dagblog - Comments for "President Not A Criminal Target"

The other side of that

moat — Fri, 06 Apr 2018 15:35:41 +0000

In reply to Most of the information about

The other side of that observation is that none of what you think matters either.
You confirm ocean-kat's statement regarding speculation.

Most of the information about

Peter — Fri, 06 Apr 2018 13:34:48 +0000

In reply to You're right that if there

Most of the information about Muller's witch-hunt has come through the media from unidentified sources, which are leaks. These are friendly leaks sbout Muller while those coming from the media about Trump are attacks that usually and often seem to be complete fabrications or gossip. You, like many snowflakes, have an overstimulated imagination but without evidence of a crime none of what you think matters.

Winter is coming

rmrd0000 — Fri, 06 Apr 2018 12:54:31 +0000

In reply to GQ had the Peter type

Winter is coming

GQ had the Peter type

artappraiser — Fri, 06 Apr 2018 01:40:04 +0000

In reply to I see your lips moving, but I

GQ had the Peter type rhetoricals pegged back in early 2017 and basically concluded The only way to fight back against an insult that doesn’t mean anything is to reclaim it, to diminish its power by making that identity a point of pride. This is the life cycle of all identity insults, and “snowflake” is already reaching the end of that cycle.I conclude from that: he might be nostalgic for the good old days, retro revival, that's why he hangs around here, keeps on trying, hoping to trigger one of the members.

You're right that if there

ocean-kat — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 22:15:50 +0000

In reply to You haven't produced a single

You're right that if there was no crime to cover up it was incredibly stupid to lie to the FBI. But they did plead guilty to lying to the FBI. I can see only two reasons for that. Either the case against them for lying was so strong they had no chance in court or they were guilty of other crimes and the evidence was so strong they would lose in court. So they decided to plead guilty to the lesser crime of lying to the FBI. Again it is stupid to lie if there was no crime to cover up and stupid to plead guilty to lying if they didn't commit some greater crime they want to plead out of. It's only speculative but highly likely there are some greater crimes that implicate higher level people that Flynn and others have traded information on to get to only a guilty plea for lying to the FBI.

There is a federal mandate that prosecutors not leak to the press but that's so rarely the case we've come to expect leaks. The Trump WH leaks like a sieve, especially Kelly Ann Conway and Bannon. Ken Starr's investigation leaked constantly. There have been no leaks from Mueller's investigation. Because Mueller is a man of integrity and does not leak you assume that the guilty pleas for lying are all he's got. But that's just speculation. Others assume that the guilty pleas are the tip of the iceberg and there was collusion or else why would they lie or plead guilty to lying. That's just speculation too. Sme speculation seems more reasonable than others but the bottom line is, Mueller doesn't leak!

It doesn't look like you are

moat — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 21:25:14 +0000

In reply to You haven't produced a single

It doesn't look like you are ever going to get how evidence is produced. Oh well, I gave it my best shot.

You say "Trump/Putin" but the scope of the investigation is about Russia as a State and its connections and interchanges with the Trump campaign. The ventriloquism you employ there is the same as the one you use when you are the one who calls the investigation a witch hunt and then ask where the witch is. Somehow, you need to find a place where you can hear yourself talk.

A Straw Man argument presumes that other people's positions are something other than what they claim them to be but nonetheless proceeds as if they did claim them. That is all you have ever done on this matter. How do expect to make persuasive arguments when it is you yourself who chops yourself off at the knees with logical fallacies?

You haven't produced a single

Peter — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 20:47:08 +0000

In reply to Ah yes, that is exactly the

You haven't produced a single charge made by Muller's witch-hunters that claims to be about Trump/Putin or anyone else colluding abvout the election. Two were old investigations from long before the election about moneylaundering and some other foreign country. The three making false statements to the FBI were about false statements or bad memories but there was no crime related to collusion identified because it is legal to talk to Russians by phone or in person. If these were lyers and not just dumb actors they were stupid because their was no crime to cover up.

Ah yes, that is exactly the

moat — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 20:19:49 +0000

In reply to You seem to be moving to

Ah yes, that is exactly the sort of ventriloquism I was referring to. What an excellent parody you provide.

Start by ignoring that evidence in Mueller's investigation is "produced" only as needed for the purposes of each indictment and then argue that the deliberate pace of the procedure is proof that there is no evidence.

Then, because the evidence that has been revealed shows more and more lies were told by more and more people, stop using the lack of evidence argument and switch to the idea that all the events that lead to the investigation are completely fictional.

No, even better than fictional. More like Alice Through the Looking Glass, where the Other room has many of the same objects found in Alice's room but their appearance has been reversed.

“snowflake party continuum”

rmrd0000 — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 18:11:50 +0000

In reply to You seem to be moving to

“snowflake party continuum”

Can you define this entity?

I see your lips moving, but I

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 17:59:53 +0000

In reply to You seem to be moving to

I see your lips moving, but I can't understand a thing you're saying...