SAVE THE SCROLL WHEELS!!!!
The Thread of Democrats
- BarnettNewman
- extemporaneous
- Posts: 552
- Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 3:29 am
- Contact:
Re: The Thread of Democrats
One of the handy things with having him on ignore is I don't have to scroll past a load of bollox. Thankfully you guys tend to only respond to the important parts and snip all of the excessive shit-talk. You're like my personal abridgers.
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
Re: The Thread of Democrats
If you want to "discuss the topic like adults" 42, you should refrain from misrepresenting my argument. As I've told you before, that's really offensive. I've highlighted the portion of my post you cut to twist my argument into something it's not, and added some comments to show how full of crap your post is.
I've spoilered it so members don't have to scroll past the quote. Some have you on ignore, and I want to be considerate of them.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
Re: The Thread of Democrats
I'll keep that in mind. As you can see above I left only the important parts.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
Re: The Thread of Democrats
Forty Two wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 10:49 amThe details are "damning?" Provide a damning quote regarding collusion/coordination/conspiracy. What's the best you got?Joe wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2019 2:16 pmYeah, the conclusion is not an exoneration, but the details are damning. If Ken Starr had turned up this kind of evidence on Bill Clinton, I've got to think Al Gore would have become President. Sadly, our Congress isn't what it used to be.Hermit wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2019 1:57 pmI did not read all of either volume, but I read enough of the report to see why Coito Two insists on focusing on his red herring. It's his only avenue to attempt to steer us away from the report's statement that "...if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state." and "While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."Joe wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2019 12:59 pmI was traveling last weekend, and read Volume II of the report. Have you had a chance to go through it?
That is a whole lot of not exonerated, and it's overwhelmingly clear that Trump repeatedly committed obstructive acts. I can understand why our friend wants to stick to collusion, or more properly conspiracy or coordination.
I'm assuming it's not a person calling a campaign office asking for signs to use at a rally. If it is that, fine, but I can't imagine that would be the biggie. So, either confirm that you think that's "damning" in some way, or provide one that you do think is "damning."
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: The Thread of Democrats
With all due respect, there is nothing "damning" on collusion/coordination/conspiracy in the Mueller report. I have read the thread. There are zero quotes which establish or evidence Trump or Trump campaign people colluding, coordinating or conspiring with Russia.
If I am missing something you feel is facepalmingly obvious, then by all means, link to it or quote the report.
If I am missing something you feel is facepalmingly obvious, then by all means, link to it or quote the report.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
Re: The Thread of Democrats
Well, if you can't figure out what you're missing, perhaps you shouldn't opine on the Meuller report, since it involves taking the effort to read the actual document instead of quotes you've been spoon fed. You might find that difficult.Forty Two wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2019 9:09 pmWith all due respect, there is nothing "damning" on collusion/coordination/conspiracy in the Mueller report. I have read the thread. There are zero quotes which establish or evidence Trump or Trump campaign people colluding, coordinating or conspiring with Russia.
If I am missing something you feel is facepalmingly obvious, then by all means, link to it or quote the report.
Let me give you a some hints.
- While "traveling last weekend" what did I read?
- What did I say was "overwhelmingly clear" Trump had done? It's not "collusion/coordination/conspiracy."
- Who did I say would want to "stick to collusion, or more properly conspiracy or coordination."
Any time you're ready to resume.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: The Thread of Democrats
One point -- I said, "Also, I'm not inaccurately representing the report. You are. When keep requoting, for example, the portion of the report that says that if they find that a given item was "established" it doesn't mean there wasn't any "evidence." Your quote is accurate, but you apply it to situations where the report actually says they didn't find or identify any "evidence.""
Then you say this absurdity in response:
"Yes, my quote is accurate, and your caveat is just your opinion, which I don't value much, and is just trying to deflect from the refutation of your statements."
It's neither an opinion, nor a deflection. Your quote says that where the report says that an item was not "established" that doesn't mean there wasn't any evidence. Yes, indeed. But, where the report says they didn't identify any EVIDENCE, then that means just what it says, they didn't identify any EVIDENCE.
Do you or do you not agree that where the report says it did not identify any "evidence" that it does, in fact, mean that the they did not identify any evidence? Or, do you think it means that just because they say they didn't identify evidence, they nevertheless identified evidence?
Then you say this absurdity in response:
"Yes, my quote is accurate, and your caveat is just your opinion, which I don't value much, and is just trying to deflect from the refutation of your statements."
It's neither an opinion, nor a deflection. Your quote says that where the report says that an item was not "established" that doesn't mean there wasn't any evidence. Yes, indeed. But, where the report says they didn't identify any EVIDENCE, then that means just what it says, they didn't identify any EVIDENCE.
Do you or do you not agree that where the report says it did not identify any "evidence" that it does, in fact, mean that the they did not identify any evidence? Or, do you think it means that just because they say they didn't identify evidence, they nevertheless identified evidence?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: The Thread of Democrats
Another point - your last post is a complete avoidance of substantiating your claim. I'm claiming that what you have said is in there is not in there. So, it's up to you, making the positive assertion, to actually substantiate it. Saying "go read the report" is you not substantiating the claim. I have read the report. Now, if you want to back up your assertion that it does, in fact, identify evidence of collusion, conspiracy or coordination by Trump campaign persons with Russia to interfere with the election, then please, present it. What evidence was identified of collusion, conspiracy or coordination by the Trump campaign persons with Russia to interfere with the election?
It's a simple question. Answer it. Or, if you aren't making that assertion, then I certainly don't want to misstate your assertion. Just say - there's your problem 42, "I am not asserting that the Mueller report identifies evidence of collusion, conspiracy or coordination by Trump campaign person(s) with Russia to interfere with the election."
It's a simple question. Answer it. Or, if you aren't making that assertion, then I certainly don't want to misstate your assertion. Just say - there's your problem 42, "I am not asserting that the Mueller report identifies evidence of collusion, conspiracy or coordination by Trump campaign person(s) with Russia to interfere with the election."
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: The Thread of Democrats
Another point - I'll get to obstruction of justice once you have clearly stated your position on the underlying criminal allegation - collusion/conspiracy/coordination with Russia. First I want to be clear on your position regarding that bit. Thank you.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: The Thread of Democrats
Another point in your post - you quoted this bit from the report "The IRA's contacts included requests for signs and other materials to use at rallies, as well as requests to promote the rallies and help coordinate Iogistics. While certain campaign volunteers agreed to provide the requested support (for example, agreeing to set aside a number of signs), the investigation has not identified evidence that any Trump Campaign official understood the requests were coming from foreign nationals."
You even increased the font size of the words "coordinate logistics." You asked "no coordination, eh? Why would Mueller use that word?"
Read that paragraph in full. the IRA made requests for signs and other materials and requested to promote the rallies and help coordinate the logistics thereof. The next sentence is of crucial importance here - read it slowly - carefully - it says that campaign workers agreed to provide the stuff requested -- THE INVESTIGATION HAS NOT IDENTIFIED EVIDENCE" -- note the use of the word "evidence" -- it does NOT say "the investigation failed to establish..." it says "the investigation did not identify EVIDENCE." Evidence of what? What didn't identify evidence of? Answer: That any Trump campaign official understood the requests were coming from foreign nationals."
Someone called up for signs and such and help with rallies. The campaign workers agreed to provide the signs and help with rallies. There is no evidence that any campaign worker understood that the requests were coming from foreign nationals.
And, that - that - is what you chose to offer as the Mueller report finding coordination between Trump campaign people and the Russians. Surely, you see that a request from someone from Russia, or Mexico, or Canada or China, to a campaign - any campaign - for signs and help with rallies - when the campaign worker does not know they are a foreign person -- is not coordination, collusion or conspiracy to interference with an election? It's not even conspiracy, collusion or coordination! You can't unkowingly conspire or collude or coordinate with someone.
It's like accusing someone of conspiring, colluding or coordinating with a thief to fence stolen goods when the accused didn't know the person was a thief and didn't know any goods were stolen.
Is that the best you have on collusion/conspiracy/coordination?
You even increased the font size of the words "coordinate logistics." You asked "no coordination, eh? Why would Mueller use that word?"
Read that paragraph in full. the IRA made requests for signs and other materials and requested to promote the rallies and help coordinate the logistics thereof. The next sentence is of crucial importance here - read it slowly - carefully - it says that campaign workers agreed to provide the stuff requested -- THE INVESTIGATION HAS NOT IDENTIFIED EVIDENCE" -- note the use of the word "evidence" -- it does NOT say "the investigation failed to establish..." it says "the investigation did not identify EVIDENCE." Evidence of what? What didn't identify evidence of? Answer: That any Trump campaign official understood the requests were coming from foreign nationals."
Someone called up for signs and such and help with rallies. The campaign workers agreed to provide the signs and help with rallies. There is no evidence that any campaign worker understood that the requests were coming from foreign nationals.
And, that - that - is what you chose to offer as the Mueller report finding coordination between Trump campaign people and the Russians. Surely, you see that a request from someone from Russia, or Mexico, or Canada or China, to a campaign - any campaign - for signs and help with rallies - when the campaign worker does not know they are a foreign person -- is not coordination, collusion or conspiracy to interference with an election? It's not even conspiracy, collusion or coordination! You can't unkowingly conspire or collude or coordinate with someone.
It's like accusing someone of conspiring, colluding or coordinating with a thief to fence stolen goods when the accused didn't know the person was a thief and didn't know any goods were stolen.
Is that the best you have on collusion/conspiracy/coordination?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
- Brian Peacock
- Tipping cows since 1946
- Posts: 38099
- Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
- About me: Ablate me:
- Location: Location: Location:
- Contact:
Re: The Thread of Democrats
What about the obstruction issue? Any thoughts on that?
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.
Details on how to do that can be found here.
.
"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."
Frank Zappa
"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
- Forty Two
- Posts: 14978
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
- About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
- Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
- Contact:
Re: The Thread of Democrats
A lot, and I gave some above. But I want the courtesy of a straight answer from Joe to my direct questions about the first bit, before I move on to the second bit.Brian Peacock wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2019 7:58 pmWhat about the obstruction issue? Any thoughts on that?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
Re: The Thread of Democrats
Uh, Forty Two....My last post asked, "What did I say was 'overwhelmingly clear' Trump had done? It's not "collusion/coordination/conspiracy."Forty Two wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2019 11:51 amAnother point - your last post is a complete avoidance of substantiating your claim. I'm claiming that what you have said is in there is not in there. So, it's up to you, making the positive assertion, to actually substantiate it. Saying "go read the report" is you not substantiating the claim. I have read the report. Now, if you want to back up your assertion that it does, in fact, identify evidence of collusion, conspiracy or coordination by Trump campaign persons with Russia to interfere with the election, then please, present it. What evidence was identified of collusion, conspiracy or coordination by the Trump campaign persons with Russia to interfere with the election?
It's a simple question. Answer it. Or, if you aren't making that assertion, then I certainly don't want to misstate your assertion. Just say - there's your problem 42, "I am not asserting that the Mueller report identifies evidence of collusion, conspiracy or coordination by Trump campaign person(s) with Russia to interfere with the election."
I think you must have confused it with the post where I demonstrated that Meuller report did say there was coordination between the Trump campaign, American citizens, and Russians.
Funny that you're responding to that post selectively. It's almost like you're hiding something.
It's a simple question. Answer it.Or, if you aren't making that assertion, then I certainly don't want to misstate your assertion. Just say - there's your problem Joe, "I am not asserting that
Fess up now, you know that's not correct.Forty Two wrote: The report found zero evidence of coordination or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia (or any American and Russia).
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
Re: The Thread of Democrats
Ah kid, how about you read my paragraph in full, especially the continuation, "This doesn't support your sweeping generalization, and neither do any of your other quotes, which Meuller qualified in one way or another and you didn't."Forty Two wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2019 12:03 pmAnother point in your post - you quoted this bit from the report "The IRA's contacts included requests for signs and other materials to use at rallies, as well as requests to promote the rallies and help coordinate Iogistics. While certain campaign volunteers agreed to provide the requested support (for example, agreeing to set aside a number of signs), the investigation has not identified evidence that any Trump Campaign official understood the requests were coming from foreign nationals."
You even increased the font size of the words "coordinate logistics." You asked "no coordination, eh? Why would Mueller use that word?"
Read that paragraph in full. the IRA made requests for signs and other materials and requested to promote the rallies and help coordinate the logistics thereof. The next sentence is of crucial importance here - read it slowly - carefully - it says that campaign workers agreed to provide the stuff requested -- THE INVESTIGATION HAS NOT IDENTIFIED EVIDENCE" -- note the use of the word "evidence" -- it does NOT say "the investigation failed to establish..." it says "the investigation did not identify EVIDENCE." Evidence of what? What didn't identify evidence of? Answer: That any Trump campaign official understood the requests were coming from foreign nationals."
Someone called up for signs and such and help with rallies. The campaign workers agreed to provide the signs and help with rallies. There is no evidence that any campaign worker understood that the requests were coming from foreign nationals.
And, that - that - is what you chose to offer as the Mueller report finding coordination between Trump campaign people and the Russians. Surely, you see that a request from someone from Russia, or Mexico, or Canada or China, to a campaign - any campaign - for signs and help with rallies - when the campaign worker does not know they are a foreign person -- is not coordination, collusion or conspiracy to interference with an election? It's not even conspiracy, collusion or coordination! You can't unkowingly conspire or collude or coordinate with someone.
It's like accusing someone of conspiring, colluding or coordinating with a thief to fence stolen goods when the accused didn't know the person was a thief and didn't know any goods were stolen.
Is that the best you have on collusion/conspiracy/coordination?
What generalization was that? Remember when you wrote, smelling of elderberries no less, this bullshit?
Yep, that's the basis for the argument, and you've been strawmanning ever since I refuted it.The report found zero evidence of coordination or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia (or any American and Russia).
As for this howler,
That's exactly what Meuller said happened, people unknowingly coordinated with Russians, and he called it coordination. That's because he has a dictionary.You can't unkowingly conspire or collude or coordinate with someone.
Why don't you just man up and say, "Damn Joe, my bad. I meant to say, ' The report found zero evidence of knowing coordination or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia (or any American and Russia)?'"
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
"Wisdom requires a flexible mind." - Dan Carlin
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests