The Mueller Report thread

[Dill]

(04-22-2019, 11:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I've read plenty and yes I accept the AG's report and consider him an expert on such matters; unless proven otherwise by Congress. Perhaps not the experts that you and Dill are and maybe they will call on Dino to testify if it ever turns to impeachment, because you've read it all.

Laymen giving their "educated verdict" on the report, because they've "read it" are clowns at best, and it's amusing you don't realize it. Not one person's opinion in this forum has changed because they read the report

To be honest the most extreme anti-Trump poster (JJ) on this forum has given the most measured answer. 

This is a keeper.  A statement of your standards.

1. You've read "plenty" of an "expert on such matters" chosen by a president with a history of lying and now on the dock for obstruction.  I.e., reading ONE side of a political issue, YOUR side, is plenty, regardless of the trust issues generated by the behavior of Trump and his picked spokespersons. 

2.  On the other hand, citizens who read both Mueller and Barr, then compare to make their own legally consistent judgment, are "clowns at best." They don't realize . . . what . . . that trusting authorities with something to hide is better than informing themselves?   Unless you, yourself, are called upon to testify, there is no need for voting citizens to personally understand the legal case for obstruction against an official elected to the highest office in the land--beyond what HE tells them about it. 

3. If no one's mind is changed by looking closely at arguments for both sides, then . . . looking at both sides is pointless?  Pick the side you like and stand pat.   

In authoritarian states, be they feudal, theocratic or totalitarian, the populace are expected to trust political authority to do their political and legal thinking for them.  

Call that Faith-based politics?

Representative governments hold forth a very different ideal--one in which the informed citizen keeps watch on government--whether the citizens are going to testify in hearings or not. "Informed" means a basic understanding how law and government work, and the arguments on both sides of national political issues/cases.

You are clearly disparaging the democratic ideal and those who practice it, while affirming the authoritarian model of trust in  authority and obedience, the model in which thinking for oneself is above the citizen's pay grade.