Trump vs Biden debate

[Anomalocaris]

The Proud Boy problem seems to be way overhyped too. Yeah, they've beaten up some people that throw piss at them or whatever, but as far as I know they're not going around burning down businesses, trying to burn down courthouses, dragging people out of their cars and beating them, shooting and killing random supporters of certain politicians in the street for no reason, or shooting cops.

But..but...but... 

Protesters are the good guys and therefore everything they do is "good". So when they burn down your house, vehicle or place of business - just remember - it's for the greater good.....

[/sarcasm]

Certainly a far greater good than white male supremacy.... wouldn’t you agree?

[Rev. Rye]

The Proud Boy problem seems to be way overhyped too. Yeah, they've beaten up some people that throw piss at them or whatever, but as far as I know they're not going around burning down businesses, trying to burn down courthouses, dragging people out of their cars and beating them, shooting and killing random supporters of certain politicians in the street for no reason, or shooting cops.

But..but...but... 

Protesters are the good guys and therefore everything they do is "good". So when they burn down your house, vehicle or place of business - just remember - it's for the greater good.....

[/sarcasm]

It's weird, it's almost like the protesters' aims are supposed to be at least part of a factor in whether or not they're percieved as good.

[Irreligious Atheist]

As a non-American outsider, I thought the debate was extremely entertaining. I was laughing all throughout. It was a lot more entertaining than the Clinton-Trump debates. I don't know if Trump helped himself much, but he brought the entertainment. Don't know if Biden helped himself much either as he mostly looked like a deer in the headlights and wasn't nearly aggressive enough. Trump did a good job exposing Biden's massive corruption concerning his crackhead son etc, but misrepresented a bunch of Biden's positions like when he was talking about the Green New Deal.

The Proud Boy problem seems to be way overhyped too. Yeah, they've beaten up some people that throw piss at them or whatever, but as far as I know they're not going around burning down businesses, trying to burn down courthouses, dragging people out of their cars and beating them, shooting and killing random supporters of certain politicians in the street for no reason, or shooting cops.

Are you russian by any chance?

The Russiagate hoax has been debunked.

Biden and Trump are both extremely corrupt and I don't like what either of them stand for, but I can't deny the President's comedic talent.

[Rev. Rye]

The Russiagate hoax has been debunked.

[Anomalocaris]

Are you russian by any chance?

The Russiagate hoax has been debunked.

Biden and Trump are both extremely corrupt and I don't like what either of them stand for, but I can't deny the President's comedic talent.

comes in trying to establish a persona that might seem to be a little to the right but still reasonable, establish credibility as a perhaps a different but still reasonable  perspective, then starting sniping from there at some basic factual foundation.   

but, talk as if from a script, doesn’t quite mimic the more spontaneous idiocy, and not sly enough when called out.  

try harder.    somewhere else.

[Irreligious Atheist]

The Russiagate hoax has been debunked.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-...rr-n986611

[The Architect Of Fate]

JIMMY DORE!!!!!!     

They asked for a citation not a comedy routine

[Irreligious Atheist]

JIMMY DORE!!!!!!     

They asked for a citation not a comedy routine

With award winning journalist Aaron Mate.

[The Architect Of Fate]

JIMMY DORE!!!!!!     

They asked for a citation not a comedy routine

With award winning journalist Aaron Mate.

Proof not everyone who has an award deserves it .

[Rev. Rye]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-...rr-n986611

The conclusion of the Mueller report is a lot more complicated than that. On the first page (numbered, 9 of 448 in the PDF) of the report:

As set forth in detail in this report, the Special Counsel’s investigation established that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election principally through two operations. First, a Russian entity carried out asocial media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the Clinton Campaign and then released stolen documents. The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign. 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.

Unfortunately, what Mueller did not find was a smoking gun that proved that the Trump campaign willfully violated the law on this front. That said, he did find a lot of acts that could be described as collusion, but he couldn't prove any charges of conspiracy, which Mueller points out does not let Trump off the hook, especially with all the collusion they did establish. Seriously, Mueller lays all this out in the introduction to Volume One of his report. You might not have the time to read the whole 448 pages, but at least read those two pages (1-2 numbered, 9-10 out of 448) before talking what the Mueller Report did or did not establish about Russia and the 2016 election.

Indeed, the conclusion outright states (repeated in full because it's one paragraph long and it's public domain):

Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time,if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.