Mueller Investigation pt4

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's really down to 10,000 iterations of argument from ignorance at this point.

There's just got to be some explanation for why all these people who were central to getting Trump elected all have alarming connections to a hostile foreign power actively infiltrating our electoral systems (collectively forgetting to mention this minor detail) while generally being up to their eyeballs in federal felony activities living lifestyles of extravagant conspicuous luxury which was just so much "useful splendor" to keep up their aura of being international back-channel elbow-rubbers-in-waiting.

It's got to be this retired FBI chief or some rogue agents somewhere in the Justice Department pulling all the strings, man...
 
Delphic Oracle said:
It's really down to 10,000 iterations of argument from ignorance at this point.

There's just got to be some explanation for why all these people who were central to getting Trump elected all have alarming connections to a hostile foreign power actively infiltrating our electoral systems (collectively forgetting to mention this minor detail) while generally being up to their eyeballs in federal felony activities living lifestyles of extravagant conspicuous luxury which was just so much "useful splendor" to keep up their aura of being international back-channel elbow-rubbers-in-waiting.

It's got to be this retired FBI chief or some rogue agents somewhere in the Justice Department pulling all the strings, man...
Click to expand...

I always say you have a quid and a quo. But evidence of a pro hasn't been presented yet.
 
BobTheCoward said:
I always say you have a quid and a quo. But evidence of a pro hasn't been presented yet.
Click to expand...

I take it that you are "just pointing this out" for us. We do realize that it's an "investigation", after all. I'm sure you're not suggesting that we only discuss actual evidence on a discussion board in a thread about a not-yet-complete investigation.

As the evidence falls into place we can tick off verified or not verified, respectively. In the interim, not discussing articles with allegations or defenses would pretty much terminate more than half the threads on this forum. There is no "innocent until proven guilty" or "preponderance of admissible evidence" requirement to simply discuss the developing events, claims and counter-claims.
 
Foolmewunz said:
I take it that you are "just pointing this out" for us. We do realize that it's an "investigation", after all. I'm sure you're not suggesting that we only discuss actual evidence on a discussion board in a thread about a not-yet-complete investigation.

As the evidence falls into place we can tick off verified or not verified, respectively. In the interim, not discussing articles with allegations or defenses would pretty much terminate more than half the threads on this forum. There is no "innocent until proven guilty" or "preponderance of admissible evidence" requirement to simply discuss the developing events, claims and counter-claims.
Click to expand...

I think we shouldn't speculate on developing situations.
 
CapelDodger said:
Occam enjoins us not to multiply entities unnecessarily. I suspect that, for Iamafalser, an intention on the part of Mueller and his team ("12 Angry Dems") to harm Trump is a necessary entity.
Click to expand...

He would hardly be alone. A large portion of the right wing has pushed the view that Mueller's just out to get Trump in his and the Democrats' witch hunt of that wonderful man.
 
Aridas said:
He would hardly be alone. A large portion of the right wing has pushed the view that Mueller's just out to get Trump in his and the Democrats' witch hunt of that wonderful man.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to figure just why they think life-long Republican and respected law and order man Mueller is 'out to get' a Republican president. You'd think if he was out to get any president, it would have been Obama. Yet he led the FBI under him instead. He sure looks suspiciously partisan to me.:rolleyes:
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Keep it up, you look foolish.
Click to expand...

Not as foolish as anybody who places their faith in the Mueller investigation and then it turns out he either doesn't have enough evidence on Trump or gets shut down by Trump before he can present it.

Skeptic Ginger said:
Half those charges have already resulted in convictions and guilty pleas. Why are you continuing with this 'no collusion' nonsense?
Click to expand...

Have these charges resulted in any legal proceedings against Trump? He has not been indicted yet, so any speculation by us at this point about what evidence there might be is just that: speculation.

I'm just trying to inject some reality into this thread. Too many people are fantasising about how Mueller is going to stitch up Trump good and proper without considering

a) Trump might close Mueller down before he reports

b) the report may well not contain enough evidence to persuade the Houser to impeach Trump.

I do not believe Trump will be impeached unless he wins re-election in 2020. I think that, if the House starts impeachment proceedings now and the Senate then votes to acquit, it would be catastrophic for the Dems in 2020. Thus, it's not going to happen without evidence that is impossible for Republican senators to ignore. From what I've seen so far, that's a pretty high bar.

Just to be clear in case you start accusing me of being a Trump supporter (which I regard as an insult): Trump is the worst president of the USA I can remember. He is a liar, corrupt and wilfully ignorant on pretty much everything to do with running the country. Yes, he's probably also a criminal, but not according to due process - yet.
 
BobTheCoward said:
I think we shouldn't speculate on developing situations.
Click to expand...

This is a discussion forum.

What, pray tell, are we to discuss if "developing situations" are off the table?

*everything* is a developing situation. Discussions rely on speculation to exist.

It's analogous to the "chemical vs natural" where someone advocates for a thing because it is natural rather than chemical, when *everything* is chemical, so the whole argument is spurious.

If the forum MA contained rules banning speculation on developing situations, then noone would be able to talk about anything without breaking those rules.
 
jeremyp said:
Not as foolish as anybody who places their faith in the Mueller investigation and then it turns out he either doesn't have enough evidence on Trump or gets shut down by Trump before he can present it.
Click to expand...

Mueller has all but named Trump in his prosecution of Michael Cohen, as Individual 1; a person who was running for POTUS in 2016 and subsequently elected. The pool of people that description applies to consists of only one person, Donald J. Trump.

Individual 1 is identified as an accomplice in a criminal offence. No prosecutor is going to rely on a single, involved witness/accomplice. Mueller is doing what is called laying the groundwork. He will have corroborating material evidence (remember all those millions of papers and 100+ recordings seized by the SCO early in 2018? )

jeremyp said:
Have these charges resulted in any legal proceedings against Trump? He has not been indicted yet, so any speculation by us at this point about what evidence there might be is just that: speculation.
Click to expand...

You do know about the DoJ memo, right?

jeremyp said:
I'm just trying to inject some reality into this thread. Too many people are fantasising about how Mueller is going to stitch up Trump good and proper....
Click to expand...

Its not a fantasy, its a judgement of character, and some of us are very, very good at it.

Trump is easier to see through than a brand new pane of glass. He is running scared; all his businesses are under investigation for fraud and as criminal enterprises. He already placed himself in personal legal jeopardy by publicly admitting to obstruction of justice when he stated that he fired James Comey because Comey would not stop the Russia investigation; an investigation that Trump KNEW was of himself.

jeremyp said:
....without considering

a) Trump might close Mueller down before he reports
Click to expand...

If he does that he is obstructing justice again. If you recall the last time a POTUS to tried to shut down an investigation into himself, it didn't work out well for him.

In any case, now that the Dems control the house, if Trump tries to shut down the SCO, the House will take up the investigation themselves (as they are entitled to do) and they will subpoena Mueller and his staff to testify before the House, in public session, as to what they have found. That could be even worse for Trump, because the public will then KNOW what Mueller has found.

jeremyp said:
b) the report may well not contain enough evidence to persuade the Houser to impeach Trump.
Click to expand...

You might be right, but I seriously, seriously doubt it

jeremyp said:
I do not believe Trump will be impeached unless he wins re-election in 2020. I think that, if the House starts impeachment proceedings now and the Senate then votes to acquit, it would be catastrophic for the Dems in 2020. Thus, it's not going to happen without evidence that is impossible for Republican senators to ignore. From what I've seen so far, that's a pretty high bar.
Click to expand...

I agree, I don't think he will be impeached, but his position will become impossible, especially if the Dems refuse to back down. They will be seen as acting positively while Trump and the GOP will be seen as obstructing the normal operation of Government

IMO, 2019 is going to be the worst year of Trump's life.
 
jeremyp said:
Not as foolish as anybody who places their faith in the Mueller investigation and then it turns out he either doesn't have enough evidence on Trump or gets shut down by Trump before he can present it.
Click to expand...

That's just never going to happen.

If Trump could shut it down, he would have done so by now. Shutting down Mueller after this long, and this many indictments and convictions etc would be political suicide, *even* for Trump.

Whatever Mueller has it's going to get presented in due course. While I'd like to think there is justice in the world and Trump will spend the final 20+ years of his life penniless and in jail, he'll probably more or less get away with it all, and suffer no more than an abject humiliation at the next election he contests.
 
jeremyp said:
Have these charges resulted in any legal proceedings against Trump? He has not been indicted yet, so any speculation by us at this point about what evidence there might be is just that: speculation.
Click to expand...
It's not speculation when evidence of obstruction of justice is already public (firing Comey, influencing witnesses, etc.). Now, whether there's enough evidence to indict - now or after T. is out of office - is a different question than whether there is **any** evidence at all, and if there is any evidence at all, it's not pure speculation.
 
Paul2 said:
Why not? Absolutely no speculation whatsoever, even nuanced, careful speculation?
Click to expand...

No, no, no! This is strictly a history forum! Just look at the subfora:
"History, Literature, and the Arts,"
"General Skepticism and the Paranormal" (evidently they left out "History of-" on that one),
"Education" (they left out "History of-" again)
"Social Issues and Current Events" (clearly that was a mixup and wasn't supposed to be here at all)

Well, I could keep going, but I think I've made my point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom