Status
Not open for further replies.
Normally justice works the other way around. A trial will end depending on reasonable doubt. Mueller was not conducting a trial, he was performing an investigation. Hence the twist in the interpretation of the evidence leading him to remind Trump et al. that Trump cannot use the report as a basis to claim innocence or guilt. Only a trial, or in a president's case, an impeachment, will determine that.

Even then, if enough Senators make it clear that they will protect Trump regardless of anything that may be presented, it cannot validly be counted as a basis for innocence. Similarly, if enough Senators made it clear that they would try to remove Trump no matter what was presented, it could not be validly counted as basis for guilt.
 
Trump Retweeted

Donald J. Trump
‏Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
How do you impeach a Republican President for a crime that was committed by the Democrats? WITCH-HUNT!
 
I don't remember any Democrat obstructing Mueller's investigation.

It really is a case of "if I keep screaming this rubbish enough morons will believe it". And I can't really say he'd be wrong...
 
If Mueller had uncovered any evidence that Trump was complicit in those attacks, Trump would be gone. There wasn't any such evidence.

Trump repeatedly order his staff to fire people to stop the investigation, and he told them to falsify WH records.

How is it anyy exonoration that they refused his orders? He had already committed the crimes.
 
If Mueller had uncovered any evidence that Trump was complicit in those attacks, Trump would be gone. There wasn't any such evidence.


Do you really believe that? There is plenty of evidence of other misdeeds in Trump's life. Any normal candidate would be finished after the 'grab them by the pussy' audio. Barely even touched Trump.
 
I think what we’re seeing is analogous to the Gish Gallop.

Call it the Trump Gallop. There are so many acts of obstruction, both big and small, both public and private, that one’s eyes can just glaze over, fatigued after trying to focus on just one, or to weed out the most egregious ones.

The solution is to focus. Michael Cohen is in prison for a felonious act that Trump allegedly instructed him to do. There are tapes that Trump was complicit - to the point that he is Individual One, in essence an unindicted conspirator.

Or focus on Trump allegedly instructing McGahn to issue a false statement, with the intent to obstruct an ongoing investigation.

Or focus on Trump’s authoring a misleading statement on the Trump Tower meeting, again with the intent to obstruct.

Or focus on...

But you see? In attempting to defeat a gallop, I’m well on my way to galloping! GIDDYAP!



FOCUS!
 
Last edited:
Then you are beyond redemption.



Be honest now, would anything be enough for the Senate?

Oh well. If I am beyond redemption, so is most of the country. The Republicans thought the same in 1998.

Would anything be enough for the Senate? Absolutely. What do you think? They're loyal to Trump? Not a chance. The GOP leadership would thank their lucky stars if they had something they could use to throw him out without alienating their voters.

Let's see what the tax and Trump Foundation investigations bring. I'm pretty sure he's been cheating on his taxes for a while. Let's see if they can come up with anything.
 
A small request. Please, do not confuse the mainstream media with the Democrats. I realize that the Republicans have been screaming "liberal left-wing media" constantly for decades, but that's largely a brazen lie on objective inspection.

If you go back to forum archives a couple of years, you could find quotes by me saying, "The truth has a liberal bias."

In the last couple of years, though, it has become painful to watch CNN in particular. I think they have a guilty conscience because they know that they are responsible for Trump's election. The Republicans have been complaining about a liberal bias for decades, and until recently, I laughed at the Republicans for saying it. Now, I don't laugh. CNN is no better than Fox these days.
 
Do you really believe that? There is plenty of evidence of other misdeeds in Trump's life. Any normal candidate would be finished after the 'grab them by the pussy' audio. Barely even touched Trump.

People really don't understand Trump's appeal to voters.

Like most people here, I assumed that Trump would never become president. It wasn't until the weekend before the election that I began to grow nervous, and what made me nervous were Hilary's ads that emphasized the Access Hollywood tapes and Trump's other unconventional statements. It was painfully clear that she just didn't get it and was alienating voters.

I still didn't believe he would win, right up until they called Wisconsin.

I'm getting the same sinking feeling now, watching the coverage of the Mueller report, and of Democratic politicians calling for impeachment. They just don't get it. To many of the people here, you just don't get it.
 
People really don't understand Trump's appeal to voters.

Like most people here, I assumed that Trump would never become president. It wasn't until the weekend before the election that I began to grow nervous, and what made me nervous were Hilary's ads that emphasized the Access Hollywood tapes and Trump's other unconventional statements. It was painfully clear that she just didn't get it and was alienating voters.

I still didn't believe he would win, right up until they called Wisconsin.

I'm getting the same sinking feeling now, watching the coverage of the Mueller report, and of Democratic politicians calling for impeachment. They just don't get it. To many of the people here, you just don't get it.


I think I understand Trump's appeal to voters. That is why he was elected despite his obvious shortcomings. But you stated that if Mueller had uncovered any evidence of real wrongdoing Trump would be out. I pointed out evidence that that would not necessarily be true. Trump can do anything he wants. He said himself he could go outside and shoot someone and no-one would care. He gets it.
 
If Mueller had uncovered any evidence that Trump was complicit in those attacks, Trump would be gone. There wasn't any such evidence.

This is where you are wrong, unless you meant conspiracy rather than complicity. And it wasn’t that that there was no evidence for conspiracy, just there wasn’t enough for a beyond a reasonable doubt determination.

This is why having all the available information, reading the report, actually matters. Arguing from a position of ignorance is never a good idea.
 
People really don't understand Trump's appeal to voters.

Like most people here, I assumed that Trump would never become president. It wasn't until the weekend before the election that I began to grow nervous, and what made me nervous were Hilary's ads that emphasized the Access Hollywood tapes and Trump's other unconventional statements. It was painfully clear that she just didn't get it and was alienating voters.

I will admit that I don’t get it at all. You’re saying that Clinton lost because she alienated voters? Trump insulted women, vets, minorities, and even his own base. It’s clearly a double standard, so it isn’t that.
 
If Mueller had uncovered any evidence that Trump was complicit in those attacks, Trump would be gone. There wasn't any such evidence.

How, exactly would Trump be "gone"? Would the longstanding DOJ position not to indict the sitting President be overturned? Would the Senate Republicans who have already ignored his other crimes suddenly have grown a spine? Walk me through your scenario.

And, to point out your willfully ignorant stance, if it takes you three paragraphs to explain what would happen, why it would happen, and why it hasn't already happened, you've lost.
 
Last edited:
I will admit that I don’t get it at all. You’re saying that Clinton lost because she alienated voters? Trump insulted women, vets, minorities, and even his own base. It’s clearly a double standard, so it isn’t that.

Yes.

"But... but... IT'S A DOUBLE STANDARD!" misses the point that Trump and his base doesn't give a crap that he's a hypocrite with double standards. This is just another thing that works in his favor because it "Gets those sissy libruls all worked up."

Trump stood in front of a crowd in Iowa and said "How stupid are the people of Iowa?" and then won Iowa in a landslide. Hillary Clinton had a brilliant plan for coal country, getting it off of coal. But Hillary Clinton did worse in West Virginia and Pennsylvania then Trump did with Hispanics after calling them rapists and thieves.

Because the one thing Trump gets in that deformed 3rd testicle that passes for his brain in that there is a sizeable, marketable cross-demographic voter base in America right now that basically is going "Insult me, lie to me, just lead me. Act like you actually think you're right." They don't want a wishy-washy milquetoast goober who's going to talk back every statement they make the second it polls bad with a focus group.

Trump knows how to do that silent, unspoken "Wink, wink but I'm not talking about you, I'm talking about other women, vets, minorities, etc" when he's openly and without shame insulting someone to their face and that's a skill the Dems have never mastered.
 
Last edited:
I think what we’re seeing is analogous to the Gish Gallop.

Call it the Trump Gallop. There are so many acts of obstruction, both big and small, both public and private, that one’s eyes can just glaze over, fatigued after trying to focus on just one, or to weed out the most egregious ones.

I've been saying this since before the primaries.

Here's why Trump is unbeatable. You'll never get more then 5 Democrats in a room together to agree on what to be mad at him over right now.

It's brilliant in a horrible, soul crushing kind of way.
 
If you go back to forum archives a couple of years, you could find quotes by me saying, "The truth has a liberal bias."

It does, currently, after all. That's likely more an artifact of "Conservatives" increasingly rejecting reality in favor of brazen lies, though.

In the last couple of years, though, it has become painful to watch CNN in particular. I think they have a guilty conscience because they know that they are responsible for Trump's election. The Republicans have been complaining about a liberal bias for decades, and until recently, I laughed at the Republicans for saying it. Now, I don't laugh. CNN is no better than Fox these days.

CNN, to me, looks like it really hasn't changed much? To me, it still looks like the slightly right-wing pro-corporate pro-establishment news outlet running on stockholder theory that it was before Trump? Bear in mind that slightly right-wing outfits do tend to not be especially friendly to right-wing extremists, just like they're largely unfriendly to people that objectively would be on the moderate left. There's a lot of criticism towards Trump, yes... because Trump-related outrage is great for ratings. That Trump's been calling them an enemy of the people, of course, doesn't make the rank and file happy with him, but the bosses have been fairly clear about how they're most interested in increased revenues. There's more that could be said, but that's enough to start.

Once again, though, please don't assume that CNN is putting any effort into accurately representing the underlying views of Democrats in full, on Russia or otherwise. CNN was and is generally much better when it comes to fact-checking and accuracy than Fox, but they've been a deeply flawed outfit for a long time. It's not without reason that CNN is one of the least trusted news outfits, even if it's greatly outclassed on that front by Fox and the new generation of Republican propaganda outlets.

People really don't understand Trump's appeal to voters.

It varies, after all.

I still didn't believe he would win, right up until they called Wisconsin.

Do you get it? I, for example, was concerned all along about him, albeit after he won the primaries. That I saw that Trump had a very real shot at winning was one of the main reasons that I ended up voting for Hillary, despite the issues that I foresaw with her.

I'm getting the same sinking feeling now, watching the coverage of the Mueller report, and of Democratic politicians calling for impeachment. They just don't get it. To many of the people here, you just don't get it.

Go ahead and explain further? It's likely, though, that this comes down to the fact that different groups of people tend to hold different values.

I will admit that I don’t get it at all. You’re saying that Clinton lost because she alienated voters? Trump insulted women, vets, minorities, and even his own base. It’s clearly a double standard, so it isn’t that.

Clinton DID alienate voters, though? That Trump's base and voters tends to hold notably different sets of values than voters who tend to vote Democrat doesn't negate that at all.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom