His name is Mueller, not Müller.

Sorry, but “the investigation did not establish that the
Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities”.

What Kremlin influence on the presidency are you speaking about? — NOS4A2

It's Müller where I'm from since we actually know how to spell a German name, so tough luck. In any case, Müller has repeatedly refused to exonerate Trump and he did so for a reason. So it's a misrepresentation on your part because you fail to include the fact that while the investigation doesn't prove it, it's because they were frustrated continuously in their investigation. In other words it was neither wasteful or fraudulent and should've been investigated further.

That’s spoliation of evidence or mishandling of classified documents. What do you call it? — NOS4A2

Irrelevant. If you think the order of the files in a specific box has any relevance as to the evidence of the content of that box then please make a cogent argument to that effect but on the face of it, it's just another delay.

It's Müller where I'm from since we actually know how to spell a German name, so tough luck. In any case, Müller has repeatedly refused to exonerate Trump and he did so for a reason. So it's a misrepresentation on your part because you fail to include the fact that while the investigation doesn't prove it, it's because they were frustrated continuously in their investigation. In other words it was neither wasteful or fraudulent and should've been investigated further.

That’s right, you can’t name any evidence of Kremlin influence. You might want to stop lying about it.

In fact, it’s a double lie because you refuse to mention (even suspiciously removing it from the sentance you quoted) the failings of that investigation as discovered in subsequent investigations.

Irrelevant. If you think the order of the files in a specific box has any relevance as to the evidence of the content of that box then please make a cogent argument to that effect but on the face of it, it's just another delay.

If the files aren’t as one found there is no way to know the contents are accurate. Not only that but they lied to the court about it. Looks like you’re parrottting Jack Smith verbatim.

If the files aren’t as one found them there is no way to know the contents are accurate. Not only that but they lied to the court about it. Looks like you’re parrottting Jack Smith verbatim. — NOS4A2

That's a dumb comment for a variety of reasons. How do they know the order changed? Because the FBI records. So we have a record of what was in it before the contents were shuffled. It's legally an inane point as to establishing what was kept and therefore no more than a delaying tactic. This was all from your link by the way. Maybe you should just learn to read instead of jerking off and getting excited because you think you're onto something everytime you read something critical about the government.

In fact, it’s a double lie because you refuse to mention (even suspiciously removing it from the sentance you quoted) the failings of that investigation as discovered in subsequent investigations. — NOS4A2

First of all, I'm only quoting you so far. I assume you remember what you wrote a few hours ago so not sure what you're going on about. Whatever failings the investigation had, none of them gave rise to indictments, and none of them discount the multiple crimes Müller established in his investigation. The lie was yours to pretend the Müller report was fraudulent and didn't establish any crimes. It did. Multiple ones.

That's a dumb comment for a variety of reasons. How do they know the order changed? Because the FBI records. So we have a record of what was in it before the contents were shuffled. It's legally an inane point as to establishing what was kept and therefore no more than a delaying tactic. This was all from your link by the way. Maybe you should just learn to read instead of jerking off and getting excited because you think you're onto something everytime you read something critical about the government.

You’re parroting the government verbatim. You’re a lawyer, apparently, and you think the spoliation of evidence and lying about it to the court in one of the most unprecedented cases in the history of the country is irrelevant.Your readiness to believe everything you read has long been proven, so your characterizations don’t mean much to me. Maybe you shouldn’t feel so duty-bound to defend their actions every single time, for whatever reason.

First of all, I'm only quoting you so far. I assume you remember what you wrote a few hours ago so not sure what you're going on about. Whatever failings the investigation had, none of them gave rise to indictments, and none of them discount the multiple crimes Müller established in his investigation. The lie was yours to pretend the Müller report was fraudulent and didn't establish any crimes. It did. Multiple ones.

You quoted one clause out of an entire sentence, afraid to quote me in full, clearly trying to hide the context for whatever reason. Probably to draw attention away from the fact that you, like your fraudulent investigation, were duped by Clinton-campaign opposition research, which to this day a fact you refuse to mention. You, like Mueller, refuse to mention exculpatory evidence, or anything else that might point to how stupid the whole charade was.

The investigation was fraudulent, as is your continued parroting of it.

As pliant minds blow in the wind like a wind-sock, another myth is dispelled.

They forgot that his agenda is called “Agenda 47”.

, generally, the Clown doesn't dispel myths, he just bullshits.

Another Trump LIE, more than half the Authors of project2025 worked in his administration. (Karma is coming · Jul 5, 2024)

Here is Trump Senior Advisor and former appointee John McEntee, who helped draft Project 2025, explaining to Steve Bannon last July how Trump plans to implement the plan immediately after taking office. But Trump doesn’t know these people or anything about it. (Ron Filipkowski · Jul 5, 2024 · 2m:26s)

I think the groundwork is forming for a shift in the US toward greater authoritarianism. The trigger for the change would be something like a war. The population is presently split between people who want that to happen (on both the right and left) and people who are apathetic.

Did you see the poll that said Trump is particularly popular among people 18-29? It was reported by The Hill. Like 61% prefer Trump.

US democracy's last line of defense everyone:

The most depressing thing about the ABC/Stephanopolous interview was indeed that final sentence.

“If you stay in, and Trump is elected, and everything you’re warning about comes to pass, how will you feel in January?” Stephanopoulos asked.

“I will feel, as long as I gave it my all, and I did the — good a job as I know I can do, that’s what this is about,” Biden replied.

Not nearly good enough. "Trying my best" and "Promise I'll go to bed early". I think it's obvious that the gig is up, let's just hope the man himself comes to realise it.

If the pressure can be sustained, there may yet be a chance he’s replaced — a much better chance than I once thought — but I’d still give the chances 1 in 5 or so. The ABC interview didn’t do much to reverse the tide.

But this has been interesting. They’re really panicking— and for good reason.

I'm convinced he will reliquish the candidacy. That's what he must do - it can't be taken from him, he has to pass it on, and I'm sure he will. And as the electorate is crying out for an alternative to Biden-Trump (not counting Kennedy, because he doesn't count), I think it will electrify the landscape. It might instantly attract millions of undecideds and anti-Trumpers. Might.

Axelrod on Biden, CNN.

he has to pass it on, and I'm sure he will. — Wayfarer

Well I hope you’re right, because the situation is sad. But who wants Kamal Harris? Oof…

I don't think she's The Candidate, but she's also not as terrible as the media tends to depict her. I said upthread, from where I sit (outside the US but with irons in the fire), a Newsom/Whitmer ticket would look pretty damned impressive.

Newsom/Whitmer ticket would look pretty damned impressive. — Wayfarer

I think that could work. Maybe a Josh Shapiro … but it’s really all just fantasy. I think if Biden steps down the natural candidate is Harris, for multiple reasons— including the large amount of money donated to their campaign.

If Harris is the nominee I imagine Shapiro would be a top pick for VP, at least if she were smart.

You also have to assume that Kamala Harris would *want* to be the Presidential Nominee. And I don't know if that's gauranteed.

Reading between the lines - and there's lots of lines - it looks as if Biden agrees to transition, it might result in an 'open convention'. It's happened before, and didn't work out well for the Democrats. But this situation is different. Sure, Trumpworld has its rusted-on supporters, but many of those who don't like him really hate him, but think Biden is too old. (I mentioned before, Steve Bannon said just as he was turning himself in, the Trump Campaign is betting on beating Biden - hey nice alliteration there - if someone else is the candidate, it's a wild card, things could shift very quickly.)

if someone else is the candidate, it's a wild card, things could shift very quickly. — Wayfarer

True. All the polls up to that point mean very little. The whole environment changes.

Maybe a Josh Shapiro — Mikie

I imagine Shapiro would be a top pick for VP, at least if she were smart. — Mr Bee

Not a good year for Shapiros in the Dem party as long as Michigan's in play.

it's a wild card, things could shift very quickly.) — Wayfarer

What do people in this thread plan to do about Biden? The biggest wildcard is that he's dug in. He is on record as saying, "No one is pushing me out of the race." He's made this perfectly clear. And Jill is fierce. You can talk Kamala and Gavin and Gretchen and Michelle all you like, but Biden's not budging.

Are Democrats ready to either impeach him or invoke the 25th Amendment? If not, how are you going to dislodge him?

