President Donald J. Trump

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks
User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 52953
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Snarfyguy » 21 Jul 2018, 03:56

Jimbo quoting Kellyanne Conway, probably wrote:Mueller’s indictments of Russian officials is akin to the shady doings that he and the rest of his profession always engage in. After more than one year of investigation Mueller succeeded only in proving that Paul Manafort is a crook and that Donald Trump, Jr. is stupid. The charges against Manafort and Trump attorney Michael Cohen have nothing to do with the Russian collusion story at all. The indictments make a political rather than a criminal case and are a weak effort to prove that the year-long charade was worth carrying out at all.


Mueller names 12 Russian nationals as military intelligence officers and also says that they conducted the hacking and leaking. He provides no evidence so the claims must be taken on blind faith.


I'm finding it hard to believe this argument is being offered in good faith, but perhaps the author merely neglected to actually read, or even read about, the indictment. Devin Nunes actually argued that there was so much factual detail in it that is was too hard to understand, LOL. (apologies, I can't find attribution for that assertion, but I'm positive I read it somewhere today)

The total for the Ken Starr Clinton investigation, which lasted four and a half years, was $39.2 million, which apparently is around $58 million in today’s dollars. Mueller's spent, apparently, $7 million since May, 2017, so I don't even want to hear about it.

Anyway, I would expect a counter-narrative to offer something more than just yelling about how the official stay is fake. Even the flat-Earth and gravity-is-just-a-theory conspiracy websites have some sort of alternative explanation for the topic at hand.

Do you actually disbelieve the unanimous conclusions of all our experts, or do you just think it's more fun to imagine that consensus reality is some kind of charade?
Jimbo wrote:Look, all I know is pretty much what I get from Robert Parry over at Consortium News.

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23700
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 21 Jul 2018, 07:51

Another member of Team Jimbo jumps ship...

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... tic-219022
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15468
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 23 Jul 2018, 07:40

You thought that maybe after more and more anti-Russia nuggets were coming from newsrooms I had given in to your pod ways. Well, I was almost there when even my best "sources" seemed to be writing less on the matter but then when I checked a few minutes ago along came my Caitlain to the rescue!

Until hard, verifiable proof of Russian election interference and/or collusion with the Trump campaign is made publicly available, we are winning this debate as long as we continue pointing out that this proof doesn’t exist yet. All you have to do to beat a Russiagater in a debate is to point this out. They’ll cite assertions made by the US intelligence community, but assertions are not proof. They’ll cite the assertions made in the recent Mueller indictment as proof, but all the indictment contains is more assertions. The only reason Russiagaters confuse assertions for proof is because the mass media treats them as such, but there’s no reason to play along with that delusion.

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/the- ... 0b5e3602a3

Tell 'em Katy! Did Russia really hack the election? Let's see some proof pod people. I'll go off on my own limb and guess that when it comes time for the CIA, etc., to show us the proof they'll back off citing that shit about keeping their methods secret. (I did say "guess.")
Some say the glass is half-empty others half-full. I say. "Lemme see that glass!"

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 66722
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Diamond Dog » 23 Jul 2018, 08:34

"Ooh, look at me - I'm a Russiagater! Come join the club!"
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23700
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?
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15468
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.
Some say the glass is half-empty others half-full. I say. "Lemme see that glass!"

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23700
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.
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 27335
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.
sloopjohnc wrote:Aslan has some good credenitals - got his BA from Santa Clara, a Jesuit school and his Masters from Harvard and PhD from Santa Barbara, a surfing school.


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

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 52953
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!
Jimbo wrote:Look, all I know is pretty much what I get from Robert Parry over at Consortium News.

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23700
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.
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 27335
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."
sloopjohnc wrote:Aslan has some good credenitals - got his BA from Santa Clara, a Jesuit school and his Masters from Harvard and PhD from Santa Barbara, a surfing school.


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

User avatar
LeBaron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 42960
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby LeBaron » 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: 27335
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.
sloopjohnc wrote:Aslan has some good credenitals - got his BA from Santa Clara, a Jesuit school and his Masters from Harvard and PhD from Santa Barbara, a surfing school.


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

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23700
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.
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15468
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.
Some say the glass is half-empty others half-full. I say. "Lemme see that glass!"

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23700
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!
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 52953
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.
Jimbo wrote:Look, all I know is pretty much what I get from Robert Parry over at Consortium News.

User avatar
LeBaron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 42960
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby LeBaron » 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: 15468
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
Some say the glass is half-empty others half-full. I say. "Lemme see that glass!"

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23700
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.
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image