let Mr. Mueller do his job, then let us judge, until then I'd suggest both sides find something else to debate.

100% agree, end thread.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Democrats are more likely to follow your advice than Republicans. I don't know whether Trump or his associates committed a crime, but I believe one of them will be indicted. We'll see. I'll wait and see, as you suggest.
But Trumpsters want to tell you that this is a "witch-hunt:" and Trump is innocent period.

Democrats are more likely to follow your advice than Republicans.

Here, that's probably so. In D.C., the people who matter, on both sides of the aisle, are "chillin'" until Mueller issues his report or allows to leak something of note.

Living as I do in "social Washington," a decent share of scuttlebutt comes my way sooner or later, and let me tell you, there's effectively no "scuttle" that's "butting" its head outside of Mueller and his team's offices.

"the people who matter"
Using subjectivity to confirm your bullshit?

Lots of people share all manners of things about all sorts of things. Not all of those people are individuals whose remarks on all topics upon which they remark should be taken as credible. When someone says something and I have no basis for thinking their remarks credible, as goes the topic upon which they remarked, they (and their remarks) don't matter.

Understanding that is precisely why Trump started the "fake news" line. He is well aware that a lot of what he says is unfounded and he's well aware that the organizations that'll call him out for making unfounded remarks are highly credible. His only choice was to create a means to rebut the scrutiny he was sure to receive as a candidate and as POTUS. Creating the "fake news" rhetorical line is his solution, and it's one that works with his largely under-/ill informed base. It doesn't work at all among well enough informed people, which includes nearly all of Congress, most of the career government employees, nearly everyone in the USIC, experts in various fields, most people in the mainstream press, and so on.

 

[TNHarley]

Democrats are more likely to follow your advice than Republicans. I don't know whether Trump or his associates committed a crime, but I believe one of them will be indicted. We'll see. I'll wait and see, as you suggest.
But Trumpsters want to tell you that this is a "witch-hunt:" and Trump is innocent period.

Democrats are more likely to follow your advice than Republicans.

Here, that's probably so. In D.C., the people who matter, on both sides of the aisle, are "chillin'" until Mueller issues his report or allows to leak something of note.

Living as I do in "social Washington," a decent share of scuttlebutt comes my way sooner or later, and let me tell you, there's effectively no "scuttle" that's "butting" its head outside of Mueller and his team's offices.

"the people who matter"
Using subjectivity to confirm your bullshit?

Lots of people share all manners of things about all sorts of things. Not all of those people are individuals whose remarks on all topics upon which they remark should be taken as credible. When someone says something and I have no basis for thinking their remarks credible, as goes the topic upon which they remarked, they (and their remarks) don't matter.

Understanding that is precisely why Trump started the "fake news" line. He is well aware that a lot of what he says is unfounded and he's well aware that the organizations that'll call him out for making unfounded remarks are highly credible. His only choice was to create a means to rebut the scrutiny he was sure to receive as a candidate and as POTUS. Creating the "fake news" rhetorical line is his solution, and it's one that works with his largely under-/ill informed base. It doesn't work at all among well enough informed people, which includes nearly all of Congress, most of the career government employees, experts in various fields, most people in the mainstream press, and so on.

ok