Mueller Investigation pt5

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cavemonster said:
I don't know when "circumstantial" became a dirty word for evidence.

A literal smoking gun would be circumstantial evidence.

DNA is circumstantial evidence. So are fingerprints. So is just about everything except witness testimony directly about witnessing the crime, direct confession or recording of the crime happening.

This idea that circumstantial evidence is weak is just bizarre.
Click to expand...


To add to that, eyewitness testimony, which as you point out is just about the only kind of evidence which isn't circumstantial evidence, has also been shown to be one of the least dependable types of evidence.

I think "circumstantial" became a dirty word to the uninformed because so many defense lawyers use it as a derogatory term when they are trying to make their case in the public arena, knowing that what they have for actual courts really sucks for their defendant.
 
Bubba said:
At least 99.9% of us international skeptics knew all along there was no 'collusion' with Russia. Its not only because we are really smart skeptics. It is also that we already knew the media promoting the claim were (still are) the PR wing of the failing liberal establishment/democrat party.

One silver lining of the debacle is that other people are waking up to we what we knew all along about those so called journalists, although some may never accept reality.

Nonetheless we mustn't become complacent. Be ready for the next load of BS coming from that PR wing of the failing liberal establishment/democrat party, the failed liberal media.

International skeptics are the best !!! We rock !
Click to expand...
Poe's law strikes again. I can't tell if you're being satirical.
 
Childlike Empress said:
The Russia CTists handed him a terrible weapon. It's a boomerang as I mentioned in passing around a year ago or when I lost interest in this BS "debate". It will continue to hurt until they get it and start to care about actual politics that are popular with ordinary people and could beat him. Which likely won't occure until it is too late.
Click to expand...


Hmm, had to search a bit for myself...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=12127315#post12127315
me said:
Nobody is denying that the Russians preferred Trump over Killary, not least because of his campaign promises about trying to fix the relationship that had so much suffered due to the machinations of mostly Obama's State Department and CIA.

As to the "Collusion" conspiracy theory, at the forefront of research is now who did what in the small group which hoaxed that CT. The FBI side is pretty clear, the DoJ side is under increasing open source investigation at the moment.

As a main goal of the hoax dossier was to get a warrant to spy on the political opponent, which was successful and led to the gotcha! moments with Flynn and Papadopoulus, it is totally clear that no surprise revelations are to come from the Mueller investigation. Because if there were a there there, we would know for a long time already, thanks to the surveillance.

The revelations to expect are in the investigation of the conspirators to hoax a conspiracy.

Results due in January.
Click to expand...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=12127430#post12127430
me said:
It is almost 2018, Squeegee. You have been waiting faithfully all the time, and I told you all the time it is in vain. Saint Mueller isn't coming. You've been fooled. To the extent that everybody who hasn't is a "Russian agent" in your mind. That's embarrassing.
Click to expand...

That was almost 2018. And then in almost 2019 I told you again how the fact that Saint Mueller didn't come up with something before the midterm elections was more and conclusive evidence that there was no there there. Too lazy to search for that, maybe do it yourself.
 
Last edited:
johnny karate said:
Why of course I'm not defending Trump! I'm just a fair-mined arbiter of the facts.



Anywho... here's some grade-A conspiracy theory Trump propaganda I'm peddling:
Click to expand...
"I don't think Jew-martians flew hologram plane rockets into the towers, I'm just asking questions1!11"
 
Childlike Empress said:
That was almost 2018. And then in almost 2019 I told you again how the fact that Saint Mueller didn't come up with something before the midterm elections was more and conclusive evidence that there was no there there. Too lazy to search for that, maybe do it yourself.
Click to expand...

I always thought the line, "If Mueller had something, he'd've released it by now" was self-evident. I've said that sentence the few times the discussion came up IRL. Can't even remember if I said that here. It was so obvious I didn't think it was necessary.
 
Bubba said:
At least 99.9% of us international skeptics knew all along there was no 'collusion' with Russia.
Click to expand...


Did you take a poll?

I have very little reason to disbelieve it now.

Out of curiosity for those of us that are just slow. Should we believe it merely on Barr's say so? Which apparently the administration tells us that's all we're entitled to. Do you believe everything the Trump administration says? And this despite the fact that Trump administration officials have told a torrent of lies to investigators, Congress and the American people. What makes Barr believable?

Should we have believe there was no collusion because Trump told us there wasn't?
Isn't this the same person who wrote his son's false statement about the infamous Trump Tower meeting?
Isn't this the same person who said that he never had sex with Stormy Daniels?
Isn't this the same person who said he didn't pay off Stormy Daniels?
Isn't this the same person who said he had no business in Russia throughout the campaign, but in fact was trying to build a tall building in Moscow up until the Convention? One of which included an illegal multimillion dollar gift of a penthouse apartment to the Russian head of State?
Isn't this the same person who said he would release his tax returns and not only didn't, is still hiding them?

I just want to know why you now think you have the truth?
 
Last edited:
Politicians always lie. It's a skeptic's job to discern fantasy from reality. Turns out they're not very good at it.
 
Baylor said:
Politicians always lie. It's a skeptic's job to discern fantasy from reality. Turns out they're not very good at it.
Click to expand...

No they don't. While occasionally a lie is told, politicians are not equal in their honesty. This absurd ridiculous false equivance that they all lie is disingenuous bull feces.

That you have no standards left and are willing to apologize for Trump's non-stop dishonesty just demonstrates that truth and principles no longer matter to you. It's all the ends justify the means to you. But I'm curious, is the end of the rule of law and democracy really what you want? Because that is the seeds you are sowing.
 
Last edited:
Baylor said:
I always thought the line, "If Mueller had something, he'd've released it by now" was self-evident. I've said that sentence the few times the discussion came up IRL. Can't even remember if I said that here. It was so obvious I didn't think it was necessary.
Click to expand...


I'm going to bold two or three sentences in my post above, as they are now still waiting to read the Saint Mueller report to find a there there. And the stuff I wrote back then was stuff I learned from the "conservative treehouse" website they were of course mocking because it had a daily prayer thread or they were too indoctrinated to dive into the excellent coverage of that topic the site had at the time. I stopped reading the site when I thought everything was said here and lost interest. Yet they - the "skeptics" - are still praying.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Where was this purpose expressed?
Click to expand...

If you are under the impression that trolls generally admit they are trolling and will even tell you the purpose they have in mind for their trolling then I'm afraid you've been misinformed.

On the other hand, it is known that Putin operates a troll farm and it is known that Putin preferred Trump over Clinton.

It shouldn't be too hard to figure things out from there.
 
Orphia Nay said:
Until any of it is released, let's call it the Barr Report.
Click to expand...
quadraginta said:
Maybe he has.

All we need now is for Trump's DoJ boss to let us see it.
Click to expand...

I find this "we don't really know if there was collusion because AG Barr won't release the full report," to be both amusing and pathetic.

It reminds of the 9/11 Truthers always yelling, "we don't really know what happened because there was never a full investigation!"

Skeptics have lost their way.
 
Cabbage said:
If you are under the impression that trolls generally admit they are trolling and will even tell you the purpose they have in mind for their trolling then I'm afraid you've been misinformed.
Click to expand...
I'm not under any such impression. That's why I asked quadraginta to support his claim about the "express purpose" of the trolling.

On the other hand, it is known that Putin operates a troll farm and it is known that Putin preferred Trump over Clinton.
Click to expand...
I think the first is generally accepted.

How do you know that Putin preferred Trump?

It shouldn't be too hard to figure things out from there.
Click to expand...
We can certainly infer it from there, but that's very different from what quadraginta actually claimed. If your problem is the claim of "express purpose", then you and I are in agreement, and your complaints should be directed at quadraginta, not me.
 
Baylor said:
I find this "we don't really know if there was collusion because AG Barr won't release the full report," to be both amusing and pathetic.

It reminds of the 9/11 Truthers always yelling, "we don't really know what happened because there was never a full investigation!"
Click to expand...

They would have a point if the 9/11 Commission and NIST reports were hidden from public view.

Skeptics have lost their way.
Click to expand...

Yes, because nothing says "skeptic" like taking at face-value the summary of an investigation as provided by a subordinate of the person being investigated.
 
theprestige said:
I'm not under any such impression. That's why I asked quadraginta to support his claim about the "express purpose" of the trolling.


I think the first is generally accepted.

How do you know that Putin preferred Trump?

We can certainly infer it from there, but that's very different from what quadraginta actually claimed. If your problem is the claim of "express purpose", then you and I are in agreement, and your complaints should be directed at quadraginta, not me.
Click to expand...

Because he said so. When asked if he wanted Trump to win, Putin answered

Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.-Russia relationship back to normal.
Click to expand...
(7/16/2018 Helsinki)
 
Baylor said:
I find this "we don't really know if there was collusion because AG Barr won't release the full report," to be both amusing and pathetic.

It reminds of the 9/11 Truthers always yelling, "we don't really know what happened because there was never a full investigation!"

Skeptics have lost their way.
Click to expand...

No, we already KNOW there was collusion. If one doesn't think that the Trump Tower meeting wasn't collusion then they don't know what the word means. If one does not think that the Trump Campaign manager sending highly detailed polling data to Russian agents is not collusion, then they don't know what the word means. And Barr is proving that like Trump, he is willing to obstruct justice.
 
I've been out of town, how is the Mueller investigation going? should we expect lots more indictments before he is done like the Resistance said?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom