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.
See more
See less

The obvious has been officially confirmed ...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    And what makes you think Flynn would be immune to coercion if a big enough lever was brought to bear? Remember, he was threatened with the financial ruin of his family, and there is evidence that Mueller's goon squad suggested that Flynn's own son might become a "target" of their investigation if Flynn didn't cooperate. It was a classic shakedown. What innocent man wouldn't plead guilty under those circumstances to protect his family?

    Let's just put it this way: there's a reason Judge Sullivan is taking a very close look at this case and is giving Sydney Powell all the time she needs to expose the truth.
    Let's put it this way, Flynn himself said that "you don't plead the fifth unless you're guilty." And you don't make a deal for a lighter sentence if you're innocent either. You may be naive, but Flynn isn't.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    MM - our DOJ, specifically Bill Barr, is out spending public money gallivanting around the world investigating conspiracy theories from right wing rags without a trace of evidence and with no other purpose than to try to resurrect ideas that might lend credence to the lies spoken so often by Donald Trump....
    Jim, look at the language you're using here. You're sounding more like JimL and Tassman with the superfluous adverbs and adjectives and prejudicial verbage. You can do better.

    Meanwhile, Barr is actually opening a criminal investigation in which anything he finds will have to be put before an actual grand jury - as opposed to Schiff's misleading implication that his investigation is similar to a grand jury.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    MM - our DOJ, specifically Bill Barr, is out spending public money gallivanting around the world investigating conspiracy theories...
    That Barr is investigating a conspiracy theory is itself a conspiracy theory. Try getting your head out of the fake news bubble and breath the fresh air for a change.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    There’s no point in bothering with someone that is too emotionally invested, to notice. Just look at your dismissive hand wave to anything and everything that is even slightly helpful towards Trump. You accuse Barr, of all sorts of things without any evidence any of your handwaves are true while ignoring the tin foil hat tightly wrapped around your own head. If Barr is right and there was an attempt to take down a US president, shouldn’t it be looked at? After all, you’re more than willing to entertain conspiracy theories that whisper what you want to hear into your ear. Go ahead, post them, don’t forget the links and context so others can see your insanity, for themselves and see that you made this bed, all by yourself, but are unwilling to sleep in it.
    I have accused Barr of supporting the president when he should not, when supporting him is not in the best interests of Justice or the integrity of the rule of Law in the United States. His end run to paint the Mueller report as 'exonerating' the president would be one such example. And his current foray to personally investigate the president's pet conspiracy theories is another - specifically that is was not Russia but Ukraine that tried to influence the 2016 election, and not in favor of himself but in favor of Hillary - something a REPUBLICAN led investigation finds counter factual (i.e. they found that the Russians DID try to influence our 2016 election, and in favor of TRUMP)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrain...spiracy_theory

    https://www.vox.com/2019/10/8/209051...-2016-election

    Again, you lack specifics in your accusations. You accuse me of listening to conspiracy theories, but don't produce any examples. My example of Barr doing what I said he is doing are listed above. That means you can take them and try to show why they are not as I describe them. There is nothing I can do with your comments as they are generalized accusations with no substance, just negative opinions expressed in derogatory terms.


    Jim
    Last edited by oxmixmudd; 10-28-2019, 02:30 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    Note the sad attempt to tar and feather, with blind accusations because you hate Trump so badly that you can’t even entertain the possibility that there was an attempt to take down a president based on lies and foreign influence. You’re more than willing to entertain any anti Trump conspiracy, why are you so unwilling to entertain this one? Do you hate Trump that badly that you want it to be crazy, so it can vindicate your beliefs?
    I don't 'hate' Trump. But I do believe he is both morally and ideologically unqualified for the position, to the point he is dangerous to the country and even to the world.

    The evidence that backs that opinion of his danger to this country is significant. From lawless actions to personal attacks on individual american citizens to irresponsible management of our military, state departement, intelligence and law enforcment agencies, and foreign policy.

    I will provide specifics if you can ever find your way out of personal attack mode and into evidence based discussion.


    Jim

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    MM - our DOJ, specifically Bill Barr, is out spending public money gallivanting around the world investigating conspiracy theories from right wing rags without a trace of evidence and with no other purpose than to try to resurrect ideas that might lend credence to the lies spoken so often by Donald Trump. This does not bode will for the objectivity of their assessments of the Mueller report evidence indicating obstruction. From day 1 Barr has shown a capacity to act against the best interests of the USA and for the best interests of Donald Trump when the two are incompatible.

    OTOH, Those signatures represent professional sources most likely free from any outside influence or obligation. Those signature should then only be suspect if they as a group have shown a track record of partisan action.
    Note the sad attempt to tar and feather, with blind accusations because you hate Trump so badly that you can’t even entertain the possibility that there was an attempt to take down a president based on lies and foreign influence. You’re more than willing to entertain any anti Trump conspiracy, why are you so unwilling to entertain this one? Do you hate Trump that badly that you want it to be crazy, so it can vindicate your beliefs?

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    I should go get the last 30 of your posts to me and post them right here, all in a row simply nothing the number of words that are nothing more than personal attacks against me or non-factual rants. And we would see what you actual track record is. I'm not sure there would be more than a paragraph or two left of actual useful, objective, text, but who knows, maybe i'd be surprised.
    There’s no point in bothering with someone that is too emotionally invested, to notice. Just look at your dismissive hand wave to anything and everything that is even slightly helpful towards Trump. You accuse Barr, of all sorts of things without any evidence any of your handwaves are true while ignoring the tin foil hat tightly wrapped around your own head. If Barr is right and there was an attempt to take down a US president, shouldn’t it be looked at? After all, you’re more than willing to entertain conspiracy theories that whisper what you want to hear into your ear. Go ahead, post them, don’t forget the links and context so others can see your insanity, for themselves and see that you made this bed, all by yourself, but are unwilling to sleep in it.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    I have presented plenty Jim, you’re just too full of yourself to ever admit you’re wrong. It’s rather simple, are those involved with the Muller report trying to impeach? Yes or no?
    I should go get the last 30 of your posts to me and post them right here, all in a row posting only substantive text and simply noting the number of words where there is nothing more than personal attacks against me or non-factual rants. And we would see what you actual track record is. I'm not sure there would be more than a paragraph or two left of actual useful, objective, text, but who knows, maybe i'd be surprised.
    Last edited by oxmixmudd; 10-28-2019, 12:03 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Evidence that was deemed insufficient by the Department of Justice who has access to additional information that has not been publicly released.

    Next?
    MM - our DOJ, specifically Bill Barr, is out spending public money gallivanting around the world investigating conspiracy theories from right wing rags without a trace of evidence and with no other purpose than to try to resurrect ideas that might lend credence to the lies spoken so often by Donald Trump. This does not bode will for the objectivity of their assessments of the Mueller report evidence indicating obstruction. From day 1 Barr has shown a capacity to act against the best interests of the USA and for the best interests of Donald Trump when the two are incompatible.

    OTOH, Those signatures represent professional sources most likely free from any outside influence or obligation. Those signature should then only be suspect if they as a group have shown a track record of partisan action.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Given the 1000+ signatures from former prosecutors referencing the evidence presented in the Mueller report, you could start there.

    https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statem...s-8ab7691c2aa1


    Jim
    Evidence that was deemed insufficient by the Department of Justice who has access to additional information that has not been publicly released.

    Next?

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    You have railed against me with irrational diatribes more times than I can count. But the number of times you've actually presented evidence is so small by comparison I can only count 3 or 4 from memory.

    "The fact Congress didn't try to impeach him" ... and what exactly are they doing now? The question of impeachment has been out there quite some time now, and was in fact suggested by Mueller in the report itself.

    Impeachment - given the rift in our country right now - is an truly extraordinary step not to be taken lightly. Nixon resigned rather than put the country through it. And we have had nutcases on this very site suggest civil war might be a possible outcome. So you should not place a great deal of weight on how long it has taken to get to this point when trying to claim Trump has not committed impeachable offences. He has committed many. But to actually impeach him and remove him is no trivial matter.

    Jim
    I have presented plenty Jim, you’re just too full of yourself to ever admit you’re wrong. It’s rather simple, are those involved with the Muller report trying to impeach? Yes or no?

