Robert Mueller, Former F.B.I. Director, Is Named Special Counsel for Russia Investigation

Hate speech is legally protected speech under the first amendment. It is often too liberally used to limit disagreeable speech which leads to a slippery slope. Then you see a double standard on the left with its treatment of specifically racially charged speech and its selective attitudes regarding which groups are worth being angry about this week. They will also take relatively ho hum mundane speech and try to interpret it as racist. IE Donald Trump saying he wants a wall or people wearing a MAGA hat.

 

NEW YORK—At a press conference Monday, American Civil Liberties Union officials announced that the organization will go to court to defend a neo-Nazi group's right to burn down ACLU headquarters.

https://politics.theonion.com/aclu-defends-nazis-right-to-burn-down-aclu-headquarters-1819567187

 

Sooooooooo, getting back on topic, it is an absolute anomaly that Trump has not tweeted out anything anout Flynn. Completely different behavior than you’d expect.

 

...this is a very interesting supposition, Nook. It echoes alot of the interpretation Rachel Maddow gave about the nature of the sentencing statement...not the least of which the Special Prosecution stated, in terms of the timeliness and thoroughness of Flynn's cooperation, was well-received and influenced others to follow Flynn's example...

 

Nook, while I think I understand (and largely agree with) the point you are trying to make there, the terms "objective" and "subjective" (along with more heavily loaded terms like "dogma" and "faith") are not doing the intellectual heavy lifting there that you may think they are doing.

While the subject is a bit too complex to go into here (in the Mueller thread especially), philosophers and theologians going back to Ian Barbour in the 60s have recognized both objective and subjective elements in religious worldviews, and Barbour famously compared science and religion to make his argument. The wiki entry on Barbour is brief but at least mentions the key issue:

"In his efforts to link science and religion in Issues in Science and Religion, Barbour coined the term 'critical realism'. This has been adopted by other scholars. He claimed the basic structure of religion is similar to that of science in some ways but also differs on some crucial points. They are part of the same spectrum in which both display ‘subjective’ as well as ‘objective’ features. The subjective include the theory on data, the resistance of comprehensive theories to falsification, and the absence of rules for choice among paradigms. Objective features include the presence of common data, evidence for or against a theory, and criteria which are not paradigm-dependent. The presence of subjective and objective features in both science and religion makes his thinking valuable and original. Barbour's arguments have been developed in significant and diverse ways by a variety of scholars, including Arthur Peacocke, John Polkinghorne, Sallie McFague and Robert John Russell. His subjective / objective approach is prominent in the evolving paradigm of Religious Naturalism.[6]

"Barbour considered critical realism an alternative to the competing interpretations of scientific theories: classical or naive realism, instrumentalism, and idealism. A critical realist perspective sees scientific theories yielding partial, revisable, abstract, but referential knowledge of the world that can be expressed through metaphors and models."
​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Barbour

again, there's much more to it than this obviously, but I don't think you can simply fall back on a "religion is subjective dogma and everything else is objective truth" set of assumptions to make your point.

 

trump: I'll pardon you if you stay loyal to ME and lie and keep your mouth shut
and if you decide to tell on me you deserve to rot in jail

mueller: for putting your country first and telling the truth, you get ZERO jail time

trump: hmmmmmm

 

Proof that liberals love Nazis.

 

This thread has gone completely off the rails the last few pages. D&D mod where art thou.

 

This is a thread about Mueller's investigation. This ridiculous religious derail is one of the few topics that truly deserves the idiotic IDIOT treatment.

 

wasn't me who brought it up.

otoh, always nice to have an opportunity to share this

 

While appreciate the people who came to my defense there was no need. I seen no reason to let the post that @Nook made derail this thread any further. He is welcome to believe what he wants to about me. While I think his post would make much more sense if this were an actual religious debate, I have made my religious beliefs public in this forum. By doing that I have opened myself up to attack for them. While I do not think it was 100% appropriate in this particular thread and would have made more sense if that was the actual thread topic, I am thick skinned and saw no need to even respond to what he said.

That being said, please let this thread go back to the Mueller investigation.

 

Mueller's office has a Friday deadline to explain to the court why it accused Manafort of lying to investigators and breaking his cooperation deal.

The special counsel must now explain exactly why it believes Manafort lied and what he lied about.
The key question is whether Manafort lied about matters related to alleged collusion between
the Russian government and the Trump campaign.​

Separately, the special counsel's office and federal prosecutors in New York have to provide memos to recommend a sentence for
Cohen -- filings that are expected to detail how he has cooperated in multiple investigations.

The special counsel could also reveal new information about its investigation when it provides a memo Friday
recommending a sentence for Cohen.​

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/06/politics/mueller-manafort-cohen-flynn/index.html

 

My last contribution to the derail, and I'll keep it short.

I think the reason we had a derail (and the derail about stopping the derail) was because posters are trying to police themselves. No one's trolling and we can work it out among ourselves. Is this the sort of thing we want a mod to step in on? I don't think so.

Classy response. But I was offended for my own self.

While I'm off topic, man the Rockets are sucking!

On topic, I see Trump will nominate William Barr to be Mueller's new boss. Trying to read about the guy now.

 

I.D.I.O.T.

 

Dang. Be careful reading up. Wiki

 

That would be 87 pages covering all of the times that the law does not apply to ... Donald J Trump.

87 pages.

Trump's legal team must know that Mueller will be charging Trump with numerous crimes.

87 pages.

That ought to be a good start on the 100s of Tump tweets to Obstruct Justice.

 

Page 1 - Photo of Mueller - Caption "Poopy Head"
Page 2 - Photo of Sessions - Caption "Dummy"
etc. etc.

 

Na,
Page one, photo of Trump with the caption, I am the greatest ever and I cannot possibly do anything wrong.

 

Mueller investigators questioned WH Chief of Staff,
John Kelly, in obstruction probe​

this was to corroborate Don McGahn's account of an episode in the WH where McGahn was arguing w Trump about firing Mueller.
Kelly had witnessed that argument.

fwiw, Kelly is expected to be fired within days

https://fox61.com/2018/12/07/mueller-investigators-questioned-john-kelly-in-obstruction-probe/

 

cnn is reporting that

the Govt recommends substantial imprisonment for Cohen​