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

Nunes sues CNN over 'demonstrably false' Ukraine report

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

  • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    It seems CNN didn't even do basic due diligence by comparing the claims to Nunes' publicly available travel itinerary, although I suppose, "It was not malice but incompetence, your honor," just might stand up in court as a valid defense.
    Yup. Even a cursory examination ought to have resulted in a "sorry for bothering you" and the story being sent to File 13.

    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

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JimL View Post
      Yes, but only because he resigned after his Republican defenders in Congress told him that it was a forgone conclusion.
      how does that change the fact that you were wrong?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        how does that change the fact that you were wrong?
        It doesn't - it's just Jim's way of trying to change the subject instead of simply admitting he erred.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          This is just more spin. If the case against Trump is solid then why are the Democrats pushing the idea that a president can be impeached without ever committing a crime?

          The following is required reading for anybody who wants to know how weak the case against Trump really is:

          https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...-breaking-law/
          MM - there is no spin in what I said. obstruction is a crime. Period. And on with the rest of the list. Those are all impeachable acts. Will they all make it into the articles of impeachment? Will the GOP in the Senate admit the evidence is strong enough to know he did those things? If they do, will they act to remove him? that is the 'rest of the story' as Paul Harvey used to say. But the elements Trump will be impeached on are crimes and they are violations of Trump's oath of office. Whether Trump will be 'convicted' as it were is what the Senate Trial will decide.
          My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

          If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

          This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
            how does that change the fact that you were wrong?
            Because it's irrelevant, the republican defenders of the president told him he would be convicted, and that they themselves would be voting to convict, ergo he resigned.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              It doesn't - it's just Jim's way of trying to change the subject instead of simply admitting he erred.
              Sure, CP.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                Sure, CP.
                And aping the things others say.
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                  MM - there is no spin in what I said. obstruction is a crime. Period. And on with the rest of the list. Those are all impeachable acts. Will they all make it into the articles of impeachment? Will the GOP in the Senate admit the evidence is strong enough to know he did those things? If they do, will they act to remove him? that is the 'rest of the story' as Paul Harvey used to say. But the elements Trump will be impeached on are crimes and they are violations of Trump's oath of office. Whether Trump will be 'convicted' as it were is what the Senate Trial will decide.
                  It's true that obstruction is a crime. However, it's not true that Trump is guilty of obstruction since he is permitted by law to challenge an investigation in court. Similarly, bribery and treason are crimes, but the definitions the Democrats include in their report are absurdly broad to the point of being all but meaningless. For instance, they define bribery as "when the President offers, solicits, or accepts something of personal value to influence his own official actions." By that standard, what politician isn't guilty of "bribery"? They even go so far in their report as to defend the impeachment of Andrew Jackson which is widely regarded as a textbook example of how not to impeach a president! Furthermore, they attempt to establish the absurd rule that a president can be impeached without ever committing a crime, and that second- and third-hand hearsay -- which is to say office gossip -- is good enough evidence to remove a president from office.

                  I can't imagine you would be you be so supportive of the Democrat party's efforts if they were against a president you actually liked, but in your obsessive anti-Trump mindset, anything goes as long it removes the bad orange man from power.
                  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 JimL View Post
                    Because it's irrelevant, the republican defenders of the president told him he would be convicted, and that they themselves would be voting to convict, ergo he resigned.
                    So you are saying your post was irrelevant? OK...

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      And aping the things others say.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        So you are saying your post was irrelevant? OK...
                        I think Jim gets wrapped up in the talking points, but when it's revealed how stupid those talking points are, he kinda tries to stuff them under the bed and pretend he never bought into them.

                        This has been the pattern lately. That, and parroting things we say.

                        I think he's getting the "free version" of the talking points which are weak and out of date, and needs to move to the "paid version" to get the more up-to-date ones.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                          I think Jim gets wrapped up in the talking points, but when it's revealed how stupid those talking points are, he kinda tries to stuff them under the bed and pretend he never bought into them.

                          This has been the pattern lately. That, and parroting things we say.

                          I think he's getting the "free version" of the talking points which are weak and out of date, and needs to move to the "paid version" to get the more up-to-date ones.
                          I believe JimL is an expired parrot. Or maybe he is just pining for the Fjords.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Juvenal View Post
                            It is never okay to get the basic facts in a story wrong.

                            But there are other issues here, running from the legal to the political. On the legal side, Nunes has a better chance of winning a lawsuit against his cow. It's a high bar for any public figure, and for political figures, it's even higher.
                            Yeah, the bar for proving libel is set pretty high.
                            I read the filing, just btw, looking for how he came up with his figure for damages. Five significant digits, so I expected there'd be a detailed accounting.

                            Yeah, right.
                            Generally, a complaint will not have a detailed accounting, though it's sometimes based on such (sometimes a plaintiff will just roll with the largest number they can sort of justify, with the aim of upping the settlement offer).
                            Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                            Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                            sigpic
                            I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              And aping the things others say.
                              Sure, CP.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                                It's true that obstruction is a crime. However, it's not true that Trump is guilty of obstruction since he is permitted by law to challenge an investigation in court. Similarly, bribery and treason are crimes, but the definitions the Democrats include in their report are absurdly broad to the point of being all but meaningless. For instance, they define bribery as "when the President offers, solicits, or accepts something of personal value to influence his own official actions." By that standard, what politician isn't guilty of "bribery"?
                                Well, yes, that is what bribery is, and in this case it can be defined as extortion as well, since the bribe, or quid if you will, is desperately needed by the subject of the bribe who is under duress and can't say no!

                                Furthermore, they attempt to establish the absurd rule that a president can be impeached without ever committing a crime,
                                There was no criminal code at the time the impeachment clause was written so what "other high crimes and misdemeaners" meant was whatever Congress determines to be abuse of power or actions detrimental to the country, and those actions can be either criminal or non criminal.

                                and that second- and third-hand hearsay -- which is to say office gossip -- is good enough evidence to remove a president from office.
                                What republicans are calling, and what you are parroting, hearsay, is not hearsay.

                                I can't imagine you would be you be so supportive of the Democrat party's efforts if they were against a president you actually liked, but in your obsessive anti-Trump mindset, anything goes as long it removes the bad orange man from power.
                                That's because you lack imagination. Not everybody lacks the ability to recognize and to accept facts, particularly when those facts exhibit such a blatant disregard for the law, the Constitution and the national security of the country, not to mention the national security of our allies.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                85 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                281 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                109 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                195 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                355 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X