Ministry of Truth?

[Dill]

(05-14-2022, 10:08 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: See, this is your blind spot.

The "Russian Hoax" is just that, a hoax. The media fell for it hook, line, and sinker. And Maddow was probably the biggest fish to take the bait. Everyone who gets their information from somewhere other than MSNBC knows this. 

But not only do you still not realize that it was a big nothing-berger, you label anyone who knows the truth as having "succumbed to Hannity."
The implication being that if you think that Russia-gate wasn't true and that Trump didn't collude with the Russians, you're a right-wing FOX viewing nut job.

YOW! I happened upon your post just before I was going to bed. After listening to 22 minutes of your first youtube item, I thought I should at least say something about that one right away.

Context: apparently Rachel and fellow liberals are raising critical questions about Barr’s summary of the Mueller Report, before the Report has become public. Does it accurately reflect the Report, they ask? Well Kulinski is having none of it. The “hoax” is over, and there is no need to question Barr’s integrity or wait for the Report. IT’S OVER.
 
I distilled three arguments from all the shouting and agitated speech, which I summarize here:
 
1.    If Barr’s summary were off, then Mueller would have publicly said ”Whoa Whoa Whoa!  He got it wrong!” (4:17-44). 
BUT HE DID NOT, which “leads you to believe the summary is correct.” So K. needs Rachel to stop misleading people, 
to “STOP ALL THE LYING!”
 
2.    “There’s three things you cannot get around,” K. says quoting Barr, whom he believes to be quoting Mueller, “No evidence of collusion,” and “no more indictments coming,” and “no recommendation of impeachment!” So “you can’t obfuscate and deflect your way out of those three facts.” Releasing the report is “not going to change anything.” 7:14-8:31
 
3.    And finally, regarding Rachel’s question 15—“Will Trump recognize that Russia attacked our election?”
After calling her “the liberal Glen Beck,” he says “notice what she did there,” using the extreme language-- “attacked us”—to describe a troll farm making memes of a “muscular Bernie Sanders” and “cartoons like Hilary was Satan,” just to get clicks and make money. “This is what they are using to say Russia attacked us.”  11:21-12:54. So the attack on our election did no real damage, and Dems are only upset because the DNC, not the RNC, was hacked. No harm, no foul. Rather than admit she was totally wrong, Rachel is trying to salvage her rep through hyperbole, keeping a non-story alive.

Responding systematically to these arguments:
 
1.    Mueller did publicly question Barr’s summary. It was a pretty big issue in fact. In a letter to Barr on March 27, 2019 he said this:
 
“The summary letter the [Juatice] Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigation.” 
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/01/politics/mueller-letter-to-barr/index.html
 
2.    Releasing the report did change something. It resulted in a series of hearings, interviews and news reports on the discrepancies between Barr’s summary and the actual report—exactly the question Rachel was raising.  It was not that the Report found no collusion whatsoever; both sides were willing, but the level of coordination required for prosecution was not met. Like prostitutes looking for johns and johns cruising for prostitutes, but they keep driving past one another. That so many of the president’s team were talking to spies and eager to collude should not seem a “nothing burger” any more than a discovery that your partner was cruising should seem ok if unsuccessful the time you know about.
 
The most important discrepancy was that Mueller found PLENTY of obstruction, an impeachable offense, and took the time to cite the relevant statues to show the president’s office could not be used to protect him from investigation, nor could it prevent prosecution. Given the numerous offenses, M. EXPLICITLY stated that the Report did not exonerate Trump. However, he said it was beyond his pay grade to indict and prosecute the president. That was the role of Congress.
 
Barr’s intervention totally obscured this hand off to Congress, giving the impression it was only up to Barr to determine whether the Report had found a prosecutable offense. And Trump’s man said “no.”
 
So Barr, stepping beyond his role, jumped out in front of the Report, and thus set the narrative, so troubling to Mueller, of Trump’s total exoneration. And with some help from the RWM, that was amplified to “hoax all along”—as if there was nothing here voters needed to know about a corrupt President and the team protecting him.
 
3.    Regarding the “attack on our election,” the Mueller Report found quite a bit more than memes from troll farms—e.g., efforts to hack into voting registrations. And knowledge of the extent of that attack has increased after 2019.  Why was K. so ready to trust the obviously untrustworthy Barr before reading the report? 
 
But it’s getting late I and have sleep, so suggestion—tomorrow let’s you and I stop comparing reporters to reporters and take a look at that Mueller Report ourselves. Then Barr’s letter. Once we've done that, we can assess the accuracy of our reporters, ok? 
 
If you’ve not read the whole thing before, we can at least review the executive summaries for each section. https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/18/politics/full-mueller-report-pdf/index.html. If that’s too tedious, we might begin with the American Constitution Society’s “Key Findings”  https://www.acslaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/ACS-CREW-Final-Mueller-Report-Highlights.7.19.pdf[url=https://www.acslaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/ACS-CREW-Final-Mueller-Report-Highlights.7.19.pdf][/url]