HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » A sure sign that Mueller ...

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 09:55 PM

A sure sign that Mueller delivered and Democrats kicked ass today:

The number of “concern” threads here about how “frail” and “ineffective” and “complicit Mueller was, how the Democrats blew it, and what a dud the hearings were.

Transparent as hell.

69 replies, 5451 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 69 replies Author Time Post
Reply A sure sign that Mueller delivered and Democrats kicked ass today: (Original post)
EffieBlack Jul 2019 OP
bluestarone Jul 2019 #1
JoeOtterbein Jul 2019 #2
EffieBlack Jul 2019 #25
JoeOtterbein Jul 2019 #27
SouthernProgressive Jul 2019 #47
tavernier Jul 2019 #67
JoeOtterbein Jul 2019 #69
Me. Jul 2019 #3
leftstreet Jul 2019 #4
marble falls Jul 2019 #6
True Dough Jul 2019 #17
leftstreet Jul 2019 #22
drray23 Jul 2019 #5
Hoyt Jul 2019 #7
scarytomcat Jul 2019 #45
The Velveteen Ocelot Jul 2019 #8
Me. Jul 2019 #15
The Velveteen Ocelot Jul 2019 #20
DeminPennswoods Jul 2019 #26
BigmanPigman Jul 2019 #31
Judi Lynn Jul 2019 #34
uponit7771 Jul 2019 #40
scarytomcat Jul 2019 #46
Iliyah Jul 2019 #9
JudyM Jul 2019 #57
NanceGreggs Jul 2019 #10
Jersey Devil Jul 2019 #11
True Dough Jul 2019 #18
EffieBlack Jul 2019 #23
oasis Jul 2019 #12
mia Jul 2019 #13
ecstatic Jul 2019 #14
True Dough Jul 2019 #21
brer cat Jul 2019 #51
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #56
qazplm135 Jul 2019 #59
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #62
qazplm135 Jul 2019 #64
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #65
qazplm135 Jul 2019 #66
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #68
The Velveteen Ocelot Jul 2019 #16
ecstatic Jul 2019 #24
Beringia Jul 2019 #19
MuseRider Jul 2019 #28
H2O Man Jul 2019 #29
ismnotwasm Jul 2019 #30
betsuni Jul 2019 #32
PatrickforO Jul 2019 #33
Ponietz Jul 2019 #35
Roy Rolling Jul 2019 #36
mcar Jul 2019 #54
tirebiter Jul 2019 #37
malaise Jul 2019 #38
uponit7771 Jul 2019 #41
MBS Jul 2019 #42
treestar Jul 2019 #44
malaise Jul 2019 #50
Baltimike Jul 2019 #39
demmiblue Jul 2019 #43
Maxheader Jul 2019 #48
onetexan Jul 2019 #49
backscatter712 Jul 2019 #52
mcar Jul 2019 #53
rzemanfl Jul 2019 #55
secondwind Jul 2019 #58
Afromania Jul 2019 #60
Progressive dog Jul 2019 #61
Bonx Jul 2019 #63

Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 09:57 PM

1. Oh you know it!!

transparent it is!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 09:57 PM

2. Please feel free...

...to name me Effie!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoeOtterbein (Reply #2)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:35 PM

25. Why would you assume my OP refers to you?

If it’s not about you, it’s not about you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #25)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:42 PM

27. Whew!

I was hoping that!

See:

"Bologna"

[link:https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=12314231|

Please tell me it was not you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoeOtterbein (Reply #2)


Response to JoeOtterbein (Reply #2)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 03:53 PM

67. Why would she name you Effie?

Your name is Joe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavernier (Reply #67)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 04:13 PM

69. My nickname, since elementary school, is:

Otter!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 09:58 PM

3. Yes THey Did Six Times Over

And what is the point of those threads, who exactly are they rooting for and supporting?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 09:59 PM

4. How did the Democrats 'kick ass?'

Did they announce they're starting impeachment inquiries?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #4)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:03 PM

6. This is all part of the process, before there can be an impeachment a case has to made to ...

Congress. This is part of the gathering of evidence to support articles of impeachment, investigation and a case before the indictment.

Its a process not a mob action.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #4)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:18 PM

17. You signed up to DU in 2005

and posted more than 30,000 times only now to reveal that you're a non-conformist? Talk about patience!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to True Dough (Reply #17)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:26 PM

22. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:01 PM

5. Indeed.

Either these folks have a hidden agenda or they are incredibly inept at understanding the political implications of what happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:09 PM

7. I was very pessimistic going in, but agree Dems kicked ass. They were prepared.

The morning started off badly when Mueller started out saying there was no conspiracy/cooperation and Barr didn’t interfere. Dems kept on and were able to really emphasize Obstruction.

The afternoon was outstanding. They branded, in spite of what Mueller said earlier, trump as unethical, immoral, unpatriotic, and quite likely criminal. And, they emphasized the Russian junk is still going on and will affect 2020, and trump is just joking about it. Mueller jumped on him too.

Outstanding effort.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #7)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 06:29 AM

45. they were very prepared and did a great job

of execution

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:10 PM

8. I just now wanted to kick Brian Williams' ass

when he started his show about how weak and frail and old Mueller seemed. He's still at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #8)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:16 PM

15. Me Too

Watch..tomorrow when he finds out the really smart kids are saying differently, he'll change his tune.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Me. (Reply #15)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:25 PM

20. He's STILL at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #8)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:35 PM

26. Gerstein is a hack from Politico,

but disappointed in Bash and Figluizzi.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #8)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 11:19 PM

31. I wanted to puke but my stomach is already empty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #8)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 11:59 PM

34. Same here. He reminded us how slow and superficial he really is. Thanks for mentioning it. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #8)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 05:42 AM

40. Williams is going to take a face mashing for that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #8)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 06:31 AM

46. I think he was getting tired towards the end of the second hearing

but he hung in there
a REAL patriot

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:10 PM

9. K & R

And corporate media supported the RW talking points.

Republicans on committee made fools of themselves. But, corporate media and few on here focused on the Democrats and Mueller in a negative way.

Sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iliyah (Reply #9)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 08:42 AM

57. Rachel, too, was pounding the issue of his frailty and implying incompetence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:11 PM

10. Transparent in the extreme.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:14 PM

11. Yeah, those who disagree with you have been working to undermine Dems all along, me since 2001

It's all a big Republican conspiracy. That's why a lot of us have been hanging on here as posters for almost 20 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jersey Devil (Reply #11)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:22 PM

18. 18 years of waiting in the weeds, eh Jersey Devil?

And it's your inability to accept that Mueller delivered the goods flawlessly that shows your true colors? Well, time to give up the independent thinking there, buddy! Get back in line!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jersey Devil (Reply #11)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:27 PM

23. If I wasn't talking about you, I wasn't talking about you

So no need to be so defensive

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:15 PM

12. B+. I wasn't expecting a slam dunk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:15 PM

13. K & R

Thank you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:15 PM

14. I don't agree. If someone watched the entire hearing and focused on

substance only, of course it would be a clear win for us. But most Americans have not done that. Hell, I didn't do that. I DVR'd the entire day of testimony but only ended up watching about 20-30 minutes before I had to turn it off.

I know a thing or two about perception, and the segment I saw wasn't particularly helpful. Acknowledging that some parts of his testimony did not go over well doesn't automatically mean I have sinister intentions, and I will NEVER give a false opinion to make others happy. If others can look at the same clip and come to a different conclusion, that's fine too. Again, it's great that we have so many optimists who can help keep everything in perspective. But realists have a role too.

Also, I think a lot of people are frustrated by Mueller's missing the forest for the trees. He was so concerned about being fair and pleasing republicans (who didn't give 2 shits about showing him any respect) and that caused him to be less forthcoming, IMO. No biggie, it's only our democracy at stake!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ecstatic (Reply #14)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:25 PM

21. You got your marching orders, ecstatic

No sense in trying to provide rationale for going against the grain here. Be a good DU Dem and repeat after me, "Robert Mueller led us to the promised land today."

Donny's surely polishing off his resignation letter as I type this!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ecstatic (Reply #14)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 08:10 AM

51. So substance doesn't matter?

After watching less than 10%, you concluded he "wasn't particularly helpful." If you watched Hank Aaron strike out at one at-bat, would your perception be that he wasn't a particularly good ball player?

Performance over substance is for the movies, not real life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brer cat (Reply #51)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 08:33 AM

56. I remember when more than one commentator said Hillary beat Trump in substance in the debates

But Trump got more style points, therefore they declared him the winner.

Same mentality.

And we wonder why we're where we are

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brer cat (Reply #51)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 08:51 AM

59. Actually not really

 

Any trial lawyer says the most substantive or factual legal argument isn't what sways the jury, the most confident one does. Body language, tone of voice, apparent confidence, dress all matter more than what is actually said.

It shouldn't but study after study shows it does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to qazplm135 (Reply #59)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 01:15 PM

62. Care to post some of those studies?

And while jurors are sometimes swayed by theatrics, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find many really effective trial attorneys who will agree that in every case "Body language, tone of voice, apparent confidence, dress all matter more than what is actually said."

In the real world, most cases don't turn on how the attorneys look and sound. Among other things, the evidence DOES play a huge role, what is said is significant, and cases don't always end at trial but are often decided on appeal where the only thing that matters is what's in the transcript and record while the attorneys' demeanor is pretty much irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #62)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 02:48 PM

64. No, I wouldn't be hard pressed

 

I've spent several years teaching courtroom tactics and strategies "in the real world" and longer trying cases on both sides "in the real world." I've had juries interviewed after trials on multiple occasions to see what they focused on. As often as not, they would comment on what an attorney was wearing, how confident they sounded, as much on any piece of evidence.

https://atcounseltable.wordpress.com/2013/08/20/five-psychological-principles-of-jury-persuasion/

"The message here is that jurors absorb what they see exponentially better than what they simply hear. Mauet writes, 'When the medium is oral testimony, clear, simple common English with a smooth, confident delivery and reinforcing kinesic and paralinguistic cues significantly affect how jurors receive, accept, and retain the communication. . . Since communication is approximately 60 percent kinetic (appearance, gestures, body movement), 30 percent paralinguistic (voice inflection), and only 10 percent word content, trial lawyers must learn to read the kinesic and paralinguistic cues that jurors send during voir dire, witnesses send while testifying, and lawyers send throughout a trial.' (Id. at 380.)"
Citing Thomas Mauet’s Fundamentals of Trial Techniques

Right there...60 percent is physical
30 percent is inflection
10 percent is actual content.

https://www.nytimes.com/1994/11/29/science/study-finds-jurors-often-hear-evidence-with-closed-minds.html

"These jurors decide on a version of events based on a preliminary story they find convincing, often at the time of the opening arguments, which then colors their interpretation of the evidence so much that they seize on whatever fits their verdict and discount the rest. Such jurors tend to make up their minds far earlier than others, and by the time they enter the jury room for deliberation they cannot be budged."

The attorney who looks the part, who speaks in "bright colors," simply, and confidently will almost ALWAYS win over an attorney with better facts and arguments but poorer appearance and delivery.

I'm not talking about "theatrics." I'm talking about tone of voice, confidence, appearance, and proper courtroom movement. Excessive theatrics is usually a bad idea, particularly if it takes you out of your range of normal actions.

Having said that, there is a REASON two of the top trial coaches in the country are former actors. And yes, having done my fair share of cases, much of what goes on in a courtroom involves a level of acting and performance, particularly opening statements and closing arguments.

https://www.thejuryexpert.com/2012/03/vocal-pitch-in-the-courtroom/
"As a nonverbal communication cue, voice has been shown to make a difference in people’s perceptions of speakers (Tigue, Borak, O’Connor, Schandl & Feinberg, in press). Guerrero and Hecht (2008) argue that a vocal attractiveness stereotype exists among listeners. People tend to believe that, “what sounds beautiful is good” (p.155). Other empirical explorations of the attractive voice stereotype have found that attractive voices make a person seem more powerful, strong, assertive and dominant (Guerrero & Hecht, 2008)."

http://www.abajournal.com/voice/article/the-jury-trial-trying-facts-or-telling-stories

