Cont: All things Trump + Russia Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
logger said:
Prove it then!!

Go ahead, I dare you. When comment again, it will be a reminder that you can’t, but you’ll still dutifully believe and spread it. Fine by me.
Click to expand...

I remember a generally sound maxim: “Never argue over matters of fact”.

Cohen either was, or wasn’t in Prague. He did, or didn’t lie about it.

The evidence regarding both assertions will be made clear in time.

That will put to rest what is now mindless speculation.
 
logger said:
Prove it then!!

Go ahead, I dare you. When comment again, it will be a reminder that you can’t, but you’ll still dutifully believe and spread it. Fine by me.
Click to expand...

Is this a self-referential statement about you spreading the claim of Cohen being in California while you are unable to prove it? LOL This was your immediate "comment again" after I asked for the proof. What a curious synchronicity.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
I remember a generally sound maxim: “Never argue over matters of fact”.

Cohen either was, or wasn’t in Prague. He did, or didn’t lie about it.

The evidence regarding both assertions will be made clear in time.

That will put to rest what is now mindless speculation.
Click to expand...

Not taking the bait.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
I remember a generally sound maxim: “Never argue over matters of fact”.

Cohen either was, or wasn’t in Prague. He did, or didn’t lie about it.

The evidence regarding both assertions will be made clear in time.

That will put to rest what is now mindless speculation.
Click to expand...

I mean, we don't know. Logger doesn't know and neither do I. What I don't get is why anyone would defend Cohen? It's pretty clear that Cohen doesn't really practice law. He appears to be more of an errand boy, bully and bag man for Trump then anything else. Hardly rationale for privileged attorney client communications.

So it will be interesting what information the search uncovers. Would it surprise me that Cohen was in Prague dealing with the Russian hackers? No. Is it possible it was someone else in the Trump organization? Maybe.

But to take Cohen's word that he was in California and has never been to Prague would be ridiculous.

I doubt ANYTHING that Cohen might say to be truthful because

1. He's a lawyer.
2.He has been working for Trump for a long time. Some of that sleaze is bound to rub off.
 
Last edited:
This whole confusion among overzealous anti-Trump people in light of recent events could have been avoided if they hadn't blindly gone along with the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.

There doesn't appear to be the "relationship" often alleged, more like Trump is just really naive and uneducated and doesn't often think before he acts.
 
Venom said:
This whole confusion among overzealous anti-Trump people in light of recent events could have been avoided if they hadn't blindly gone along with the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.

There doesn't appear to be the "relationship" often alleged, more like Trump is just really naive and uneducated and doesn't often think before he acts.
Click to expand...
Riiight, because Trump really put it to Putin, yessiree. :rolleyes:
 
Venom said:
This whole confusion among overzealous anti-Trump people in light of recent events could have been avoided if they hadn't blindly gone along with the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.

There doesn't appear to be the "relationship" often alleged, more like Trump is just really naive and uneducated and doesn't often think before he acts.
Click to expand...

That's...not actually better. 'Was working with Russians to manipulate the election for personal gain' is a huge problem, but 'was used by the Russians manipulating the election because he's a criminally negligent, arrogant, moron' is also a huge problem.

Also, what? What problem has the strong suspicion of collusion with the Russians caused?
 
logger said:
They report “sources”.
Click to expand...

While you're right that scepticism should always be applied (do you, I wonder, apply the same standards to the Conservative Treehouse and the like?), it's worth noting that even Donald Trump has complained about how much his administration leaks. So there are definitely legitimate sources spreading legitimate news. And it's worth noting that another way we can know this to be true is that many of these stories that come from "sources" are later corroborated by events.

So, yes, scepticism should be applied. That doesn't mean dismissing such a story out of hand.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
While you're right that scepticism should always be applied (do you, I wonder, apply the same standards to the Conservative Treehouse and the like?), it's worth noting that even Donald Trump has complained about how much his administration leaks. So there are definitely legitimate sources spreading legitimate news. And it's worth noting that another way we can know this to be true is that many of these stories that come from "sources" are later corroborated by events.

So, yes, scepticism should be applied. That doesn't mean dismissing such a story out of hand.
Click to expand...

Conservative Treehouse does a great job sourcing, applying timelines and what is already public information. That doesn’t mean they’re correct every time and that isn’t the reason I link them. I do it so the left can be forced to get the other side of the story. I like forcing things. :)
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
While you're right that scepticism should always be applied (do you, I wonder, apply the same standards to the Conservative Treehouse and the like?), it's worth noting that even Donald Trump has complained about how much his administration leaks. So there are definitely legitimate sources spreading legitimate news. And it's worth noting that another way we can know this to be true is that many of these stories that come from "sources" are later corroborated by events.

So, yes, scepticism should be applied. That doesn't mean dismissing such a story out of hand.
Click to expand...

We can actually dismiss this one out of hand. There is no need to process this information at this time. So, we can tell the reporters to come back when they are serious and willing to bring appropriate levels of evidence.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Cohen not being in Prague was touted as proof that the Steele Dossier was a fabrication.
With this big domino falling, there isn't much Steele was wrong about.

I assume that Nunes and Hannity will sent him an apology.
Click to expand...
Hannity will just show a video of a car crash.

Sent from my LG-K121 using Tapatalk
 
logger said:
Conservative Treehouse does a great job sourcing, applying timelines and what is already public information. That doesn’t mean they’re correct every time and that isn’t the reason I link them. I do it so the left can be forced to get the other side of the story. I like forcing things. :)
Click to expand...

Well, you force me to giggle every time I read one of their stories. So keep up the good work!
 
logger said:
Conservative Treehouse does a great job sourcing, applying timelines and what is already public information...
Click to expand...

... carefully omitting any details that reveal the idiocy of their conspiracy theories. And their Nellie Ohr time machine theory is a good example of what they do with what's left.
 
WilliamSeger said:
... carefully omitting any details that reveal the idiocy of their conspiracy theories. And their Nellie Ohr time machine theory is a good example of what they do with what's left.
Click to expand...

Well then, let’s discuss what’s carefully omitted. Start with the Nellie Ohr embarrassment.
 
logger said:
Lol

Same way when you put up tweets from our ol buddy Seth. But a tweet can’t even compare to the analysis put up by CT.
Click to expand...

Well, you're definitely right that Seth Abramson's twitter feed and the Conservative Treehouse aren't on the same level.
 
logger said:
Well then, let’s discuss what’s carefully omitted. Start with the Nellie Ohr embarrassment.
Click to expand...

I did, and I'd still like you to explain how Nellie Ohr went back in time to feed the "Cohen in Prague" into the Steele dossier, when the "wrong Cohen" turned up while trying to verify the dossier?

But I already pointed out one important fact theconservativetreehouse story carefully omitted: any mention of the fact that what Comey and McCabe did hurt Clinton, not Trump. You should understand why they omitted that, given the silliness of your attempts to explain it in a way that fits your story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom