President Donald J. Trump

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks
User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23856
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 23 Jul 2018, 14:33

Jimbo - Do you have proof that 9/11 was an inside job?
“Remember I have said good things about benevolent despots before.” - Jimbo

Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15822
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 23 Jul 2018, 15:41

I have an inkling why you are asking this question but I would like you to tell me your point in asking.
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23856
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 23 Jul 2018, 15:53

Just teasing out the difference in terms of how you regard the required standard of proof.

Your argument regarding 9/11 is that there are open questions that deserve investigation. That’s the exact same argument in favor of Mueller’s probe.
“Remember I have said good things about benevolent despots before.” - Jimbo

Image

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 27598
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby toomanyhatz » 23 Jul 2018, 20:28

1) The term "confirmation bias" might apply here.
2) Part of that is, Jimbo really seems to have more belief in stuff that doesn't meet the burden of proof than stuff that does. Intelligence agencies all independently saying the same thing tickles his Jimbo sense, Trump being his consistent arrogant self doesn't. Too pat.

That would all be fine with me if not for the fact that "proof" isn't even an important element in how he determines what's true and what isn't.
Jimbo wrote:My point is to save the world from WWIII.

Jimbo wrote:Trump is right. The collusion conspiracy theory has been debunked and you seem to refuse to look at the evidence.

1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017 2018!!

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 53157
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Snarfyguy » 23 Jul 2018, 22:18

There's no "proof" of anything (except in mathematics, I guess) until someone gets in a court of law and establishes it, and even then, the evidence used for a judge or jury to arrive at the conclusion that something is "true" isn't necessarily even going to be made public.

This is all very handy in cases where you don't want to believe something (like say, for example if you're Donald Trump, or Jimbo), but it's also ridiculous on its face when the evidence that is publicly available has been characterized (on both sides of the aisle) as "unassailable" and "irrefutable."

Anyway, I suggest we stop wasting our time with these ontological parlor games and do something useful, like wave our arms in the air!
GoogaMooga wrote: The further away from home you go, the greater the risk of getting stuck there.

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23856
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 23 Jul 2018, 22:55

Some of this is down to Jimbo simply being a really really bad spokesperson for his opinion.

If someone said, “By all means, let’s investigate any and all leads. Let’s protect ourselves from the possibility of future attacks, and figure out what Trump’s relationship with Russia is. But let’s not jump to conclusions. Let’s be aware that our intelligence agencies have historically given us reason to doubt them. Oh...and while we are at it, let’s look at some of our actions towards other countries too and demand better going forward,” - would anyone here find that unreasonable?

But that’s not enough for Comrade Jimbo and his merry band of Russia-sympathizers.
“Remember I have said good things about benevolent despots before.” - Jimbo

Image

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 27598
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby toomanyhatz » 23 Jul 2018, 23:24

I will happily admit I just want him gone. I would lie, cheat, and steal, if that's what it takes. I believe he is a danger to our democracy in a way that has never been seen before. Even the Bushes had some pretensions toward acting on majority rule. Trump has openly created an agenda that says "if you are not in total agreement with me, you don't matter."
Jimbo wrote:My point is to save the world from WWIII.

Jimbo wrote:Trump is right. The collusion conspiracy theory has been debunked and you seem to refuse to look at the evidence.

1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017 2018!!

User avatar
Still Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 43182
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Still Baron » 23 Jul 2018, 23:38

toomanyhatz wrote:I will happily admit I just want him gone. I would lie, cheat, and steal, if that's what it takes.


I’m afraid it’s not that simple. You and a bunch of other people will have to vote.
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?

take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 27598
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby toomanyhatz » 23 Jul 2018, 23:39

Not worried about me. It's the "a bunch of other people" that I'm concerned about.
Jimbo wrote:My point is to save the world from WWIII.

Jimbo wrote:Trump is right. The collusion conspiracy theory has been debunked and you seem to refuse to look at the evidence.

1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017 2018!!

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23856
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 24 Jul 2018, 01:25

I’m in.
“Remember I have said good things about benevolent despots before.” - Jimbo

Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15822
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 24 Jul 2018, 03:36

LeBaron wrote:
toomanyhatz wrote:I will happily admit I just want him gone. I would lie, cheat, and steal, if that's what it takes.


I’m afraid it’s not that simple. You and a bunch of other people will have to vote.


And I'm afraid that voting won't solve the problem either. Voting may solve some domestic issues but the foreign agenda including war, regime change, energy, weapons sales, middle east policies, etc., are what's at stake. Purposefully or stupidly Trump is fucking with that agenda. If the US public and media took the bait on all the shit the CIA has historically pulled, this Russia thing fits the pattern - some aggrievement, a boogie man, a compliant media, no real evidence, just assertions - and you must be skeptical. I honestly think this may be the biggest hoax ever.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me time after fucking time ... Duh, okay. I'll bite.
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23856
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 24 Jul 2018, 04:09

You should use that last line in a letter to Jimmy Dore!
“Remember I have said good things about benevolent despots before.” - Jimbo

Image

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 53157
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Snarfyguy » 24 Jul 2018, 04:52

Jimbo wrote:...no real evidence, just assertions...

If I didn't know better I'd think you were just parroting your sources. :lol:

Have you read the last indictment? Yes, an indictment is not "evidence," but by the same token, there's NEVER any evidence before it comes out at trial. That's how our system works, believe it or not.

Mueller is prepared to prove his assertions in federal court using admissible evidence. Do you really think he's going to go in there half-cocked, with a bag full of innuendo and implications? Federal court is no joke.

We shall see what we shall see.

Looking forward to monitoring Manafort's first trial, starting shortly.
GoogaMooga wrote: The further away from home you go, the greater the risk of getting stuck there.

User avatar
Still Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 43182
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Still Baron » 24 Jul 2018, 05:05

Didn’t you know, these federal indictments are a big show?! Nothing to see here, folks ... just elite lawyers who “believe” in American institutions using a federal grand jury and the federal courts as their little sandbox to suit their whimsically nefarious “point.” Because they’re lawyers and everybody knows that’s how they roll. Every last overcharging, oppressing one.
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?

take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15822
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 24 Jul 2018, 05:24

Snarfyguy wrote:
Jimbo wrote:...no real evidence, just assertions...


Have you read the last indictment?


Yes I have and they seemed damning. But then we get some evidence and again and again these assertions crumble. They're making this shit up.

DHS: 'No intelligence' Russia compromised seven states ahead of 2016 election


http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity ... systems-in
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23856
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 24 Jul 2018, 05:36

Okay. So let’s apply the same burden of proof to your 9/11 theory.
“Remember I have said good things about benevolent despots before.” - Jimbo

Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15822
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 24 Jul 2018, 05:43

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:Okay. So let’s apply the same burden of proof to your 9/11 theory.


I suggest you move this question over to the conspiracy thread. In fact, that's where you Russiagaters should take your bs too.

Snarfyguy wrote:
Jimbo wrote:...no real evidence, just assertions...

If I didn't know better I'd think you were just parroting your sources. :lol:.


It shows I've learned something.
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 53157
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Snarfyguy » 24 Jul 2018, 14:36

Jimbo wrote:
Snarfyguy wrote:
Jimbo wrote:...no real evidence, just assertions...


Have you read the last indictment?


Yes I have and they seemed damning. But then we get some evidence and again and again these assertions crumble.

What is this "counter-evidence" and what is its source?
GoogaMooga wrote: The further away from home you go, the greater the risk of getting stuck there.

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15822
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 24 Jul 2018, 15:11

Snarfyguy wrote:
Jimbo wrote:
Snarfyguy wrote:
Have you read the last indictment?


Yes I have and they seemed damning. But then we get some evidence and again and again these assertions crumble.

What is this "counter-evidence" and what is its source?


First of all I don't need counter evidence. The burden of proof is on you, the accuser.



Caitlin Johnstone @caitoz

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
~ Sagan
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
~ Hitchens
"We have to believe that Russia is attacking our democracy because the TV and the CIA told us to."
~ Russiagaters
5:42 AM - Jul 23, 2018



Regarding the tampering with state elections I already showed you via The Hill was a non-starter.

The 12 Russians will never come to a US court so that is a waste of legal fees.

And I read how Peter Struk (sp) said in his text how there was "no there there" re the investigation. Lisa Paige verified he was talking about the Russian hacking.

And, so far the weapons inspector guy's assertion of the indictment NSA playbook template theory hasn't been debunked.

I read that Manafort was lobbying the ousted Ukrainian president to reject Russia and join the EU. Treasonous?

(Correction. Not EU particularly but to buddy up with the US.)

In the memo, Manafort said that his “Engage Ukraine” campaign would reinforce to U.S. policy makers the positive aspects of relations between the two nations.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... or-ukraine
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 53157
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Snarfyguy » 24 Jul 2018, 15:34

Jimbo wrote:First of all I don't need counter evidence. The burden of proof is on you, the accuser.


I'm not the accuser, Mueller is. You said the evidence in last indictment seemed damning but "then we got some evidence and again and again [Mueller's] assertions crumble." I was just wondering what-all you were talking about.

Your Hill piece was in response to reporting by NBC. NBC has nothing to do with Mueller's investigation. If they botched a story, I don't particularly care and I'm not going down a rabbit hole of he-said-she-said news media reporting with you.

The purpose of the recent indictment wasn't to bring the twelve Russians to justice, but for Mueller to play some cards - to announce that he knows what they did and how they did it. None other than Donald Trump himself responded: "The Russians are nailed."

Peter Strzok's observation is over a year old and he was a foot soldier. I'll give his boss the benefit of the doubt w/r/t how this thing moves along from here.

Your weapons inspector guy's field of expertise is pretty far from cyber-crime, so I don't know if he can speak authoritatively on that topic.

Manafort, treason? Well, he hasn't been charged with that, but it does appear he may have been acting counter to American foreign policy (with these pro-Russian elements in Ukraine that he was collecting zillions from). We'll see.
GoogaMooga wrote: The further away from home you go, the greater the risk of getting stuck there.