Originally posted by Mountain Man
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Trump gives highly classified information to the Russians
Collapse
X
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostIt seems that over the last month the MSM has been slowly changing their story from Trump being under investigation to someone in his inner circle being under investigation. I'm wondering if by mid June it'll be his mailman or the cousin of one of his doctor's nurses who are the focus.
10DOGS3-articleLarge.jpg
NPR: "Do Trump's choice of condiments say about his ability to lead the nation?"
NBC: "Did Trump trade secrets for free hotdogs?"
Mother Jones: "Hotdogs, minorities, and meat segregation."
The View: "Trump ate hotdogs with his kids once - as some sort of weird sexual thing, no doubt."
BBC: "Why not bangers? Trump's irrational hatred of Europe"Actually YOU put Trump in the White House. He wouldn't have gotten 1% of the vote if it wasn't for the widespread spiritual and cultural devastation caused by progressive policies. There's no "this country" left with your immigration policies, your "allies" are worthless and even more suicidal than you are and democracy is a sick joke that I hope nobody ever thinks about repeating when the current order collapses. - Darth_Executor striking a conciliatory note in Civics 101
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostExcept that Comey told Trump that he wasn't being investigated, and two Senators are on record confirming it, one of them being the virulently anti-Trump Diane Feinstein.
So no evidence, and Trump is not even under investigation.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimLamebrain View PostWhat Comey told Trump is that he is not a target of the investigation, not that there is no evidence. There is plenty of evidence of Russia's interference and plenty of evidence of Russian connections to Trumps campaign associates, not to mention the obvious evidence of Trumps attempt to stall the investigation and cover-up for those associates. The cover-up itself, orchestrated by Trump, is itself evidence against Trump.
"It's a coverup, I tell you! That's the only reason there's no evidence, because they covered it all up, man! The lack of evidence is evidence! Wake-up, people!"
Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostOnce again, I find it impossible to tell the difference between biting sarcasm and liberal delusion.
"It's a coverup, I tell you! That's the only reason there's no evidence, because they covered it all up, man! The lack of evidence is evidence! Wake-up, people!"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostThere is no conclusive evidence or evidence of high confidence (that we know of).
"Oh, well, there's 'evidence', it's just not conclusive or of high confidence, so we're pretty sure he's guilty even though we can't actually prove it."
Like I said, I hope conspiracy nuts like you and Jimmy never serve on a jury.Last edited by Mountain Man; 05-23-2017, 12:34 PM.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostYou could say that about literally any case for which there is no evidence.
"Oh, well, there's 'evidence', it's just not conclusive or of high confidence, so we're pretty sure he's guilty even though we can't actually prove it."
Like I said, I hope conspiracy nuts like you and Jimmy never serve on a jury.
The zero evidence claim is a fiction.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostThe zero evidence claim is a fiction.Actually YOU put Trump in the White House. He wouldn't have gotten 1% of the vote if it wasn't for the widespread spiritual and cultural devastation caused by progressive policies. There's no "this country" left with your immigration policies, your "allies" are worthless and even more suicidal than you are and democracy is a sick joke that I hope nobody ever thinks about repeating when the current order collapses. - Darth_Executor striking a conciliatory note in Civics 101
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostThe zero evidence claim is a fiction.
Look, kiddo, the "evidence beyond a reasonable doubt" statute exists precisely so conspiracy nuts like you don't glom onto any bit of "evidence" that happens to be waved under your nose and convict innocent people for crimes they never committed.
Legally speaking, a lack of "conclusive evidence" is as good saying there is no evidence. Otherwise you could convict someone for a traffic violation based on the "evidence" that they happened to be on the road at the time and not because there is evidence they actually broke the law.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Meh Gerbil View PostI'll need you to back that claim with evidence.
Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostI see. So Clapper, Waters, Morell, Feinstein, and other political enemies of Trump are in the habit of writing fiction?
Look, kiddo, the "evidence beyond a reasonable doubt" statute exists precisely so conspiracy nuts like you don't glom onto any bit of "evidence" that happens to be waved under your nose and convict innocent people for crimes they never committed.
Legally speaking, a lack of "conclusive evidence" is as good saying there is no evidence. Otherwise you could convict someone for a traffic violation based on the "evidence" that they happened to be on the road at the time and not because there is evidence they actually broke the law.
The funny fact is that you talk about what goes "legally speaking" and I am not denying that since the evidence that we know of is non-conclusive, then what exists is not enough. All I am saying is that there are enough indications and hints (evidence in the weaker meaning of the word) to justify further investigation. Investigation is a proces in which you see if the hints and indications actually point to anything conclusive. Legally speaking you are innocent while undergoing investigation at least until conclusive evidence is found.
Whether it will lead to conclusive evidence I do not know, though you keep trying to make it look as though I claim that Trump must be guilty. Your constant need to misrepresent what I am saying does not change the truth.
Comment
-
Do we know what the inconclusive evidence is?
What is the weak (not sufficient to charge) evidence in this case?Actually YOU put Trump in the White House. He wouldn't have gotten 1% of the vote if it wasn't for the widespread spiritual and cultural devastation caused by progressive policies. There's no "this country" left with your immigration policies, your "allies" are worthless and even more suicidal than you are and democracy is a sick joke that I hope nobody ever thinks about repeating when the current order collapses. - Darth_Executor striking a conciliatory note in Civics 101
Comment
-
Originally posted by Meh Gerbil View PostDo we know what the inconclusive evidence is?
What is the weak (not sufficient to charge) evidence in this case?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostLook, kiddo, the "evidence beyond a reasonable doubt" statute exists precisely so conspiracy nuts like you don't glom onto any bit of "evidence" that happens to be waved under your nose and convict innocent people for crimes they never committed.
And all that "kiddo"-stuff and the like even seems to suggest that not only have you repeatedly misrepresented my statements, you are also trying to go for some kind of ad hominem "argumentation" too.
I would much rather hear your fair points about what I am actually saying.
Comment
-
Hard to tell what he gave, but rumors are that the Russians are bossing him about, so could be something simple, could be something big. Could be stuff for an upcoming cooperation. Could be all smoke and mirrors.
Hard to tell when you're not allowed to know what it is.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 11:05 AM
|
10 responses
75 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
Today, 06:55 AM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 05:24 AM
|
37 responses
180 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 03:27 PM
|
||
Started by seer, 05-18-2024, 11:06 AM
|
49 responses
306 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Yesterday, 04:14 PM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, 05-18-2024, 07:03 AM
|
19 responses
146 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by One Bad Pig
Yesterday, 09:58 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 05-17-2024, 09:51 AM
|
0 responses
28 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
05-17-2024, 09:51 AM
|
Comment