Mueller Investigation pt 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
BobTheCoward said:
...
ETA: you think the question how can we know who to believe is a stupid question? That seems like the question to ask multiple times a day. Also my questions were independent of the question of if a news source should be believed.
Click to expand...
By now it should be clear to you this is a straw man.
 
Cabbage said:
...and so evidently you desire someone else to make that decision for you. That certainly seems to be the implication of our previous discussion, anyway.

Intellectually Lazy.
Click to expand...

I have no interest in that as I said repeatedly. I don't consume the news media being discussed.

ETA: I think people might have interesting ideas on it. I'm trying to facilitate further discussion.
 
Last edited:
BobTheCoward said:
I have no interest in that as I said repeatedly. I don't consume the news media being discussed.

ETA: I think people might have interesting ideas on it. I'm trying to facilitate further discussion.
Click to expand...

Ah, so this isn't about the Mueller investigation?
 
BobTheCoward said:
I have no interest in that as I said repeatedly. I don't consume the news media being discussed.
Click to expand...

No **** ? "I don't have an opinion on that". Neat. Totally unexpected. :thumbsup:

BobTheCoward said:
ETA: I think people might have interesting ideas on it. I'm trying to facilitate further discussion.
Click to expand...

The conversation you're starting sucks. As in, all of it. It's an exercise in complete and total nonsense. It's nothing more than being a contrarian to everything that's stated, until you have to commit to a position, and then it's all "no opinion, rabble, rabble, rabble."

It sucks.
 
plague311 said:
No **** ? "I don't have an opinion on that". Neat. Totally unexpected. :thumbsup:



The conversation you're starting sucks. As in, all of it. It's an exercise in complete and total nonsense. It's nothing more than being a contrarian to everything that's stated, until you have to commit to a position, and then it's all "no opinion, rabble, rabble, rabble."

It sucks.
Click to expand...

The conversation he is trying to start has not started and likely never will.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
[Climbs out of rabbit hole, looks back down. "Whew, that was a deep one."]
Click to expand...

The only way I manage to stay involved with this thread as I wait for real content to re-emerge:

48099772421_ae25a3335e_z.jpg
 
BobTheCoward said:
It isn't about what we think about the Mueller investigation as consumers of the investigation. It is about the media as gatekeepers of the Mueller report.
Click to expand...

But again, you're wrong there. The media are not the gatekeepers of the Mueller report. The same redacted report available to the media is freely available to you without an intermediary. Of course, Bill Barr is the gatekeeper of the unredacted report, but we've already seen how unreliable a medium for the report he can be.
 
Cabbage said:
But again, you're wrong there. The media are not the gatekeepers of the Mueller report. The same redacted report available to the media is freely available to you without an intermediary. Of course, Bill Barr is the gatekeeper of the unredacted report, but we've already seen how unreliable a medium for the report he can be.
Click to expand...

Call it whatever you want. They do something, and that something can be examined. Doesn't matter what word you want to use.
 
plague311 said:
No **** ? "I don't have an opinion on that". Neat. Totally unexpected. :thumbsup:



The conversation you're starting sucks. As in, all of it. It's an exercise in complete and total nonsense. It's nothing more than being a contrarian to everything that's stated, until you have to commit to a position, and then it's all "no opinion, rabble, rabble, rabble."

It sucks.
Click to expand...

Perfectly fair comment
 
BobTheCoward said:
I post questions when I'm looking for answers. If I had findings, I wouldn't post questions to you.
Click to expand...

I was not responding to a question.

Of course you don’t have findings. You have made no attempt to answer your own questions beyond asking others to do your work for you.

You have stated above that you would have no confidence in your own assessment of the report. There is no reason for you to have any confidence I anyone else’s assessment. It seems that there is no possible way for you to understand the report. Give up now and stop wasting time.
 
Steve said:
I was not responding to a question.

Of course you don’t have findings. You have made no attempt to answer your own questions beyond asking others to do your work for you.

You have stated above that you would have no confidence in your own assessment of the report. There is no reason for you to have any confidence I anyone else’s assessment. It seems that there is no possible way for you to understand the report. Give up now and stop wasting time.
Click to expand...

It isn't wasting time to have a realistic expectations about meeting the nigh impossible bar set by skepticism.
 
BobTheCoward said:
I cut the cord in 2010. I do not have access to these media sources we are discussing.


ETA: you think the question how can we know who to believe is a stupid question? That seems like the question to ask multiple times a day. Also my questions were independent of the question of if a news source should be believed.
Click to expand...

Then..............

READ THE ******* MUELLER REPORT YOURSELF AND DRAW YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS!!!!
 
Last edited:
And all of this is complicated by the issue that the person making claims (Mueller) did not make his evidence available. It is problematic to accept claims based on evidence you are not allowed to see.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom