50 Years Ago Today

[whell]

Originally Posted by RickeyM

Irrespective of when it started the Republican party has been out to overthrow our democracy for a long time. They play the long game better than anybody.

Interesting how each side accuses the other of exactly the same thing.

[RickeyM]

Originally Posted by whell

Interesting how each side accuses the other of exactly the same thing.

Remember when the leader of the Democratic party instigated an insurrection against the U.S. government? Yeah, me neither. Remember when the Democratic party so radicalized it's members that the majority of them refuse to believe that last election wasn't stolen? Yeah, me neither. Remember when the Democratic party instituted measures to restrict voting across the because of imaginary voter fraud? The widespread voter fraud no one has shown any evidence of. Yeah, me neither. Once during an interview then speaker of the House Paul Ryan said it was his job his duty to see that another Democrat never sat in the WH. I wager that he wasn't and isn't the only Repub to hold that view.
The Repubs accuse the Dems of trying to take over to deflect from what they themselves are doing.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

Interesting how each side accuses the other of exactly the same thing.

They seem rather equivalent when stated that way, don't they? One might throw up one's hands and just figure all politicians are equally bad. But there is a heck of a lot of evidence that the GOP of late has been plotting to subvert democracy here. I have heard many Republicans testify under oath about how they tried to do it.

On the other hand, actual evidence of Democratic Party vote fraud seems really thin on the ground. So, equal accusations do NOT mean equivalence. Not at all.

Please be more careful about repeating easy but false accusations.

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

They seem rather equivalent when stated that way, don't they? One might throw up one's hands and just figure all politicians are equally bad. But there is a heck of a lot of evidence that the GOP of late has been plotting to subvert democracy here. I have heard many Republicans testify under oath about how they tried to do it.

On the other hand, actual evidence of Democratic Party vote fraud seems really thin on the ground. So, equal accusations do NOT mean equivalence. Not at all.

Please be more careful about repeating easy but false accusations.

Thanks for telling me to be careful about something I didn't do. But, while we're at it, allegations of voter fraud are nothing new. Having a presidential candidate openly question the results of a national election are also nothing new.

If evidence of election fraud seems thin to you, maybe its because you're not looking for it. It happens every election cycle, and members of both parties do it. While I don't believe the 2020 election was stolen, there were plenty of cases of election hi-jinks.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-edpa/pr...election-fraud


https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud-print/search

https://www.courierpress.com/story/n...ny/7799375002/

https://www.wuft.org/news/2022/04/02...registrations/

Back to my original point, claims that members of one party "subverting democracy" by another party is nothing new, and didn't start in 2020. Here's a Slate article going back to 2003 where it was suggested that the Repubs were subverting democracy when they, for example, impeached Clinton for lying. Funny how Slate never thought that the Dems efforts to derail the Trump presidency with never ending false accusations, investigations and impeachments were subverting democracy. But its not hard to find examples of Repubs accusing Democrats of the same thing.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

But its not hard to find examples of Repubs accusing Democrats of the same thing.

That was my point! Accusations are cheap! To use them to say the two side are equal is tantamount to saying the two sides are GUILTY of similar accused conduct.

And FALSE accusations against Trump? I see you are now past fairly considering my comments, and are in full partisan mode. So engagement over!

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

That was my point! Accusations are cheap! To use them to say the two side are equal is tantamount to saying the two sides are GUILTY of similar accused conduct.

Which, of course, is why I used those words.

Originally Posted by donquixote99

And FALSE accusations against Trump? I see you are now past fairly considering my comments, and are in full partisan mode. So engagement over!

Yup, false. Regardless of how much folks want to believe it happened, there was no finding of collusion with Russia during the 2016 election cycle. Even though it was the topic of breathless reporting for years and allegations by the opposing party and their mouthpieces were non-stop during that period.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Yup, false. Regardless of how much folks want to believe it happened, there was no finding of collusion with Russia during the 2016 election cycle. Even though it was the topic of breathless reporting for years and allegations by the opposing party and their mouthpieces were non-stop during that period.

The report said that they had insufficient evidence to prove Trump's involvement in the scheme in part due to obstruction (10 counts, 4 of which were slam dunks), perjury and unwillingness to cooperate with the investigation. They did clearly show, however, that Manafort, Gates and Stone all collaborated/coordinated with Russian agents and that Trump welcomed Russian help and likely benefited from it. The GOP-controlled Select Committee on Intelligence said the same thing.

[RickeyM]

Originally Posted by finnbow

The report said that they had insufficient evidence to prove Trump's involvement in the scheme in part due to obstruction (10 counts, 4 of which were slam dunks), perjury and unwillingness to cooperate with the investigation. They did clearly show, however, that Manafort, Gates and Stone all collaborated/coordinated with Russian agents and that Trump welcomed Russian help and likely benefited from it. The GOP-controlled Select Committee on Intelligence said the same thing.

That's correct, nobody said tRumpty was exonerated. The insufficient evidence was due to the obstruction. If there was nothing to hide why all the obstruction?

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

The report said that they had insufficient evidence to prove Trump's involvement in the scheme in part due to obstruction...

No, it didn't say that. You may wish it said that, but it didn't. What the Mueller report did say was:

Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

Further:

In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of “collusion.” In so doing, the Office recognized that the word “collud[e]” was used in communications with the Acting Attorney General confirming certain aspects of the investigation’s scope and that the term has frequently been invoked in public reporting about the investigation. But collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law. For those reasons, the Office’s focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law. In connection with that analysis, we addressed the factual question whether members of the Trump Campaign “coordinat[ed]”—a term that appears in the appointment order—with Russian election interference activities. Like collusion, “coordination” does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law. We understood coordination to require an agreement—tacit or express—between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference. That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other’s actions or interests. We applied the term coordination in that sense when stating in the report that the investigation did not establish that the Trump Campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

I'd prefer to stick to the investigation's conclusions rather than wild speculation about the meaning of certain "evidence" that you think may be relevant.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Interesting how each side accuses the other of exactly the same thing.

Perhaps, but this assertion only makes sense when levied by a Democrat. When Republicans say it, it brings to mind the meme "Every Republican accusation is a confession."