What do people in this thread plan to do about Biden? — fishfry

Nothing I can do about it, I’m not even an elector (although my son lives in the US and is a dual citizen.) I’m still holding out hope that Biden will see reason (and rather uncharitably wishing he’d have a mild stroke which would take the matter out of his hands.) But if he stays the candidate, I’m now convinced that Trump will win, and that it will be an unqualified disaster for America and the rest of the world (but that’s not something I’m going to debate outside the Trump thread, of which I’m steering clear.)

Not a good year for Shapiros in the Dem party as long as Michigan's in play. — fishfry

Michigan is in play in large part because Biden is the nominee and pissing off Arabs with what he's doing in Gaza. That's why I think Whitmer is an ideal candidate since she can take any stance on Israel and win Michigan easily but apart from his age, Biden's foreign policy is a big drag on the ticket.

Are Democrats ready to either impeach him or invoke the 25th Amendment? If not, how are you going to dislodge him? — fishfry

I've heard there's also a "good conscience" rule the DNC can add for delegates to not vote for Biden, but right now the Dems are trying to convince grandpa that he is perhaps not the best driver in the world and relinquish his car keys voluntarily. Next week will probably see the dam breaking.

Maybe Sherman went a bit over the top here

Opinion | Why the sociopaths are winning — and the obvious thing we’re not doing about it (— Jeremy Sherman · AlterNet · Jul 6, 2024)

If you argue with stupid, they'll drag you down and beat you with experience. — whoever

Either way, some worthwhile observations/ethics can be found

Shame constrains us. Shamelessness is a liberation.

Learning to be absolutely shameless is easy.

It is our civic duty to make motivated sociopathy costly.

Some (post-rationalizing) individuals gravitate naturally towards conflict, which can empower the demagogue. Anyway, nutn' much new here, jus'sayin.

, you think there's a large number of people in the US that want war (civil or wider)? A US civil war would play straight into the hands of hungry foreign forces, which might just come back to haunt them.

Kamela? Really? From one deeply unpopular candidate to another. I have long given up on the Democrats actually delivering anything meaningful policy wise. All I need from them is to prevent the descent into outright fascism by defeating a totally unqualified sub moronic evil clown. Even that very low bar is too much for them.

The Democratic party has long ago degenerated into complete worthlessness. In a functioning democracy they would have been swept away long ago. It is our winner take all electoral system that makes a third party impossible, and therefore keeps the existing two parties entrenched, no matter how awful they become. This will be America's downfall.

This country is not going to elect a black woman, much less a politically incompetent black woman like Harris. Michelle Obama is the exception to that rule and probably the only person in the country who could rescue the Democrats, but that's not going to happen. Trump is up 3 points in the polling average. 538 has the race as even. Biden is not going to drop out under those conditions, nor should he. The Democrats still have a powerful message: white male vegetable>election stealing prolife felon.

Wow. A demented president and his crackheaded, deadbeat son are running the country.

After being embarrassingly outed for feeding the media questions in an effort to save the optics regarding his cognitive abilities, the Biden campaign is now saying it will stop doing so. WHO IS RUNNING THE COUNTRY?

“Biden campaign will no longer feed questions to media after being outed by radio host: source”

https://nypost.com/2024/07/06/us-news/biden-campaign-will-no-longer-feed-questions-to-media-after-being-outed-by-radio-host-source/

How big of an imbecile does one have to be to really believe the US President “runs the country”?

I’d say pretty big.

When your own mental gymnastics convince you.

The President is both the head of state and head of government of the United States of America, and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/our-government/the-executive-branch

:up: :up:

Michigan is in play in large part because Biden is the nominee and pissing off Arabs with what he's doing in Gaza. That's why I think Whitmer is an ideal candidate since she can take any stance on Israel and win Michigan easily but apart from his age, Biden's foreign policy is a big drag on the ticket. — Mr Bee

Good point, Whitmer is popular in Michigan and can withstand the Palestinian-supporting component of the left. Makes sense. Still tricky to leapfrog Kamala. Do you mean Whitmer for veep or prez? Kamala has a constituency within the party.

I've heard there's also a "good conscience" rule the DNC can add for delegates to not vote for Biden, but right now the Dems are trying to convince grandpa that he is perhaps not the best driver in the world and relinquish his car keys voluntarily. Next week will probably see the dam breaking. — Mr Bee

Oh I see I hadn't heard that. Internet says that "DNC rules encourage but don't specifically require delegates to vote for the candidate they're pledged to support. Instead, the rules say, “All delegates to the National Convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them ..."

That does seem like an out. I thought the delegates were firmly bound, but evidently not.

My take on this situation is that the Dems are in denial when they say, "Dems are trying to convince grandpa that he is perhaps not the best driver in the world ..." In fact Joe has stated that he's in it to win it, and he has Jill and now Hunter on his side. And he's President of the United States. There's a lot of power in that. The Dems are going to have to force Joe out. And I don't think they'll be up for it. The unseemliness of the Dems trying to destroy their own president.

My take -- my out-on-a-limb prediction -- is that in the end, the Dems will not persuade him to drop out. They will either need to impeach him, or invoke the 25th Amendment. And I predict the Democrats will not have the stones to do that. And besides, if they do move to impeach or invoke 25A, the Republicans will oppose them! Imagine the hilarity that would ensue. The GOP would love to run against Biden. Without GOP support the Dems can't get rid of Joe.

I think the Dems made their bed last year when they decided not to have an open, competitive primary. They are stuck with Biden until Jill says so. And she didn't come this far to give up now.

Nothing I can do about it, I’m not even an elector (although my son lives in the US and is a dual citizen.) I’m still holding out hope that Biden will see reason — Wayfarer

This is my thesis again. The Dems are hoping Joe will quit. But Joe has said he's not quitting, and he and Jill and Hunter are circling the wagons. In the end the Dems are going to have to act; by impeaching him, 25A-ing him, or deliberately incapacitating him.

(and rather uncharitably wishing he’d have a mild stroke which would take the matter out of his hands.) — Wayfarer

Can you see the irony, dare I say depravity, of hoping fo such a thing? In a candidate you supported five minutes before the debate?

I'm struck by the viciousness of the Dem and left response. All those who had Joe's back five minutes ago, and are now stabbing him in the back. And why is the response so emotionally intense? Because these are all of the people who didn't say anything a year ago, when they could have called for open and competitive Democratic primaries. They didn't say anything in 2020, when Biden was doing badly in the polls and the DNC did the Clyburn deal to install Biden. Along with Kamala, who'd dropped out of the 2020 race in 2019, polling in single-digits in her own home state. She got taken apart by Tulsi Gabbard in a debate, and never recovered. The media are pumping her up this week, but her negatives aren't going away.

Now the bill's come due, and the Dems are hoping Biden strokes out soon. You're not the only one. Perhaps that stroke won't come along by itself, ya know? Slip Joe a little something in his bowl of ice cream. That's what the Dems have come to.

Is that extreme? Just look at what you wrote. You are not the only Dem thinking that way. But a year ago when the DNC decided not to have real primaries, you said nothing. This is a fiasco of the Dems' own making.

But if he stays the candidate, I’m now convinced that Trump will win, — Wayfarer

That's been clear a long time, and even from before the general public found out about his tragic age-related cognitive decline. Biden's policies are unpopular. You can't fix that with a younger candidate. Of course I'll stipulate that you disagree with me on policy, and I'm not here to argue that. Many voters are not happy with how things have been in the Biden administration and swapping in a younger candidate with the same policies is not going to change that many votes.

and that it will be an unqualified disaster for America and the rest of the world (but that’s not something I’m going to debate outside the Trump thread, of which I’m steering clear.) — Wayfarer

I understand your feelings about that. No need to discuss the respective merits of the candidates. The scandal is what's interesting. This Biden mess is going to be the biggest political scandal in my lifetime, bigger than Watergate. Just swapping in a new candidate is not going to solve the Dems' problems, It's raise a whole host of new ones, starting with fundamental democratic legitimacy. Will voters stand for yet another last-minute DNC back-room deal?

That's what he must do - it can't be taken from him, he has to pass it on, and I'm sure he will. — Wayfarer

People keep saying this but contested conventions have happened. Isn't that a process where it can be taken from him?