It's Time. Just Say It-- "Trump Did NOT Collude With The Russians"

a reply to: CriticalStinker

To be clear, I'm not using an analogy. I'm directly and concisely (ha!) saying that what we see as "liberals" today is a religion.

That's an important point, including the implications. They became more concerned with conversion and ideology adherence than.. anything else. How much time, money, and energy has been spent on this Trump nonsense? Time, money, and energy that could have been spent on creating and inventing stuff that could have been unimaginably more effective with real world results.

I started to break away when AGW was gaining ground. It wasn't enough that I wanted to see vast improvement in humanities interactions with nature. I don't think it would have even been enough to simply agree either, I was asked to "spread the word" and convert others. I'm not down with that, ever.

If we look at this all as social groups interacting, rather than just politics, it becomes very clear where the behavior falls. When adherence to belief becomes paramount to what we actually do, it falls squarely into religious fervor.

As for me, I'm probably further "left" than most. So far, in fact, that it starts to wrap back around again. My own ideas for this realm of things focus on creating independence and self sufficiency in all social programs, and leveraging technology to achieve things we could never even imagine a decade ago.

To be honest though, not many call me a liberal. I can't seem to talk about a damn thing with people in this new religion, yet those "right wing nut jobs" have been more open to discussion than I can remember.

The only time I see folks getting hit with "liberal" as a pejorative is when the individual(s) are exhibiting a specific set of behaviors, rather than a specific set of beliefs. So, when someone gets hit with that label, it tends to be because they are perceived as disingenuous in general rather than specific political beliefs.

In other words, no.. I don't tend to get called a liberal at all despite being very left leaning. In fact, I'm feeling that the right is more reasonable than ever. We just don't agree on many things in the political sphere. And, because I think that novel, "progressive" ideas should be so good that the right doesn't just support them, they get excited about it.. I've actually had some of those "rwnj" seek me out, out of pure curiosity. I like that.

My experience seems to differ from yours immensely. But, it probably doesn't help that many in this emergent religion have now begun to claim themselves "centrists" and "unbiased." They set themselves up on that fence solely to target one side. Its the "high ground," after all. A term with a wicked double meaning.

a reply to: ketsuko

I do get where you are coming from, and I appreciate that you see me as reasonable.

But!

Look at it from my perspective:

I've watched a social group that I identify with (and find important) be taken over by religious zealots. That was done, at least in part, by controlling language.

How could anyone be against Super Happy Fun Time, right?

I get the perspective that I'm not a liberal "any more," even mirroring that understanding in some of my posts.

But.. I just can't let them have it. Especially since it confuses the identification of what this group actually is: a new religion that happens to be heavily involved in politics. A situation that we have, historically, tried to avoid for obvious reasons.

By calling them "liberal," or even "the left," it lends legitimacy that these are solely political groups. When, at least in my opinion, they are not.

a reply to: Serdgiam

If we look at this all as social groups interacting, rather than just politics, it becomes very clear where the behavior falls. When adherence to belief becomes paramount to what we actually do, it falls squarely into religious fervor.

We can agree on that....

blogs.timesofisrael.com...

play.acast.com...

a reply to: Serdgiam

Well said, friend.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Pyle

I didn't expect much from this investigation as far as collusion is concerned. I have several threads going back over a year stating that.

But I also didn't expect for some sort of come to Jesus line started from those who did think there was collusion to apologize to ATS for being wrong. How often does that happen?

Honestly I feel most people don't look for the truth on both sides, they look for how to "prove" their "truths". They construct their narrative and do whatever it takes to keep it alive.

Biggest problem is how a bunch of the public evidence seems to support Trump is doing something with Russia and Barr's summary doesnt really answer anything other then "NO COLLUSION!" Hopefully the full report explains those oddities because it would go a long way to getting this to everyone still waiting for answers before they jump into this mess discussing things.

None of which changes the conclusions (and much touted-by-the-left Mueller inquiry) that "NO COLLUSION" was actually a factual statement. You know, that statement MSM/pundits/pols/voters mocked? Yes, that one. It turned out to be totally accurate

Big surprise

Just like Trump's wiretapping/spy claims, those turned out to be true also.

Or a rigged election. also true
Or crooked Hillary, also true

So much inconvenient truth, no wonder he gets so much grief

a reply to: Pyle

seems to support Trump is doing something with Russia

You mean business deals? Personal relationships? Diplomatic relations? Personal vacations? Yeah, none of that is illegal nor was it the focus of the investigation (again, because none of which is illegal)

You are moving those goal posts again....

Now, now...

Remember what happened the last time.. Fitzmas X 10000

No "collusion"! No conspiracy! No crimes!

I have to tell you Pyle, you and several other on here couldn't have been more wrong. On virtually every page of breathless speculation, rampant paranoia or malicious rumor-mongering - totally wrong. Shame on Democrats who divided this nation OVER NOTHING

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: RadioRobert
I'm watching MSNBC and some talking head just suggested the fact that Barr issued a statement within 48 hrs indicated they didn't take enough time to think about obstruction.

And another says as I type, "who says the AG, presidential appointee, gets to make the decision to not prosecute. It will be up to Congress!"

I have heard "other investigations" about 70 times in less than ten minutes. Must be the new talking point from the DNC.

GOP said the similar things about lynch/Comey during the Clinton investigation.

All right then, I guess we need to completely abolish the Dept. of Justice because no matter what, it cannot be just as you just pointed out. Due to its nature, it will always have an inherent bias.

Thank you for getting rid of a large chunk of Federal Bureaucracy for us.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: InTheLight

We wont lose sight of the reasons for the election.

The reason was Trump was seen as a possible outsider, and so the establishment, led by Obama administrations intel community, decided they must take him down by any means necessary.

If it was about foriegn influence, Ukrainian collusion with the DNC would have been investigated. Feinstein who actually employed a Chinese spy would have be treated at least as harshly as trump, Obama would not have laughed off election interference claims during his demonstration , and so forth.

No matter how many hacks russia, china, or anyone else commits against the US, it pales it comparison to the Democratic establishment party under Obamas admin weaponizing the intel community to go after opponents.

Exactly! And don't forget the Awans and Wassperperson-Schultz on that list.

You would think if this foreign influence was such an all-consuming concern that Obama would have weaponized our intel agencies against those foreign agents rather than against the domestic opposition candidate. Such a move smacks of banana republic tactics.

a reply to: Serdgiam

I understand the religion thing. You see it with churches, even between different churches of the same sect, in Christianity.

But, yeah, the SJW biz has taken hold hard and it's a new form of Puritanism.

I'm not sure what we should call them. Maybe the New Red Guard? They do have some very close similarities. All they need is their Mao.

originally posted by: Pyle

Biggest problem is how a bunch of the public evidence seems to support Trump is doing something with Russia and Barr's summary doesnt really answer anything other then "NO COLLUSION!" Hopefully the full report explains those oddities because it would go a long way to getting this to everyone still waiting for answers before they jump into this mess discussing things.

What "Public" evidence ? 😎

The banana MSM/Democrat BS ? 😎

a reply to: xuenchen

You know x... those "reporters" who cite each other's delusions and pretend it is some sort of "evidence"

Evidence of them being bitter, sour grapes maybe

a reply to: Pyle

Biggest problem is how a bunch of the public evidence seems to support Trump is doing something with Russia and Barr's summary doesnt really answer anything other then "NO COLLUSION!" Hopefully the full report explains those oddities because it would go a long way to getting this to everyone still waiting for answers before they jump into this mess discussing things.


Oddities he's a multi billionaire world wide businessman. Of course he knows Russians probably lots of them and don't forget Chinese and Africans.

The left was never interested in collusion or obstruction - I don't think they ever mentioned it, did they???

The big one was always Stormy Daniels.. Avenatti will get Trump, just you wait and see... Oh wait Avenatti has just been arrested for extortion... bwahahahahaahahahaha!

No apologies needed...

LOL

mobile.twitter.com...

I think we should go a step further and go after those who was so sure of themselves perpetuating all this nonsense on national television. Many were US representatives saying that there was plenty of evidence. If these people are US reps then just who exactly are they representing with lies and deceit?? Nope their done, It's time they all get thrown out of office. Every last one of them. They don't represent the people or have the integrity to back the president. Just full of lies, create problems and get a fat check. It's not just a swamp, It's turning into a cesspool.

Democrat woman on CNN just now... we have to get to the bottom of the 16 contacts with Russia...
Apparently the Special Counsel didn't.

They are also lying about Trump's reaction - pretending that his comment on going after the people who started this hoax refers to Mueller.

These people are so crazy, lol.

a reply to: UKTruth


Lies and Fake News is ALL they've got left.
I'd pity them...if I wasn't laughing at them so much.

BTW... Lindsay Graham is against making the Mueller Report public. And Senate leader Mitch McConnell just officially blocked making it public.

www.nbcnews.com...

Democrats and MSM are beyond LIVID now!