Replies

On the other side you have a whole bunch of people — probably a large majority here on FR — who insist that Mueller is part of some deep conspiracy to destroy President Trump.

Well that is where all the actual evidence seems to lead, starting with the President's own bombastic tweets, is it not? Who are we supposed to believe, the man there to drain the swamp, or the swamp creature who covered up Fast and Furious, the IRS targeting, the Uranium sale to Russia, just to name a few?

This whole fable seems intent on trying to lend desperately needed credibility to Mueller, while setting Trump up to appear weak and ineffective for not countering him better. It's just been rammed down our throats way too hard to think there's not some motive to the story itself.

After all the nonsense I went through last November and December dealing with Freepers who insisted first that the Jill Stein recounts were going to be used to overturn the election results in MI, PA and WI, then that the Electoral College was going to throw the election to Hillary Clinton, I take every outlandish thing I read here on FR with a huge grain of salt.

I also try to be as objective and analytical as possible when I comment on the articles and vanities posted here ... so I try not to go out on a limb with any predictions, or clearly explain in my posts that I'm speculating (sometimes wildly!).

It's kind of pathetic how so many people here insist that media outlets like CNN, the New York Times and the Washington Post are "fake news," but then immediately post reflexive reactions to stories posted with references to "unnamed sources" on those very sites.