I'll spoil it for you, telling a story beats listing facts. Jurors get bored easily, and they tune out quickly, and they make snap judgments. So if your first two minutes aren't sharp, if your suit is wrinkled and ill-fitting, and if your voice isn't strong and confident, it won't matter what comes next.

http://cornelllawreview.org/files/2018/04/St.EveEssay-1.pdf
Presentation by attorneys was the most positive and most negative responses. Jurors cared about eye contact, being more personable to the jury, various criticisms on body language (e.g. that attorney crossed their arms too much), etc. Again, in various ways jurors respond to the things I listed above both negatively and positively and reward each side accordingly.

https://books.google.com/books?id=SwhGiWNFV18C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to qazplm135 (Reply #64)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 03:23 PM

65. Thanks. This is very interesting

And while I agree that a more confident presentation can give one an advantage, attorneys presentations do not necessarily determine outcome. As I said, there are too many other factors at play, including the judge, jury instructions, the evidence, and, very important, other jurors who aren't as easily swayed since, as one of your cited pieces notes, a certain type of juror with flawed decision-making abilities may be susceptible to such dynamics but a majority isn't.

So, I sti disagree with your assessment, but appreciate you posting these cites, which provide interesting food for thought.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #65)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 03:39 PM

66. jurors are selected

 

that process produces types of jurors. Even in military courts-martial that don't have the same type of selection process we see the same things.

I'm sorry but all things being equal presentation matters far more than facts.

If it's a slam dunk case it's usually a guilty plea, so most contested cases are not that way.

Thus, it's a battle of competing facts and competing experts with a factfinder that is not selected to be the most discerning, or the most attentive, or the most intelligent.

The judge matters a little bit, but not as much as you think in most cases. Usually the judge comes into play with less experienced counsel more than experienced counsel.

Presentation is a LARGE part of what goes on in a trial. The longer the trial, the less facts the panel really remembers. What sticks is perception.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to qazplm135 (Reply #66)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 03:57 PM

68. I hear you and appreciate your expertise

I just see it differently.

But it's all good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:17 PM

16. People were expecting a TV trial and were disappointed at the lack of fireworks.

It wasn't entertaining enough for the folks whose idea of a great presidential candidate was Michael Avenatti.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #16)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:31 PM

24. You're right! Perception is reality in this country. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:24 PM

19. You don't take differing points of view well do you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:52 PM

28. I thought it was great.

I think these days if people are not screaming and getting results that are often questionable a lot of people are not satisfied. I like a good screaming match as well as the next person and I like people getting emotional and excited about things as well but there is a time for quiet deliberation and I thought today was great. We got confirmation of the most needed, basic info. We go from there. I have learned patience as I have grown older, I think we must be patient with those who have not yet found that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 10:56 PM

29. Recommended.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 11:05 PM

30. Yup

I literally had to just do other things than read that crap. It was annoying

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 11:40 PM

32. Yes. I didn't see the hearing, came here and saw concern threads.

Thought I'd check Splinter News, my go-to site (among others) to find out how Democrat-haters are bashing that day. The Mueller hearing: "This Was a Colossal Waste of Time."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Jul 24, 2019, 11:55 PM

33. Yes. You know, I watched much of the hearings. Had a meeting in the morning, but

saw most of it.

I didn't think it was a 'dud' or a 'flop' or any other name media heads spun out.

Mueller did well and the Dems did well. Yes, the GOP tried to make it a circus, but the Dems clearly established, in televised testimony, that the report presents evidence of obstruction of justice on five occasions (that's what they had time for - there's actually ten), and that there is also evidence of witness tampering.

We also heard Mueller talk about how Russia interfered in our '16 election, and how Trump first asked for, and then gratefully used that interference, and how important it is we harden our elections.

Then, McConnell, with the help of the traitor Cindy Hyde-Smith, who objected to the bipartisan legislation.

No - the Democrats did kick ass, because they awakened at least the Americans who watched. Besides, the House has a plan. They are going to subpoena McGahn and start getting that word out. This whole thing is just that - a nationally televised platform to alert Americans who haven't been paying attention to what is really going on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 12:01 AM

35. Excellent observation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 12:48 AM

36. Some things age well

Like fine wine, Mueller's testimony is just starting to ferment. His faults will be forgotten and excused by reasonable people. I mean, how many Republicans want to start criticizing him because he appeared old and weak? Please, try it.

