Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 31 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said: Sorry...aren't we missing the part where Russia...helps Trump...and he is their toady? I think instead the vodka is mixed with lemonade powder. It's called "Trump drizzle juice" STILL waiting on that russian "collusion". What i've seen from THIS set of indictments is a guy who evaded taxes 5+ years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 10 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said: Election fraud of this type is a pretty small crime. She's trying to conflate this into more than it is. It's offensive, and it shows the "character" of the man, but this is not an impeachable offense. Impeachable offense are what the members of the House at the time decide are impeachable offenses. Defenders of Clinton say an affair where we wasn't exactly truthful wasn't impeachable. I disagree; he should have been convicted for perjury. Likewise, if it is shown the current president broke the law to swing the election, or even worse worked with a foreign enemy to do so, he should also be impeached and convicted. If anyone in the country should be held up to the highest possible ethical and legal standards, it should be our presidents. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 5 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: We will see. For those of you trying to write this off as nothing against the president think again. If Cohen and/or Manafort have material they can trade to provide evidence about whatever went on with the Russians, odds are they'll use it. As I keep saying, let the investigation run its course. Again, those thinking there's more of a deal to come are dreaming or ignorant of how cases like this work. If Cohen had "material they can trade" he would have done so. He had every opportunity to, said he would, and yet he didn't because there's nothing to turn over. How do we know? By reading the plea deal. This is the deal Cohen made - pleading out to a campaign finance violation (which isn't criminal) and doing so with inflammatory language. You're way off base if you think he has more to offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 Breaking the law isn't criminal???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 34 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Again, those thinking there's more of a deal to come are dreaming or ignorant of how cases like this work. If Cohen had "material they can trade" he would have done so. He had every opportunity to, said he would, and yet he didn't because there's nothing to turn over. How do we know? By reading the plea deal. This is the deal Cohen made - pleading out to a campaign finance violation (which isn't criminal) and doing so with inflammatory language. You're way off base if you think he has more to offer. You're way off base thinking he doesn't. You want to believe you're right because it fits your pre-conceived narrative. Confirmation bias. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 28 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said: I'm sorry...did I vividly hallucinate Trump himself saying that Don Jr. met with Russian intelligence in Trump tower, and that he knew about it but the information "wasn't good" https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/msn/giuliani-trump-tower-meeting-was-originally-for-the-purpose-of-getting-information-about-clinton/ar-BBM7LgG If you want to say that it didn't have an effect, and that Trump would have won anyway...fine. But come on, how much more evidence do you need that Trump is a lying con? He lied repeatedly about what the Russia meeting was about, his campaign manager has been convicted of bank and election fraud and his personal lawyer paid off prostitutes. So, Manafort was convicted of election fraud? Stuff like this is what gets me about all you Johnny-come-latelies here at PPP. Not only are you ignorant of the basics but you make shitup. Every so often we get inundated down here with a whole bunch of Gleeful Gator clones because they think the left is gaining some type of upper hand. It won't be long and you guys will crawl back into your holes to gather your strength to come back here to spread more lies and dishonest crap. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 53 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said: Election fraud of this type is a pretty small crime. She's trying to conflate this into more than it is. It's offensive, and it shows the "character" of the man, but this is not an impeachable offense. Democrats should use this for what it is, not what it's not. It's embarrassing when they do this. "Impeachable offense" is whatever the Democrats say it is when they get control of the House. Don't pretend the law has anything to do with this anymore. We've been past the rule of law for years. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 doesn't really mean anything. same with cohens lawyer and his over the top statements and starting a go fund me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 17 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: You're way off base thinking he doesn't. You want to believe you're right because it fits your pre-conceived narrative. Confirmation bias. There's more to back up my position than yours. They held the plea under seal for four months. It didn't just happen yesterday. For four months he's been talking with them. This is the best he could offer them. If he had more, he would have given more. See, I'm pointing to evidence: the filing itself which spells it out, and the fact that it was kept sealed for four months while media narratives about Cohen flipping ran wild. You're pointing to nothing to prop up your opinion. Nothing. Cohen is going to do 3-5 years and blew any chance of getting a pardon from Trump with that filing yesterday. If he had a get out of jail free card, like Gates did on Manafort, Cohen would have used it. There's no logical explanation why he wouldn't. Yet, he's going to jail for 3-5 years now... which was a reduced sentence. Meaning he cut a deal already. Meaning, that section on campaign finance violation is the deal he cut. Who's suffering from confirmation bias? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 Guilty of Campaign Finance Violations: Obama: https://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/obama-2008-campaign-fined-375000-085784 HRC: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/25/hillary-clintons-campaign-accused-of-election-law-/ Sanders: https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-campaign-illegal-contribution-828044 Biden: https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/us/politics/18biden.html?mtrref=www.google.com Bill Clinton: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_campaign_finance_controversy (this is a PR victory for anti-Trumpers... not a serious legal matter, no matter what the headlines say) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: "It's immoral to let a sucker keep his money." Canada Bill Jones / The Clinton Machine That seems to be the guiding principle of the support network behind Stzok, McCabe, now Cohen with these go fund me pages. Men of principles. All of them. Edited August 22, 2018 by Deranged Rhino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 28 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: There's more to back up my position than yours. They held the plea under seal for four months. It didn't just happen yesterday. For four months he's been talking with them. This is the best he could offer them. If he had more, he would have given more. See, I'm pointing to evidence: the filing itself which spells it out, and the fact that it was kept sealed for four months while media narratives about Cohen flipping ran wild. You're pointing to nothing to prop up your opinion. Nothing. Cohen is going to do 3-5 years and blew any chance of getting a pardon from Trump with that filing yesterday. If he had a get out of jail free card, like Gates did on Manafort, Cohen would have used it. There's no logical explanation why he wouldn't. Yet, he's going to jail for 3-5 years now... which was a reduced sentence. Meaning he cut a deal already. Meaning, that section on campaign finance violation is the deal he cut. Who's suffering from confirmation bias? Here's the deal. I work in the medical field. If someone has a kidney disorder I consult a nephrologist, and not a truck driver. I spent all last night watching a variety of prosecutors voicing their educated opinions on the Cohen stuff. I read a number of different sites with generally differing perspectives. And I listened to Cohen's actual lawyer. The vast vast majority disagree with you and indicated that the story on Cohen's cooperation is far from closed. So so tell me: are you a prosecutor who has actual experience in such matters? Or are you a truck driver? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: "It's immoral to let a sucker keep his money." Canada Bill Jones / The Clinton Machine That seems to be the guiding principle of the support network behind Stzok, McCabe, now Cohen with these go fund me pages. Men of principles. All of them. What these politicians have done to gofundme... SMH At this point, I'd be willing to buy Lanny Davis is being paid by the Clintons in this matter. The stench of why he was hired, and the political statement forced in this plea, is worse than a garbage scow on the way to China. Edited August 22, 2018 by Buffalo_Gal 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Here's the deal. I work in the medical field. If someone has a kidney disorder I consult a nephrologist, and not a truck driver. I spent all last night watching a variety of prosecutors voicing their educated opinions on the Cohen stuff. I read a number of different sites with generally differing perspectives. And I listened to Cohen's actual lawyer. The vast vast majority disagree with you and indicated that the story on Cohen's cooperation is far from closed. ... All that, and you didn't bother to read the primary source material, the plea, for yourself? Instead you listened to other people tell you what to think, what it means, and capped it off by listening to Clinton's lawyer (who's represented Cohen for 2 weeks)... and you think that's thinking for yourself? 3 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: So so tell me: are you a prosecutor who has actual experience in such matters? Or are you a truck driver? I worked in the legal field for a number of years. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: ... All that, and you didn't bother to read the primary source material, the plea, for yourself? Instead you listened to other people tell you what to think, what it means, and capped it off by listening to Clinton's lawyer (who's represented Cohen for 2 weeks)... and you think that's thinking for yourself? I worked in the legal field for a number of years. Yes, I listen to people with expertise in the field. Like most people do. And then I form my opinion. Your source stuff is a broken record now. I have patients who see me because of my expertise. Maybe I should send them to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 Just now, oldmanfan said: Yes, I listen to people with expertise in the field. Like most people do. And then I form my opinion. Without doing any due diligence on your own, thus you have no way of knowing whether the "experts" are shining you on or not. All that does is assure that you're misinformed. 2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Your source stuff is a broken record now. It's important. Only those suffering from severe confirmation bias would deny that examining evidence for yourself first hand is informative - more informative than relying on second hand "expert" opinions. 4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: I have patients who see me because of my expertise. Maybe I should send them to you. When the patients come to you and list their symptoms, do you do an examination of them personally? Or do you go to another doctor and ask them for their opinion on your patient's symptoms? Or do you go watch a bunch of YouTube interviews with other doctors talking about their experiences? You of course examine the patient yourself first. Right? Because you're not a moron. That's all I'm asking you to do. It's amazing that you're resisting so hard being told to hone your OWN discernment. Not mine. Not anyone else's, but your own. We are in a (dis)information war where information is weaponized and manipulated to propagandize you into stupidity. Your response to that is to turn a blind eye to direct, primary evidence you can read for yourself because you don't think you're qualified to make a judgement. In other words, you outsource your thinking to others without asking yourself, or caring to check, if those people have agendas of their own. If they have reason to lie to you. To mislead you. That's a dangerous way to live in today's (dis)information war. It only assures you're deaf, dumb, and blind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 13 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Yes, I listen to people with expertise in the field. Like most people do. And then I form my opinion. Your source stuff is a broken record now. I have patients who see me because of my expertise. Maybe I should send them to you. Stating that you put any credence to anything Lanny Davis said comes close to disqualifying you to be a part of the human race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 8 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Yes, I listen to people with expertise in the field. Like most people do. And then I form my opinion. Your source stuff is a broken record now. I have patients who see me because of my expertise. Maybe I should send them to you. Actually, you raise a point that should stop and make you think if you have even a drop of competence in your field. Your patients see you because they have expertise in themselves. They know when something doesn't feel right. They feel the pain, or discomfort. They come to you because they want to know the root cause. But, quite often, you fail them and get the root cause wrong. They go on, dealing with the issue, trying new treatments, looking for second opinions, because you were wrong. The fact that you are a medical expert does not confer on you the ability to correctly diagnose without the patient being a subject matter expert in what they are feeling. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 BUZZKILL: Chris Hayes makes STUNNING admission on what reporters really think of all the Trump news Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts