Justifying 3 years of Lies

@coldjoint,

So, let's just clarify some points.

You asked where the "Russian hoax" went & was told it's not gone but delayed. Then you must recognize the seriousness of the allegations against Trump, acknowledge he committed crimes and will be investigated, indicted then submitted to a criminal trial, just as all civilians endure.

Then, after the evidence that proves guilt, Trump will be sentenced to prison, albeit 2025.

So I have to ask, why is it that you still continue this charade of supporting a guilty person?

2 Replies

@neptuneblue,

Quote:

So I have to ask, why is it that you still continue this charade of supporting a guilty person?

Because he has not been found guilty. And it is not a charade, I am honoring our justice system and that says innocent until proven guilty. Why do you think our laws do not apply to Trump?

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

He hasn't been found innocent, he's a sitting President that cannot be indicted. Mincing words doesn't change the fact if he were NOT President, he'd be in jail right at this very moment.

2 Replies

@neptuneblue,

Quote:

Mincing words doesn't change the fact if he were NOT President, he'd be in jail right at this very moment.

You are in trouble now, for what? Laughing

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

At no time was that an cohesive thought. Would you like to try again?

1 Reply

@neptuneblue,

Quote:

At no time was that an cohesive thought.

I asked what Trump would be in jail for.

0 Replies

@neptuneblue,

neptuneblue wrote:

Since there was no investigation into "collusion" with Russia, there's no charge against Trump for it. However, once he leaves Office, you bet he'll be investigated, charged, found GUILTY and sent to prison.

Not a chance. First, there was no collusion.

Second, even if there had actually been collusion, collusion is not a crime.

But we do need to outlaw the Democratic Party so we can put an end to their witch hunts against people who disagree with progressive ideology.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Jut because the Senate had acquitted him was an outcome we all knew was coming. It does NOT prove that the articles were a hoax, It merely states that the GOP has sold its soul to the dark side.

The reason why the articles were a hoax is, the articles impeached him for doing something that is entirely legitimate.

farmerman wrote:

Remember it was the SENATE GOPS that voted NOT to allow specific evience to be presented.

They let the House present its evidence.

What the Senate disallowed was a fishing expedition to drag out the process once it was clear that their was no crime in anything that Mr. Trump was accused of doing.

farmerman wrote:

The TRIAL was a hoax, not the articles of impeachment.

Acting like the President did something wrong, when in fact he did noting wrong, was very much a hoax.

4 Replies

@Sturgis,

Sturgis wrote:

coldjoint wrote:
Three years of lies from the media and the Democrats and bureaucrats. That is fact, not a daydream.

Can you list and show any of the lies? Legitimate links only.

I remember the media lied about the size of the crowd during Mr. Trump's inauguration.

Whoever was accusing Trump Administration officials of nefarious contacts with Russian agents was also lying. I wasn't paying much attention, so I forget who it was that was making those accusations. I remember though that progressives kept babbling all sorts of nonsense about supposed meetings with Russian agents, so someone was feeding them the lies.

Left: Mainstream News
Right: Reality

http://wtop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/012017_trump_compare.jpg

http://s4.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?d=20170125&i=1170068903&r=LYNXMPED0N06R&t=2

Note the white square forward of the Smithsonian Castle (red building in the lower right). The mainstream news has the square about 20% full. The real picture has the square about half full.

Forward of that is the white square next to Hirshhorn Museum (round building). The mainstream news has the square mostly full. The real picture has the square filled up and overflowing into the brown areas surrounding the square.

Forward of that is a white square that is slightly less than half full in the mainstream news. The real picture has it about two thirds full.

By the way, if anyone wants to know the difference between a picture taken by a real camera verses one taken by a cheap smart phone, compare those pictures at full resolution.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

I remember the media lied about the size of the crowd during Mr. Trump's inauguration.

You can go to "Trump inaugural celebration" and clicl "Images" and you can see how half the bleachers were empty, and others, only where cameras focused , were full.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Acting like the President did something wrong, when in fact he did noting wrong, was very much a hoax

The vote was not a fair guilty/not guilty vote. Mitch Mconnell said beforehnad that he was going to make certain that Trump would not be found guilty of the charges. Thats certainly not a way we do analyses objectively.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

It is fair to ensure that someone is found not guilty when it is clear that they are being railroaded on bogus charges.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

You can go to "Trump inaugural celebration" and click "Images" and you can see how half the bleachers were empty, and others, only where cameras focused, were full.

I'm unsure which images you are referring to, but if they are provided by the mainstream media they are probably untrue.

0 Replies

@neptuneblue,

neptuneblue wrote:

He hasn't been found innocent, he's a sitting President that cannot be indicted.

Despite the efforts of progressives, this remains a civilized country. People are innocent until proven guilty.

neptuneblue wrote:

Mincing words doesn't change the fact if he were NOT President, he'd be in jail right at this very moment.

If he were not president, progressives would not be trying to frame him for imaginary crimes.

0 Replies

@neptuneblue,

neptuneblue wrote:

So, let's just clarify some points.
You asked where the "Russian hoax" went & was told it's not gone but delayed.

The hoax is over. There was never anything to it.

neptuneblue wrote:

Then you must recognize the seriousness of the allegations against Trump, acknowledge he committed crimes

Being framed for crimes by the Democrats does not mean that he committed actual crimes.

neptuneblue wrote:

and will be investigated, indicted then submitted to a criminal trial, just as all civilians endure.
Then, after the evidence that proves guilt, Trump will be sentenced to prison, albeit 2025.

Setting aside the fact that it is clear that these charges are just the result of the Democrats framing people, Bill Clinton committed obstruction for real, and he was only given a $25,000 fine.

Even if you could establish that Mr. Trump actually committed obstruction (and note that you can not establish this), the worst that Mr. Trump would face is a similar $25,000 fine.

neptuneblue wrote:

So I have to ask, why is it that you still continue this charade of supporting a guilty person?

There is no reason to think that Mr. Trump is guilty of obstruction.

There is no reason to think that obstruction would be all that big of a deal even if he had actually been guilty. He would just need to write a check for $25,000.

I highly doubt that Coldjoint's support is a charade.

My support for Mr. Trump is not a charade either.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

evidence against Trump has been compiled

I really really doubt it.

farmerman wrote:

and, as you know, the entire investigation did not limit itself to one area that defined interference by a foreign power to influence and election.

If so then Mr. Mueller is guilty of abuse of power.

farmerman wrote:

Like on Bill Clinton, Starr did not limit his investigations,

That is incorrect. Mr. Starr investigated only within the areas that Attorney General Janet Reno authorized him to investigate.

farmerman wrote:

BUT, like Clinton who also was impeached and found Not Guilty, Trump was given a political get out of jail card by his enabler and buddies.

In Mr. Trump's case it was more that the first impeachment charge was not even a crime. Governments withhold aid to pressure other governments all the time. The second charge (obstruction of Congress) was preposterous since "disagreeing about the extent of Congress' power and letting the courts decide" is hardly obstruction.

But if Mr. Trump had been accused of actual wrongdoing, I'm sure the Republicans would have extended him the same courtesies that the Democrats extended to Bill Clinton.

farmerman wrote:

Mueller, as Neptuneblue has presented nicely, did NOT find Trump innocent.

People are innocent until proven guilty.

farmerman wrote:

I think after he loses in Nov. he will be charged for several things, civil and criminal.
Emoluments will be among the top.

What are civil charges? Do you mean someone will sue him?

At any rate, the sooner we outlaw the Democratic Party, the sooner we can put an end to these witch hunts against people who disagree with progressive ideology.

0 Replies

1. Here's what we know about the 17 known investigations into Trump, his campaign, and Russia.

Published December 17, 2018

https://able2know.org/topic/489085-1

2. All of Robert Mueller’s indictments and plea deals in the Russia investigation so far.

Published September 14, 2018

https://able2know.org/topic/477697-1

0 Replies

State Department Releases Ukraine Documents to American Oversight

Published November 22, 2019

https://able2know.org/topic/540784-1

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

Acting like the President did something wrong, when in fact he did noting wrong, was very much a hoax

The vote was not a fair guilty/not guilty vote. Mitch Mconnell said beforehand that he was going to make certain that Trump would not be found guilty of the charges. Thats certainly not a way we do analyses objectively.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

No what the Senate would not allow is direct testimony and several pieces of non-exculpatory data

1 Reply

Justifying 3 years of Lies

Quick Links

My Account

able2know