His inability to be a media hack added to his credibility, and contrasted to the fast-talking Republicans trying to score political points. He looked like an aging lion with a lifetime of successful battles to his credit. Republicans looked like a bunch of hyenas nipping at his heels.

Or am I being affected by the new “Lion King” movie?

Regardless, there was nothing memorable about Republicans putting people to sleep with their Steele dossier stories. Man, their act was stale.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roy Rolling (Reply #36)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 08:22 AM

54. Good point!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 04:55 AM

37. I liked the part wher a Republican pressed Mueller if Trump can be charged with crimes

When he leaves office and Mueller very quickly and clearly said “yes” twice. There was no walking back on that. Not even a little bit. I understand what a Pelosi figured out a lot sooner. Impeaching him denies the opportunity to put him in jail for crimes against the state. That’d be real justice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 04:58 AM

38. It's a sad day when performance is presented as more important

than facts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #38)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 05:45 AM

41. +1, for people who wanted to push the narrative Red Don is a crook it was a slam dunk ... for people

... who wanted Mueller to fly in with a cape they didn't like it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #38)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 06:18 AM

42. + 1000 n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #38)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 06:25 AM

44. +1 I kept thinking is anyone in this country interested in substance?

When is the pendulum swinging back on this, because it is getting ridiculous. Reality is not optional and not everything is show. We have got to quit being so shallow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #44)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 08:06 AM

50. THIS

We have got to quit being so shallow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 05:31 AM

39. amen. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 06:23 AM

43. Even more transparent is when people try to pit DUers against each other. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 06:44 AM

48. Mueller acknowledged statements..


concerning cheetox attempts to have him fired...and the dude being asked to create false files, that quit?
And mueller always referred back to the report..
After having laid the ground rules..no detours from the
report..no indictment, regardless of the findings..subtle hints of lies by mr. zero..

Won't be enough for the wingers though...no innuendos allowed, no 'if there's smoke there's fire"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 06:46 AM

49. There's no denying that as feeble and guarded as Mueller appeared yesterday, he delivered the goods

Dems got what they wanted - to let the American public hear from the horse's mouth that the guy we have in the WH is a crook. The repugs coming at Mueller like a pack of hyenas in a concerted attempt to discredit him and change the narrative from the resounding message of obstruction by bringing up Christopher Steele, dossier, Hillary, etc. did not work. The same tactics which they tried with Hillary, with Michael Cohen, when LowBarr was testifying..is clearly the same game plan - speak fast and yell loudly to intimidate the witness, discredit him by bringing up distractions, and make him out to be the bad guy coming after 45.

I'm glad to see some of the headlines spoke the truth. Dems need to deliver a relentless campaign against 45 and paint the GOP as enabling a dangerously crooked, fascist president planted there by the foreign actors. This is the only way we can get rid of him next year. Beginning impeachment process to mark 45 for the loathsome fraud that he is would help tremendously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 08:11 AM

52. I find Mueller guilty... of not being a natural public speaker.

Which is OK. Neither am I.

Pay attention to the facts he gave, not the propagandizing pieces of shit screaming about how "guarded" he looked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 08:20 AM

53. One OP during the first hearing

talked about it being a disappointment. Even though the author wasn't watching.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 08:29 AM

55. I hope a certain obscene poster doesn't show up here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 08:43 AM

58. He did what he was allowed to do. He was muzzled

from the start.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 09:16 AM

60. He did seem sort of frail, but I think that was because we built him up in our minds before hand.

He did his job exactly as it was prescribed, no more and no less. All of that information has been collected, sorted, categorized and put together in a report that is just as damning today as it was yesterday and the day before. Muller not having stage presence has nothing to do with any of those facts. Which for those not paying attention were all confirmed to be 100% true yesterday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 12:59 PM

61. Great job by the Democrats

on both committees. I watched much of both and saw many memorable moments, most of which are appearing in short clips all over the news. Mueller's report was devastating and the Democrats gave him a chance to defend it. He did fine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Jul 25, 2019, 01:17 PM

63. I feel like we win every time, but it isn't always recognized.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread