monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

Okay, you were trying to make a point, a partisan point but not your usual raging partisanship.

Gosh you almost managed a response without hyperbolic insult.

JTT wrote:

But if you try to deny that Trump isn't a liar, that makes you close to a Trump equal at lying. It would be delusion on a grand scale.

Your wording is flawed. Normally I wouldn't bring this up but you like to position yourself as a master of language and so it only seems fair.

Trump is a liar, I'm a liar and believe it or not, you are a liar. Everyone on earth lies. The latest edition of Nat Geo has a cover story "Why We Lie" Nowhere in the article does it cite anyone who has always told "the truth."

We all do it so what is your point?

0 Replies

The president's lawyer just accused Comey of illegally leaking those memos. Didn't the prez himself talk about those closed one on one meetings when he referenced Comey assuring him he wasn't under investigation?

1 Reply

@layman,

Of course.

What did Comey do before he left? Send a survey around to all FBI staff asking them if they had full confidence in him?

It's not a factual matter upon which a lie can be constructed.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Considering the question was asked at a hearing and those in the FBI said it wasn't true that he was not respected, I think it is clear the president lied again.

1 Reply

@layman,

Here's the kind of report I've seen about Trump's "lies," as alleged by Comey:

Quote:

Comey: White House Lied ‘Plain and Simple’

Fired FBI Director James Comey testified Thursday that he was ... "concerned" when President Donald Trump told the public he was firing him for undermining the morale of the agency he had led since 2013.

"Those were lies, plain and simple," Comey said.

The Trump administration, he said, "chose to defame me...

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/comey-testifying-senators-trump-russia-n769701

0 Replies

@revelette1,

And there is a reasonable argument to be made that he did. It's not overwhelming but neither is it fanciful.

Comey has chosen to play hardball with the president of the United States. He's a big boy (figuratively and literally) and will he now pout about the White House's response? I hope not.

Too many of the people in this forum have no experience with high stakes power plays and think that their naive take on the world instructs the rules everyone must and will play.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

It's not a factual matter upon which a lie can be constructed

Yeah, thanks for the elaboration. That was my point, although perhaps I didn't make it clear.

But, that said, as I also noted, there is solid evidence to support Trump's claim, too.

1 Reply

@revelette1,

"Those in the FBI?" Congress called the thousands of FBI employees to testify? I missed that.

BTW "Those in the FBI" also testified that no one has obstructed their investigation.

1 Reply

@layman,

And so it comes down, once again, to matters of interpretation and opinion.

Criminal cases can be won on circumstantial evidence, but it requires a preponderance of same and the word doesn't mean "a bunch."

The President of the United States is not going to be convicted of a crime or impeached (Unless the Dems gain a majority and even then I doubt it) based on circumstantial evidence.

1 Reply

Early word is that Jim Commie self-destructed in front of the committee and that the DT-collusion bullshit narrative just went down in flames.

2 Replies

www.infowars.com

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Criminal cases can be won on circumstantial evidence, but it requires a preponderance of same and the word doesn't mean "a bunch."

For the record, Finn, that's not an accurate statement. The "preponderance" standard only applies to civil matters, not criminal cases where the standard of proof required is much stricter (beyond a reasonable doubt).

1 Reply

@layman,

Well thanks for that correction. I'm not a lawyer and you are correct.

In my career, I have dealt with thousands of civil suits and maybe a handful of criminal ones and so that may explain my error, but an error it was.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Well thanks for that correction. I'm not a lawyer and you are correct.

In my career, I have dealt with thousands of civil suits and maybe a handful of criminal ones and so that may explain my error, but an error it was.

Well, that's good. My experience is the opposite. I never had a civil suit filed against me. No one would bother, they aint gunna get a single penny outta me.

I have only been in court to answer to criminal charges (many times). Thanks to the "reasonable doubt" standard, I can almost always beat the rap.

Fortunately for me, not all bottom-feeders insist on cash payments. Many will take an indefinite series of future freebies from a ho as full "payment."

Failing that, they will almost always accept the keys to a new Lincoln that recently disappeared from a Wal-mart parking lot in another state as payment.

1 Reply

@layman,

I'm much more law abiding. Never had a serious brush with the Law. Probably due to my German genes. Or the luck of my Irish ones. Smile

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

You got that from infowars? Their rep for telling the truth is about rhe same as trump. That is "doesn't".

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

Gunga reading from the script again. Comey asserted that Trump is a liar and he stated that he felt that Trump wanted him to "lay off" Flynn.
I was listening to Trumps attorney who asserted just the opposite. To me, The mere mention of an outcome as a"desired outcome" BY YOUR LEADER IS CONSIDERED A DIRECTIVE. (This whitehouse is kinda like the Sopranos where Uncle Junior would say "I wish this thing with tony would jut go away". That was orders for HIT.

This is only Fact Finding.Lots more time in the investigation. The real thing is that NO-ONE doubts that Russia was attempting to interfere with the election. Did they seek to have Trump elected? Did it affect any votes?? thats another story and another path of evidence.

As far as Trump being a liar, of that theres no doubt.We all know that he lies on camera so Comey had better have kept good notes . The committee has already asked for em. I wonder if everything is being Bates Stamped??

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

The mere mention of an outcome as a"desired outcome" BY YOUR LEADER IS CONSIDERED A DIRECTIVE.

This is simply your opinion unless you can cite legal precedent. Not withstanding, of course, the emphasis of your caps

Quote:

As far as Trump being a liar, of that theres no doubt.We all know that he lies on camera so Comey had better have kept good notes . The committee has already asked for em. I wonder if everything is being Bates Stamped??

Who in the White House has never lied? Your selective outrage reveals your partisanship.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Of course Trump lies like a dog. For God's sake, he's a salesman, not a politician (they lie even more).

A big-ass liar is more better than an even bigger-ass liar, in my book.

1 Reply

@layman,

Everyone lies and everyone has an aversion to lying. It's a human paradox.

Trump has, stupidly, lied about things that are of no real consequence and he has no one to blame but himself that a lot of people doubt his veracity.

Having said this, the anti-Trump voices in this forum were, with rare exception (Lash perhaps being the only one) who were all about accepting and forgiving Obama's obvious lies.

3 Replies

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know