Cal Thomas: Is Merrick Garland serious?

  
Via:  Just Jim NC TttH  •  3 months ago  •  102 comments


Cal Thomas: Is Merrick Garland serious?
 

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Cal Thomas: Is Merrick Garland serious?


Cal Thomas, Tribune Content Agency,
Cal Thomas Posted 08/15/2022 at 11:15 am EST

Commenting about the FBI executing a search warrant on former president Donald Trump's Florida home, which he approved, Attorney General Merrick Garland said: "Faithful adherence to the rule of law is the bedrock principle of the Justice Department and of our democracy. … All Americans are entitled to the even-handed application of the law, to due process, and to the presumption of innocence."

None of this applies to the way the Department of Justice, the FBI and most of the media have treated Donald Trump.

From the Steele Dossier, Russia "collusion," the labeling of Trump as a Russian "asset," the Mueller Report, and the refusal by the Biden administration to enforce our immigration laws, the Justice Department in this administration has done just the opposite when it comes to equal application of the law and due process.

Whatever one thinks of Trump's character, he is entitled to the same presumption of innocence as any other American. Trump always suffers from a presumption of guilt. He is forced to continually prove he is innocent of charges, often made by "sources" who leak information to anti-Trump media, or must explain himself to hostile Democrats (and a few hostile Republicans).

The specter of armed federal agents outside Trump's Florida home is not an image I suspect many of us are comfortable with. Even those who do not like Trump and hope he does not run for president in 2024 should be alarmed at how this focus on him is contributing to what has been a long slide in the trust Americans place in our institutions.

In 1973, when the Gallup organization began polling on the subject, 42 percent of respondents had a "great deal/quite a lot" of confidence in Congress. This year that number is just 7 percent.

In 1991, 73 percent of the public had a great deal/quite a lot of confidence in the presidency. This year only 23 percent feel that way.

Confidence in the criminal justice system has reached a new low with just 14 percent coming down on the side of great deal/quite a lot. Is it any wonder with stories of woke prosecutors freeing criminals with low or no bail only to see many of them commit new crimes?

In what should be a warning to the media - a warning that has been apparent for many years—confidence in the trustworthiness of newspapers has declined from a high of 51 percent in 1979, to a record low of 16 percent today. Confidence in TV news reflects a similar drop - from 46 percent in 1993, to the current 11 percent. Perhaps some introspection by the media as to the "root causes" might be beneficial to the profession and the public.

Gallup has recorded similar declines in confidence levels for other institutions, including the church (no wonder with all the scandals and some TV evangelists still living the lifestyles of potentates as opposed to that of the One they claim to follow). It may surprise many that the police, which have been under heavy assault from various liberal groups, continue to enjoy major support. Gallup found 45 percent have a great deal/quite a lot of confidence in the police, down only from 52 percent in 1993.

No foreign power could hope to undermine the pillars of our democracy better than we are doing ourselves. Serious attention to rebuilding these and other institutions, which can lead to restoring confidence in them, is urgently required.

Readers may email Cal Thomas at tcaeditors@tribpub.com. Look for Cal Thomas' latest book "America's Expiration Date: The Fall of Empires and Superpowers and the Future of the United States" (HarperCollins/Zondervan).

©2022 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

KeyWords:: 34f442de-1170-49b9-b0b5-6156b8596daf 34f442de 1170 49b9 b0b5 6156b8596daf bc-thomas bc thomas


Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
Just Jim NC TttH
PhD Principal
1  seeder  Just Jim NC TttH    3 months ago

Seriously doesn't seem like it..............

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
2  Jeremy Retired in NC    3 months ago
"Faithful adherence to the rule of law is the bedrock principle of the Justice Department and of our democracy. … All Americans are entitled to the even-handed application of the law, to due process, and to the presumption of innocence."

Unless you are the President who embarrassed the Democrats time and again.

In what should be a warning to the media - a warning that has been apparent for many years—confidence in the trustworthiness of newspapers has declined from a high of 51 percent in 1979, to a record low of 16 percent today. 

Joseph Goebbels would be proud of the propaganda being pumped out by the media in the US.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3  JohnRussell    3 months ago

Bizarre article, to say the least. Most of it is a lamentation about how "the people" dont trust institutions any more, along with a dusting of sympathy for the horrible way Trump has been treated.

One doesnt know whether to laugh or cry. One thing is for sure - this article is meaningless, other than to prove old warhorse right wingers like Cal Thomas should retire. 

Cal, YOU CAN'T RESTORE TRUST IN POLITICS AND INSTITUTIONS BY PROMOTING THE 'INNOCENCE' OF DONALD TRUMP.  People will just laugh at you. Trump has NEVER had approval of 50% or more of Americans, so by definition he is the hero of a minority faction. In this case a minority faction of the misinformed, uninformed, malformed, conspiracy fans and "patriots" upset that we are in the 21st century. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1  Ozzwald  replied to  JohnRussell @3    3 months ago

I also do not understand this article.  It claims:

All Americans are entitled to the even-handed application of the law, to due process, and to the presumption of innocence."

Yet fails to show where Trump was treated differently.  If anything, Trump was given more breaks than an average citizen by them "negotiating" with him for almost 9 months to get back the documents he illegally took.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
3.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1    3 months ago
"Yet fails to show where Trump was treated differently.  If anything, Trump was given more breaks than an average citizen by them "negotiating" with him for almost 9 months to get back the documents he illegally took."

Do you have any proof of this assertion? For some reason, no details have been leaked yet

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1    3 months ago
Yet fails to show where Trump was treated differently. 

If you don't understand that nobody can get through to you.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.2    3 months ago

If Trump has been treated a little differently it is because he behaved a lot differently (in a bad way) than any poltician we had seen before. 

When Trump asked Russia to help him find dirt on Hillary Clinton in the summer of 2016 jaws dropped all over America. What is wrong with this guy , was the thought. When he talked about a debate moderator "bleeding all over" which was seen as a misogynistic comment, more jaws dropped. When he said he would not accept the results of the 2016 election unless he won, when he retweeted white supremacists about a dozen times , dont you think the FBI was impressed by how off the wall dangerous this guy was?  Trump made his own bed but never wanted to lie in it. He lied everywhere else though. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.4  Snuffy  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.1    3 months ago
"Yet fails to show where Trump was treated differently.  If anything, Trump was given more breaks than an average citizen by them "negotiating" with him for almost 9 months to get back the documents he illegally took."
Do you have any proof of this assertion? For some reason, no details have been leaked yet

Yeah, I've heard of that negotiating for nine months bit from others on this board but cannot find any info about it in main-stream media, would love to know where that is coming from.

Also, would love to know what the FBI / DOJ looked at when they were down there in June and signed off, and what was not shown to them.  I've complained that there is still just way to many unanswered questions but get shouted down by those demanding Trumps head.   I would also love to see the affidavit but understand we may never see that and at a minimum that doesn't get released until after any court case.  But in many cases the affidavit lays out suspected / probable crimes committed so it's also curious why the FBI didn't arrest Trump when serving the warrant.  If the crimes were so serious and the suspicion of crime was there then why with his money and contacts was he left free after the raid?  If they took his passports due to flight risk, why couldn't he just get on his plane and leave anyway?  He has the money and contacts to go almost anywhere in the world so it wouldn't be hard for him.  Just more unanswered questions.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.5  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.3    3 months ago
When Trump asked Russia to help him find dirt on Hillary Clinton in the summer of 2016 jaws dropped all over America.

What on earth are you talking about?

Got any quotes for that claim?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.6  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.5    3 months ago

Get lost. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.7  Snuffy  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.5    3 months ago

He's probably talking about this...

Donald Trump Jr's meeting with Kremlin-linked lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower could constitute a breach of US campaign rules, experts say.

But wasn't that part of the Mueller investigation which concluded that this was all just a big maybe, with no definite proof and no punishment coming for anybody in that meeting?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.8  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.4    3 months ago
I've complained that there is still just way to many unanswered questions but get shouted down by those demanding Trumps head.

There are indeed critical unanswered questions:

  • Were the recovered TS/SCI documents declassified (there would be a record of that formal process)?
  • Was Trump cooperating with the DoJ/FBI to return all classified material?

Until these questions —at a minimum— are answered, we do not know if it is Trump or the DoJ/FBI that has done wrong (or both).    There is speculation that Trump committed a crime and there is speculation that Trump has done nothing wrong.   In both case, we lack critical information to move from speculation to fact.

Another important question for the purpose of national security is: 

How was Trump allowed to even hold classified documents (if so) at his residence when he left office?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.9  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.6    3 months ago
Get lost. 

If that were my intent, I would simply read more of your bizarre, unsupported wild-ass claims, JR!

I can get lost for days in those fantasies!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.7    3 months ago

Sure it was. 

Problem for some Democrats is they banked on Mueller to 'get' Trump for them.

Now, facts and whatever he may have found have been perverted to support fantastical conspiracy theories.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.11  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.3    3 months ago
If Trump has been treated a little differently it is because he behaved a lot differently (in a bad way) than any poltician we had seen before. 

Actually, he was a very good President. He was clearly a threat to the ruling class, but thanks for finally admitting that he was treated "differently: as in unfairly.


When Trump asked Russia to help him find dirt on Hillary Clinton in the summer of 2016 jaws dropped all over America. 

You know that's not what he said. How about you give the quote with a link. Even the far left Time magazine was able to do it:

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump said at a press conference in Doral, Florida, Wednesday morning after the second night of the Democratic convention. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let’s see if that happens.”



Trump didn't ask them to do anything. Such an interpretation is insane btw, but the left wing media ran with that interpretation, as have you ever since.


When he said he would not accept the results of the 2016 election unless he won, when he retweeted white supremacists about a dozen times , 

But it was the little darlin' that propagated the Russia/collusion hoax that adamantly refused to accept the results of 2016:

"Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear.

“There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level,”  Clinton  said during an interview for the  latest episode  of  The Atlantic’s  politics podcast,  The Ticket . “We still don’t know what really happened.”

“There’s just a lot that I think will be revealed. History will discover,” the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential nominee continued. “But you don’t win by 3 million votes and have all this other shenanigans and stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, ‘Whoa, something’s not right here.’ That was a deep sense of unease.”



So, you see John it's not Trump. It's the fucking radical left.



 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.12  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.7    3 months ago
But wasn't that part of the Mueller investigation which concluded that this was all just a big maybe, with no definite proof and no punishment coming for anybody in that meeting?

Although that is not what I was talking about, you are completely misrepresenting the situation, which is probably why so many Trumpsters think there is no evidence. 

Donald Trump Jr and Jared Kushner, and Manafort, met with a couple Russians in Trump Tower in June of 2016 with the absolute purpose of getting dirt on Hillary Clinton from the Russians. Some time before that Trump Jr had been informed in an email from an acquaintance that the Russian government had dirt on Clinton they would be willing to share. 

Mueller acknowledged these facts in his report but said , although indictable, Trump and Kushner were too ignorant of the fact that what they were doing was illegal for "intent" to be proven in a court of law. 

As far as Trump, he stood on a stage at a press conference a week or two later , and suggested Russia might want to find Hillary's missing emails and make them public. This plea for a foreign hostile power to interfere in an American election was unprecedented of course, and the intent was for them to help HIS campaign by producing dirt on Clinton from her missing emails. 

Has any other presidential candidate you have ever heard of suggested that a hostile foreign power help his campaign out? I dont think so , lol. 

Trump has done so many despicable things you can no longer keep track of them. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.13  Snuffy  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.8    3 months ago
Another important question for the purpose of national security is:  How was Trump allowed to even hold classified documents (if so) at his residence when he left office?

Had any of the classified documents that were seized been declassified prior to Trump taking them?  The sitting President has enormous powers to declassify documents.  Would there be a record elsewhere that it was done?  Probably should be but is it truly required?  I don't know.  It's also possible I guess that Trump did declassify them in his last hours but due to the chaos of packing some paperwork was missed.  We will never really know I believe.

The optics of this are bad all the way around.  IMO if they want to thru this around and get the public to calm down the DOJ needs to come out with a lot more information and show the justification for their actions, and Trump needs to publicly state that people need to calm down over this and let the courts handle it.  But I don't expect either to happen.

I will admit that even unclassified, IMO it is wrong for a president to take them as they can show means and methods.  They should have remained with the National Archives IMO.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.14  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.12    3 months ago
Trump has done so many despicable things you can no longer keep track of them. 

What is most troubling for our nation is that so many continue to defend Trump no matter what he does.   This is why the Big Lie campaign is so noteworthy to me — it was the most blatantly obvious, lengthy, highly publicized, outrageous display of Trump's abysmal character and willingness to bring harm to the nation simply because his ego could not tolerate losing the election.

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
3.1.15  Sunshine  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.5    3 months ago
Got any quotes for that claim?

That would be a no.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.16  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.11    3 months ago
Trump didn't ask them to do anything.

Completely ridiculous. He signaled to the Russian intelligence services, already credibly accused of hacking the Democratic National Committee servers and either selling or giving the results to Wikileaks for public consumption, that they should find the emails and they would be "rewarded" if they did so. 

Only someone [deleted] would see what he said and not conclude he was asking them to do it. And in fact, the Russians attempted to hack into Clinton's computer system that very night. 

[deleted]

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1.17  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.1    3 months ago
Do you have any proof of this assertion? For some reason, no details have been leaked yet

Just what the national archives has posted.  Which is good enough for me.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.18  JohnRussell  replied to  Sunshine @3.1.15    3 months ago

[Deleted

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.19  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.11    3 months ago

They have lied so many times for so long about Trump they have managed to pervert facts to support inane conspiracy theories.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1.20  Ozzwald  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.2    3 months ago
If you don't understand that nobody can get through to you.

Translation: you have nothing.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.21  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.14    3 months ago

He had a lot of completely obvious outrageous displays. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.22  Texan1211  replied to  Sunshine @3.1.15    3 months ago
That would be a no.

I know.

These questions I ask usually end up being rhetorical, because they rarely if ever actually get a comprehensible, on-topic answer.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.23  Snuffy  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.14    3 months ago
What is most troubling for our nation is that so many continue to defend Trump no matter what he does.   This is why the Big Lie campaign is so noteworthy to me, it was the most blatantly obvious, lengthy, highly publicized, outrageous display of Trump's abysmal character and willingness to bring harm to the nation simply because his ego could not tolerate losing the election.

And so many will continue to attack Trump no matter what he does.  The continued lie about the 2020 election and his actions over the past 18 months from that election have caused great harm to the nation, but for the entire term when Trump was in office there was a large group of the nation (both individuals and main-stream media) who attacked Trump regardless of what he did or said.  Their inability to see and acknowledge anything that Trump did that was good for the nation simply reflects on their bias.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.24  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.16    3 months ago
He signaled to the Russian intelligence services,

No, he didn't signal a thing. Nobody signals with public statements. What he said turned out to be accurate. Hillary had confidential e-mail on her personal server and the IG later said that the information contained there probably feel into the wrong hands and was as he put it "compromised." The fact that there was an investigation of her personal server would be the real fucking signal for Russia, China and Iran to go looking at Hillary Clinton's unsecured e-mails. 


Only someone truly dense would see what he said and not conclude he was asking them to do it. 

Only a radical leftist would keep spinning it.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.25  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.11    3 months ago
"Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear.

So what? She's right. Russia helped Trump's campaign. This was specifically acknowledged by the Senate Intelligence Committee report on Russian interference in the election. 

You are hanging your hat on the Mueller conclusion that there was no provable "collusion" which Muller took to be a legal term which he would be unable to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. None of that means Mueller was blind to Russian interference in the election. Most of the crap that came out about Hillary having brain tumors and mysterious diseases that made her medically unqualified to be president came from Russian trolls in order to effect the election. 

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
3.1.26  Sunshine  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.22    3 months ago
These questions I ask usually end up being rhetorical, because they rarely if ever actually get a comprehensible, on-topic answer.

Yep, it's still a no quote just the crazy conspiracy theories.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.27  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.19    3 months ago
They have lied so many times for so long about Trump they have managed to pervert facts to support inane conspiracy theories.

They've misrepresented not only Trump but lied about him being a traitor for his entire Presidency, investigated him without any predicate, impeached him twice out of spite (the second time he wasn't even the President), they have smeared half the country, condoned improper behavior by the FBI, adopted two standards of Justice and sadly even misrepresented themselves, some of them claiming to be non-partisan.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.28  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.24    3 months ago
No, he didn't signal a thing. Nobody signals with public statements.

You are beyond silly Vic. Trump signals with public statements all the time. One could say every damn day. 

Of course he was signaling to Russia that he wanted them to interfere in the election. Just a week or two before his son had met with Russians at Trump Tower to get dirt on Clinton. If you think Trump wasnt aware of that meeting , either before or after (but certainly before his message to Russia from the press conference) I'll sell you the Brooklyn bridge. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.29  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.27    3 months ago

You are unbelievable. And almost always laughably wrong with the facts. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.30  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.25    3 months ago
You are hanging your hat on the Mueller conclusion that there was no provable "collusion" which Muller took to be a legal term which he would be unable to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Probably because much of the nation was subjected daily to cries about "Wait until Mueller releases his report--we have really got Trump NOW!" bullshit.

Mueller released his report. Trump isn't indicted.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.31  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.28    3 months ago

The meeting was legit. Weissmann couldn't spin it, maybe you should throw in the towel as well.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.32  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.13    3 months ago
Had any of the classified documents that were seized been declassified prior to Trump taking them?

The critical questions posed in my post:

TiG@3.1.8
  • Were the recovered TS/SCI documents declassified (there would be a record of that formal process)?
  • Was Trump cooperating with the DoJ/FBI to return all classified material?

Would there be a record elsewhere that it was done?  Probably should be but is it truly required?  I don't know. 

Yes, the declassification process maintains a formal record of documents that were declassified.   

It's also possible I guess that Trump did declassify them in his last hours but due to the chaos of packing some paperwork was missed.  

It is not possible for a PotUS to officially declassify documents without the formal declassification process recording same.   For this to be true, our national security protocols would need to be at the level of a third world nation.   A PotUS cannot simply waive his hand and declassify.  There is no reasonable scenario wherein a document is officially declassified and no records of same exist.   Without the records, the document remains classified.

The optics of this are bad all the way around.

Of course.   And the optics are actually an argument that the DoJ/FBI have something significant.   As I have noted elsewhere, it would be brain-dead-stupid for the DoJ/FBI to engage in a search & seizure operation on the residence of a former PotUS —an act that has never taken place in our history— unless it was certain to produce results that justify the historically extraordinary action.

I will admit that even unclassified, IMO it is wrong for a president to take them as they can show means and methods.  They should have remained with the National Archives IMO.

Or at least in a government secured facility.  Never in the private residence of a former PotUS.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.33  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.29    3 months ago
You are unbelievable.

If you think I'm unbelievable, just wait until November.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.34  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.23    3 months ago

Is someone who lies to or misleads the public 30,000 times ( WHILE IN OFFICE ! ) "good for the nation?"  It is absurd that we even have to discuss this. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.35  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.25    3 months ago
So what? She's right. Russia helped Trump's campaign. This was specifically acknowledged by the Senate Intelligence Committee report on Russian interference in the election. 

Actually Russia interfered with the 2020 election on all sides, they were just more successful in breaking into the Clinton campaign and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic National Committee.  They also tried hacking into the Republican Campaign Committee but were not successful.  Can you tell us how long it's been since Russia didn't try to interfere with a U.S. election?  I don't know the answer but I know it's been a very long time.  Most countries attempt to interfere with elections to get a government that may be more favorable to them.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.36  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.23    3 months ago

While he was president , Trump officially attacked over 600 people, by name, on his Twitter page. He said his twitter was the same as a declaration by the White House. 

Do you think it was admirable for the president of the United States to verbally attack so many people by name, in public, just because they disagreed with him ?

The 600 figure is low as well, because that was the number only half way through his term. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.37  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.35    3 months ago

The Senate Intelligence Committee report specifically states that Russia was interfering with the hope Trump would win. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.38  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.31    3 months ago

Utter nonsense. You need to pick up a book Vic. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.39  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.30    3 months ago

Get lost. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.40  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.34    3 months ago
Is someone who lies to or misleads the public 30,000 times ( WHILE IN OFFICE ! ) "good for the nation?"  It is absurd that we even have to discuss this. 

And you prove my point.  Not everything Trump did while in office was bad and there were things that were for the good of the nation.  The simple fact that  you refuse to acknowledge any of it is the point.  You would rather hang your hat on what the Washington Post said than think for  yourself and that's the absurd part. 

Nowhere will you find me saying that Trump is 100% honest and truthful.  But the Washington Post has shown their extreme bias against Trump.  Hell, everybody in public office lies to get there and lies to stay there but they only focused on Trump.  They ignore anything else around it.  If you refuse to see that then that is on you.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.41  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.39    3 months ago

If that were my intent, I would simply read more of your bizarre, unsupported wild-ass claims, JR!

I can get lost for days in those fantasies!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.42  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.25    3 months ago
So what? She's right.

She's never been right, John. That Russia hoax that you swallowed, hook, line & sinker came out of her campaign. Anyone who believes that Russian propaganda is palpable is deluding themselves. And anyone who decides who to vote for because of something they read on Twitter (or because Jim Clyburn told them who to vote for) shouldn't be voting.

You are hanging your hat on the Mueller conclusion that there was no provable "collusion"

No John, If you recall I knew Mueller never had anything. Even Weissmann knew they were going to have to find something. So they used the FBI's old MO against organized Crime. They threatened and tried to scare people like Paul Manafort. They even obtained a 47 month sentence for Manafort hoping that he would either tell what they thought Trump may have done or make something up. It all failed.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.43  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.23    3 months ago
And so many will continue to attack Trump no matter what he does. 

Given Trump's history prior to office, his incessant lying, what he has done while in office, and most significantly his Big Lie campaign, it is not at all surprising that people attack him.

Trump is a con-man (among other negative characteristics).   After his Big Lie campaign he no longer deserves the benefit of a doubt.    So those who presume Trump has done wrong have good circumstantial reason to hold that position.

Note:  I am saying that speculating that Trump has done wrong is more sound based on what we know of Trump than is speculating that Trump has done no wrong.   Trump does deserve normal justice but his past actions certainly support negative speculation.

In short, it is not at all surprising that people attack Trump.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.44  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.36    3 months ago
While he was president , Trump officially attacked over 600 people, by name, on his Twitter page. He said his twitter was the same as a declaration by the White House. 

Do you think it was admirable for the president of the United States to verbally attack so many people by name, in public, just because they disagreed with him ?

The 600 figure is low as well, because that was the number only half way through his term. 

Simple answer, no.  Hell,  I wished during the 2016 campaign that someone would / could take his phone away from him but that didn't happen.  Trump attacked people and threw people under the bus.  He's done that sort of shit his entire life.  But calling someone names on a public source is not the whole story, if it was then there are a few on this very board who would be considered the 'New Oracles of Delphi' with their constant name calling and attacking.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.45  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.40    3 months ago
You would rather hang your hat on what the Washington Post said than think for  yourself and that's the absurd part. 

You are hopeless. The only way Trump would EVER be fit for office is if no one gave a damn about his character , truthfulness, and knowledge of the history of this country. He has none of any of those. 

What did he do that was "good" for the country?  He got next to nothing through Congress other than a tax break that disproportionately benefited the wealthy, almost everything he accomplished was through executive orders which the next president can rescind ( and Biden did rescind a lot of them) , and he , by pure luck, was able to put three far right justices on the Supreme Court. That wasnt done through any skill or wisdom of his, but by circumstance. The economy was ok, but many think it was a continuation of the last couple years of the Obama presidency.

The main thing Trump accomplished was to tear the country apart. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.46  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.42    3 months ago
She's never been right, John. That Russia hoax that you swallowed, hook, line & sinker came out of her campaign. Anyone who believes that Russian propaganda is palpable is deluding themselves.

They swallowed the lies hook, line and sinker, and then wonder why some don't find their lies credible?

I guess it must be hard to fathom how some people can be discerning and not swallow lies when they can do nothing BUT swallow.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.47  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.44    3 months ago
But calling someone names on a public source is not the whole story ...

Agreed.   Trump has demonstrated that he is willing to throw pretty much anyone under the bus.   He has demonstrated that he will go to even extraordinarily slimy methods to get what he wants.    He has, importantly, demonstrated that he places himself above the good of our nation.

Trump has distinguished himself from all other PotUS' and the distinction is a very bad one.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.48  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.44    3 months ago

Yeah, ok, whatever. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.49  Snuffy  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.43    3 months ago
In short, it is not at all surprising that people attack Trump.

Maybe not surprising but it is boring and troublesome (at the same time) when people will attack Trump rather than look big picture.  There are, for example, so many unanswered questions around the raid on Mar-a-Lago but if anybody questions the DOJ they are attacked and rounded upon by those who will defend ANY action taken against Trump.  This has been the case for several on this board ever since Trump first announced he was running back in 2015 without any consideration or acknowledgement of a bigger picture.  To them the only picture was Trump and their only focus was in attacking Trump.  That gets very tiresome.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.50  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.45    3 months ago
The main thing Trump accomplished was to tear the country apart

Ridiculous.

We have always had differences between parties in this country.

Going all Chicken Little in a fearmongering effort is a waste of time and brain cells.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.51  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.33    3 months ago
If you think I'm unbelievable, just wait until November.

What is the point of constantly repeating this?    It is both obvious and common knowledge that mid-term elections favor the party out of power.   It is also common knowledge that economic woes go against the party in power.

The Rs have a distinct advantage in November because they are the party out of power.   All other factors are gravy.   

Most everyone knows this.   You are not predicting anything.   So when the Rs take control of Congress (the most likely, obvious scenario at this point) your 'I told you so' would be as impressive as predicting that Trump will lie during his next speech.

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
3.1.52  Sunshine  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.42    3 months ago
It all failed.

Epic, that is what happens when investigations are based on lies and deceit.  The TDS crowd were so eager to believe the salacious nonsense they bought it hook, line, and sinker. Gullibility of some is astounding.  Waste of resources that could have gone to something more important such as stopping school shootings, investigating pervs sexually abusing little gymnast, sex trafficking, etc.  The list is endless.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
3.1.53  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.3    3 months ago

So you don't like his mean and coarse personality.

He was still the only logical choice in both past elections

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.54  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.21    3 months ago
He had a lot of completely obvious outrageous displays. 

Of course he did.    My point, which you seem to never get, is that the Big Lie was the most visible, blatantly obvious display of Trumps abysmal character during his term.   

The Big Lie was not something that could be swept under the rug or easily forgotten.   It was and is a blatant, undeniable illustration that Trump should never have the power of any public office.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.55  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.54    3 months ago

Oh I agree with that, but your approach implies that prior to the 2020 election he hadnt done much that made him unfit to hold office, when there is a mountain of serious misbehavior on his part from 2015 on.  2011 if you count his racist birtherism. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.56  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.51    3 months ago
It is both obvious and common knowledge that mid-term elections favor the party out of power.   It is also common knowledge that economic woes go against the party in power.

Not everyone shares your sentiments on that.

Some are insisting Democrats will not lose, and that the Biden economy is freaking great! I mean, come on, man, inflation is at ZERO!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.57  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.53    3 months ago

He's a pathological liar, has that actually escaped your grasp?  Coarse personality ? LOL. 

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
3.1.58  Sunshine  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.56    3 months ago

Sounds like they have thrown in the towel already.  Willing to accept defeat because that's how it always works...lol

Nothing to do with a 8.5% inflation rate.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.59  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.49    3 months ago
Maybe not surprising but it is boring and troublesome (at the same time) when people will attack Trump rather than look big picture.

I think most are looking at the big picture.   The big picture is that Trump is a parasite that weakens the GoP and that Trump is a growing stain on our nation.   The big picture is that we should rid ourselves of Trump and try to heal the GoP and the nation.   Trump brings this on himself.

There are, for example, so many unanswered questions around the raid on Mar-a-Lago but if anybody questions the DOJ they are attacked and rounded upon by those who will defend ANY action taken against Trump. 

What I have observed are not simply questioning the DoJ/FBI but conspiracy theories that the DoJ/FBI is just out to get Trump.   Most every conservative here has argued or claimed that the DoJ/FBI is clearly at fault yet nobody could possibly know that.

This has been the case for several on this board ever since Trump first announced he was running back in 2015 without any consideration or acknowledgement of a bigger picture.  To them the only picture was Trump and their only focus was in attacking Trump.  That gets very tiresome.  

Yeah, well I am more concerned with the facts.   So, back to the Big Lie, see 3.1.47

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.60  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.45    3 months ago
The only way Trump would EVER be fit for office is if no one gave a damn about his character , truthfulness, and knowledge of the history of this country. He has none of any of those. 

What politician has ever had good character and truthfulness?  They all fucking lie, biggest difference is that Trump didn't bother to try to hide it while the "successful" presidents are better actors.

What did he do that was "good" for the country?  He got next to nothing through Congress other than a tax break that disproportionately benefited the wealthy, almost everything he accomplished was through executive orders which the next president can rescind ( and Biden did rescind a lot of them)

You continue to make my point.  Your refusal to acknowledge any of the good that Trump did only continues to highlight your bias.  Now did Trump do a lot thru executive order?  Yes he did, same as most recent presidents.  Tell me, how much did President "I have a pen and a phone" Obama get thru Congress, how many EO's did he write and how many of them did Trump overturn when Trump came into office?  But that is more indicative of the highly partisan nature of Congress and the proof that the party's run the show rather than the Congressmen.  How much has Biden gotten thru Congress vs his ability to write Executive Orders?   You want to imply that Trump is unique in this problem but this is an issue that has been growing larger since Reagan and I have no idea when or where it's going to end up at.

by pure luck, was able to put three far right justices on the Supreme Court. That wasnt done through any skill or wisdom of his, but by circumstance.

Yep, elections have consequences.  So?

The economy was ok, but many think it was a continuation of the last couple years of the Obama presidency.

And many give credit to Trump for the policies of his that made the economy better.  Hell, how many predicted that if Trump were elected the U.S. would fall into a recession?  That didn't happen as  you well know.  This just further highlights your inability to acknowledge anything that Trump did that was good.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.61  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.56    3 months ago
Not everyone shares your sentiments on that.

You never have everyone holding the same position.

It is a fact that mid-term elections historically have favored the party out of power.

It is a fact that economic woes go against the party in power.

This is not a position, this is simply acknowledging facts.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.62  TᵢG  replied to  Sunshine @3.1.58    3 months ago
Sounds like they have thrown in the towel already. 

'They'?   Texan was speaking with me.   Who is the 'they' you attribute to me?

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.63  Snuffy  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.59    3 months ago
I think most are looking at the big picture.   The big picture is that Trump is a parasite that weakens the GoP and that Trump is a growing stain on our nation.   The big picture is that we should rid ourselves of Trump and try to heal the GoP and the nation.   Trump brings this on himself.

That's not the only piece of the big picture.  It is just a portion of the problem and all some people can focus on.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.64  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.55    3 months ago
Oh I agree with that, but your approach implies that prior to the 2020 election he hadnt done much that made him unfit to hold office, when there is a mountain of serious misbehavior on his part from 2015 on.  2011 if you count his racist birtherism. 

My concern with Trump is limited to his presidency and influence on the GoP and nation since his presidency.

Not sure what you need to hear from me, John, given I have never argued hat Trump magically became a con-man when he was sworn in as PotUS.    He has been a slimy con-man his entire life.   I do not think anyone with such ethics should hold public office, but the vast majority of our political 'leaders' are, IMO, unethical narcissists.   Trump definitely is the poster child, but such abysmal character is unfortunately replete in our elected officials.   

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.65  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.63    3 months ago
That's not the only piece of the big picture. 

Okay, I am not going to reduce our discussion to semantics of what constitutes 'big picture'.    This is almost meaningless given what we were discussing.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.66  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.61    3 months ago
This is not a position, this is simply acknowledging facts.

Which some steadfastly refuse to do.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
3.1.67  Greg Jones  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.32    3 months ago

I would venture to say that Obama and the Clinton have some classified materials in their private  residences at this very moment..

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.68  Snuffy  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.65    3 months ago

Fair enough.  I think it's wrong and short-sighted but it's your choice.  I just think the bigger picture revolves around the DOJ.  The optics around their actions for the past couple of years is a big concern for me.  Whistle-blowers are coming forward about how some buried the Hunter Biden laptop issue, how Comey concluded that HRC and her email server did compromise classified documents and she was not prosecuted vs this raid of Trump.  It appears that there is a bias in the DOJ that needs to be shown to be inaccurate or trust will never return.  And if we cannot trust our DOJ then were are we left?  If the concern over classified documents were so concerning, then why was the warrent signed on a Friday and the raid not happen until the following Monday?  If the DOJ has taken documents that are covered under client-attorney privilege, or executive privilege, what are they doing to protect them to insure they are not misused?  The optics of this are horrible for this country.

Do I want Trump back in office?  Hell no.  I've stated that before.  IMO his actions since the 2020 election where he continues to push his "big lie" are all that I need to never want him in public office again.  Doesn't mean I won't worry about other concerns that further erode the the trust and abilities of other government agencies.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.69  Snuffy  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.67    3 months ago

We don't know that so I dislike any speculation around that.  But the other side of that is there are so many levels of classification and the federal government has been known to go "overboard' in classifying documents that it's very possible that a simple phone list of who's in what office in the White House could be considered confidential.  So never say never but I dislike speculation of that in this discussion as it grants the nay-sayers the ability to shout "what-about-ism".

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.70  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.67    3 months ago
I would venture to say that Obama and the Clinton have some classified materials in their private  residences at this very moment..

Is it your opinion that Obama and Clinton have TS/SCI classified documents in their private residences?   On what do you base this?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.71  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.68    3 months ago
I think it's wrong and short-sighted but it's your choice. 

You think I am being short-sighted by not wasting time debating the meaning of the phrase 'big picture'?   Out of all that I wrote you focused on what constitutes 'big picture'.   Wanting to continue to speak of what matters is hardly short-sighted.

I just think the bigger picture revolves around the DOJ.  The optics around their actions for the past couple of years is a big concern for me. 

The optics are not nearly as relevant as the truth.   I want to know the truth.

If the concern over classified documents were so concerning, then why was the warrent signed on a Friday and the raid not happen until the following Monday? 

Why is this question repeated in the R circles?    It presumes that there would be no tactical or logistical reason for the FBI to conduct their operation on Monday instead of the instant the warrant was signed on Friday.   Such presumption is silly.   Sure, if the warrant was signed in July and they waited until August I can see the obvious question.   But Friday to Monday?    Grasping at straws.

If the DOJ has taken documents that are covered under client-attorney privilege, or executive privilege, what are they doing to protect them to insure they are not misused?  The optics of this are horrible for this country.

Should we not wait until we know this actually happened?   

Do I want Trump back in office?  Hell no.  I've stated that before.  IMO his actions since the 2020 election where he continues to push his "big lie" are all that I need to never want him in public office again.  Doesn't mean I won't worry about other concerns that further erode the the trust and abilities of other government agencies.

Of course we want the government to be clean.    But idle speculation accomplishes nothing of value.   

As I have suggested repeatedly, just follow the facts and when the facts run out ... wait.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
3.1.72  Greg Jones  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.70    3 months ago
"Is it your opinion that Obama and Clinton have TS/SCI classified documents in their private residences?   On what do you base this?"

Opinions need not be explained to the uninformed..

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.1.73  JBB  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.72    3 months ago

Unfounded baseless accusations hardly qualify as opinions!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.74  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.72    3 months ago

Instead of answering my question you decline and label me "uninformed"?

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
3.1.75  afrayedknot  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.72    3 months ago

“Opinions need not be explained to the uninformed..”

Making them all just uninformed opinions.

Plenty of those hereabouts unless, of course, your opinion should in any way somehow stand above the rest. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
3.1.76  Greg Jones  replied to  JBB @3.1.73    3 months ago

"Unfounded baseless accusations hardly qualify as opinions!"

You make countless unfounded baseless accusations everyday.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
3.1.77  Greg Jones  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.74    3 months ago
"Instead of answering my question you decline and label me "uninformed"?

Of course I do. Go bother someone else

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
3.1.78  afrayedknot  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.76    3 months ago

“You make countless unfounded baseless accusations everyday.”

Thank gawd you are here everyday in your specious attempts to refute them…

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
3.1.79  Greg Jones  replied to  afrayedknot @3.1.75    3 months ago

I stand by my opinions....yours are irrelevant and of little value

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
3.1.80  Greg Jones  replied to  afrayedknot @3.1.78    3 months ago
"Thank gawd you are here everyday in your specious attempts to refute them…"

I usually don't waste my time since they have no value to me

Have a nice day.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
3.1.81  afrayedknot  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.79    3 months ago

“I stand by my opinions....”

As do I.

Relevancy is for the reader to decide. It is my opinion you have no desire to engage in a reasonable discussion as reason has somehow left your building. 

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
3.1.82  Sunshine  replied to  afrayedknot @3.1.81    3 months ago
It is my opinion you have no desire to engage in a reasonable discussion

And where in this thread have you shown this desire?

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
3.1.83  afrayedknot  replied to  Sunshine @3.1.82    3 months ago

Who are you?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.84  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.77    3 months ago

In reply to my comment @3.1.32 (not addressed to you) you replied @3.1.67 yielding this exchange:

Greg @3.1.67I would venture to say that Obama and the Clinton have some classified materials in their private  residences at this very moment.

TiG@3.1.70Is it your opinion that Obama and Clinton have TS/SCI classified documents in their private residences?   On what do you base this?

Greg @3.1.72Opinions need not be explained to the uninformed..

TiG @3.1.74Instead of answering my question you decline and label me "uninformed"?

Greg @3.1.77Of course I do. Go bother someone else

Bother someone else?   In response to my obvious question on what you posted, you immediately went personal and snarky and then have the temerity to imply that I am the one who is doing the trolling.   

If you cannot stand to have your opinions challenged by the person you addressed, then you should spend your time on an echo chamber.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.85  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @3.1.73    3 months ago
Unfounded baseless accusations hardly qualify as opinions!

And neither do dumbass memes.

 
 
 
Transyferous Rex
Freshman Quiet
3.1.86  Transyferous Rex  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.64    3 months ago
 I do not think anyone with such ethics should hold public office, but the vast majority of our political 'leaders' are, IMO, unethical narcissists. Trump definitely is the poster child, but such abysmal character is unfortunately replete in our elected officials.   

That last bit is the rub. I'm not going to defend Trump's antics. I grew tired of them in short time. But, his problem was his sophomoric approach to what goes on daily in DC. Apart from that, he could stand in line with the rest, including the current dog-faced pony soldier in chief. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.87  TᵢG  replied to  Transyferous Rex @3.1.86    3 months ago

He certainly is not alone in lying and cheating, but Trump has defined a new categorical low.

No PotUS (or even candidate) in US history has come close to the wrongful acts of Trump during his Big Lie campaign.   That alone (even if we disregard all that took place during his presidency and all that we know of Trump prior to office) distinguishes him in a bad way.    And if it turns out that he was holding classified TS/SCI documents and was not cooperating in their return, then just add that to his ugly legacy.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Masters Guide
3.1.88  Snuffy  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.71    3 months ago
You think I am being short-sighted by not wasting time debating the meaning of the phrase 'big picture'?   Out of all that I wrote you focused on what constitutes 'big picture'.   Wanting to continue to speak of what matters is hardly short-sighted.

I think  you are being short sighted when you want to focus on Trump and ignore the DOJ.  Trump is a problem and we would all be better off if he would just step out of the limelight and went away, but IMO the bigger picture is the DOJ and how they have acted with seemingly bias for the past few years.  

The optics are not nearly as relevant as the truth.   I want to know the truth.

I want to know the truth as well, but until we do get the truth all we have are the optics. And if history is any example we won't get the truth, we will only get what some news media darling puts forth as their truth.

Why is this question repeated in the R circles?    It presumes that there would be no tactical or logistical reason for the FBI to conduct their operation on Monday instead of the instant the warrant was signed on Friday.   Such presumption is silly.   Sure, if the warrant was signed in July and they waited until August I can see the obvious question.   But Friday to Monday?    Grasping at straws.

Maybe, maybe not.  It was hyped as very critical to national security and pundits "leaked" info about nuclear weapons/programs.  So IMO the question about the delay over the weekend (as well as why no immediate arrest of Trump) are valid questions that deserve an answer.

Should we not wait until we know this actually happened?   

The federal government has a bad habit of "classifying" actions they take that may make them look bad.  If history is any example we will never get the background and truth of this.

Of course we want the government to be clean.    But idle speculation accomplishes nothing of value.    As I have suggested repeatedly, just follow the facts and when the facts run out ... wait.

Ok, that's just funny.  Here you are just like the rest of us, indulging in speculation just like everybody else on this board.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.89  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.88    3 months ago
I think  you are being short sighted when you want to focus on Trump and ignore the DOJ.

All you need do is carefully read what I wrote and it would be clear that you are changing my meaning.

Note my beginning post in our exchange:  TiG@3.1.8:

There are indeed critical unanswered questions:
  • Were the recovered TS/SCI documents declassified (there would be a record of that formal process)?
  • Was Trump cooperating with the DoJ/FBI to return all classified material?

Until these questions —at a minimum— are answered, we do not know if it is Trump or the DoJ/FBI that has done wrong (or both).    There is speculation that Trump committed a crime and there is speculation that Trump has done nothing wrong.   In both case, we lack critical information to move from speculation to fact.

Another important question for the purpose of national security is: 

How was Trump allowed to even hold classified documents (if so) at his residence when he left office?

Now how is it that you cannot see that I argued that both Trump and the DoJ/FBI could be engaged in wrong-doing and that we need some critical questions answered before we can proceed with our analysis?

Here you are just like the rest of us, indulging in speculation just like everybody else on this board.  

I wrote 'idle speculation'.   Idle speculation is speculation that pursues an unlikely end.   It is next to conspiracy theory.

I have enumerated reasonable possibilities (both ways) as part of analysis and have explicitly noted that we lack the facts to say that any of them are true.   That is not idle speculation, it is analysis.

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
4  Sunshine    3 months ago

Democrats like to keep their adversaries on the defense.  They can't win over the public by promoting their policies so a boogeyman is always needed.  It may be climate change fear from nut jobs like AOC or endless investigations into Trump that have not resulted in any convictions. And they use taxpayers funds to do it.  Hard to imagine that any American would want this for themselves and families.

Apparently they do considering they voted in the most failed politician.

Obama tried to warn them...

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
4.1  JBB  replied to  Sunshine @4    3 months ago

Merrick Garland is a lifelong rock ribbed conservative Republican!

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
4.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JBB @4.1    3 months ago

Not a bit true.

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
4.1.2  Sunshine  replied to  JBB @4.1    3 months ago

Thanks for the chuckle.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5  Tacos!    3 months ago

This author needs to focus a little. He’s all over the place. I think that’s part of the problem with his dissatisfaction. Here is his main problem:

All Americans are entitled to the even-handed application of the law, to due process, and to the presumption of innocence." None of this applies to the way the Department of Justice, the FBI and most of the media have treated Donald Trump.

Our criminal legal system presumes a person’s innocence. DOJ, the FBI, and the media are not our legal system. The first two are merely components of that system. Cogs in the machinery. The media is its own private industry. That should be obvious. They are not even part of the legal system.

Less obvious, I suppose, is that it’s not the role of DOJ and the FBI to confirm the innocence of anyone. They are in the business of sniffing out crime. They obtain warrants based on “probable cause,” which is a relatively low standard of proof. They look for stuff that could possibly be evidence of crime and then they act on that search to push an investigation and arrest. The matter is adjudicated in court, not in the minds or offices of FBI agents.

This is why we always say “don’t talk to the police.” They are not your friends. It is not their job to be your friend. It is their job to arrest people.

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Participates
5.1  Sunshine  replied to  Tacos! @5    3 months ago
The matter is adjudicated in court, not in the minds or offices of FBI agents.

That isn't what Comey said.  He made the FBI's judgement as to whether Hillary Clinton should be prosecuted.  The Attorney General makes the decision to prosecute. The FBI is an investigative agency and does not have the authority to make prosecutorial decisions.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.1.1  Tacos!  replied to  Sunshine @5.1    3 months ago

But they do have discretion within their limited sphere. And yeah, Comey is a train wreck.

 
 
 
Transyferous Rex
Freshman Quiet
5.2  Transyferous Rex  replied to  Tacos! @5    3 months ago
This is why we always say “don’t talk to the police.” They are not your friends. It is not their job to be your friend. It is their job to arrest people.

At least not at the crime scene. I'd recommend befriending a few troopers and local cops though. 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Participates
5.3  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Tacos! @5    3 months ago
Our criminal legal system presumes a person’s innocence.

What Trump sycophants are bitching and moaning about is that Trump is often seen as presumed "guilty" by the court of public opinion, the "main stream" Americans, the "bi-coastal liberal progressive secular elitist's and Godless Hollywood homosexuals" who see Trump for the slimy lying scum bag sexual predator he is. That's why the right wing conservatives he appealed to created their own universe to live in with their own right wing conservative media, right wing conservative news sources and their "alternative facts".

 
 

Who is online

Vic Eldred
Sean Treacy
Ronin2
Nerm_L
JBB


16 visitors