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Of course the opinion of former federal prosecutors on the legal veracity of a set of evidence carries far more weight than mine or most people in the USA. They didn't obtain those offices because they had a math or comp-sci degree and worked in industry. They got there because they had mastered their capabilities and understanding in the field of Law. And while a few such people might be game for placing their reputations on the line for a cheap stunt, most would not be. And unless you at a bare minimum have a law degree and have practiced law, what you just said above would be a clear indication you don't know what you don't know.
    Are they involved in the case? No, so yes Jim, there opinion means very little because they are not privy to the inside details that those actively working the case are. It’s like quoting the opinion of a scientist that hasn’t worked in his field, for 30 years. The opinions that matter are those who actively worked the case. Muller couldn’t list a single crime Trump committed. That’s a fact. Barr and Rosenstein signed off and agreed with the opinion of not enough evidence. That is a fact. Congress is not perusing impeachment for the contents found inside the Muller Report. That’s a fact. The media has gone silent on the contents of the Muller report. That is a fact. When both friends and enemies of Trump are doing the same thing, that’s worth something. I don’t care what the opinion is of a DA that last served as a DA 40+ years ago. Reality: there is no crime within the pages of the Muller report. Face it and stop hiding from the same reality you accuse your opponents of doing.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    I have pointed out your biasness time and time again, only to watch you make excuse after excuse for it. Look right here where you try to pass off some signatures as some sort of big deal, when none of these people are involved in the case. Rod Rosenstein signed off, with Barr, on his letter to Congress and agreeded with Barr. Those are the opinions that matter, not the opinions of people that are not on the case and have no more access than you or I. The fact congress didn’t try to impeach him, based on the Miller report, says a lot too. Those are the facts and your opinion is noted and dismissed. Stop trying to win a nearly 3 year ago election.
    You have railed against me with irrational diatribes more times than I can count. But the number of times you've actually presented evidence is so small by comparison I can only count 3 or 4 from memory.

    "The fact Congress didn't try to impeach him" ... and what exactly are they doing now? The question of impeachment has been out there quite some time now, and was in fact suggested by Mueller in the report itself.

    Impeachment - given the rift in our country right now - is an truly extraordinary step not to be taken lightly. Nixon resigned rather than put the country through it. And we have had nutcases on this very site suggest civil war might be a possible outcome. So you should not place a great deal of weight on how long it has taken to get to this point when trying to claim Trump has not committed impeachable offences. He has committed many. But to actually impeach him and remove him is no trivial matter.

    Jim

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    Who cares? Some of these guys left government work when my parents where in grade school. They are not involved in the case and their opinions mean no more than yours or mine. It’s simply a cheap and dishonest way to raise ones opinion to meaning more than it does.
    Of course the opinion of former federal prosecutors on the legal veracity of a set of evidence carries far more weight than mine or most people in the USA. They didn't obtain those offices because they had a math or comp-sci degree and worked in industry. They got there because they had mastered their capabilities and understanding in the field of Law. And while a few such people might be game for placing their reputations on the line for a cheap stunt, most would not be. And unless you at a bare minimum have a law degree and have practiced law, what you just said above would be a clear indication you don't know enough to know how unqualified you are to make such a statement.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    That is your opinion - and until you offer objective evidence that show it to be more than just your opinion - that is ALL it is.

    Again pix, you can't just rant if you want to make an actual point. You need evidence that is factual and which logically supports your opinion.



    Jim
    I have pointed out your biasness time and time again, only to watch you make excuse after excuse for it. Look right here where you try to pass off some signatures as some sort of big deal, when none of these people are involved in the case. Rod Rosenstein signed off, with Barr, on his letter to Congress and agreeded with Barr. Those are the opinions that matter, not the opinions of people that are not on the case and have no more access than you or I. The fact congress didn’t try to impeach him, based on the Miller report, says a lot too. Those are the facts and your opinion is noted and dismissed. Stop trying to win a nearly 3 year ago election.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
16 responses
127 views
0 likes
Last Post One Bad Pig  
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
53 responses
328 views
0 likes
Last Post Mountain Man  
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
25 responses
112 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
33 responses
197 views
0 likes
Last Post Roy
by Roy
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
84 responses
361 views
0 likes
Last Post JimL
by JimL
 
Working...
X