Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

Aretheymyfeet

duploelabs wrote: »

The evidence you seek is detailed right here if you'd take the time to peruse

https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download

No it isnt. If you believe it is, please detail the page(s), paragraph(s) and line(s) you assert contains the evidence of Russian State interference in the US election. It's not for me to do your research and prove your point. You claim the Report contains such evidence, back your claim up so. Show us where the evidence is.

duploelabs

Aretheymyfeet wrote: »

No it isnt. If you believe it is, please detail the page(s), paragraph(s) and line(s) you assert contains the evidence of Russian State interference in the US election. It's not for me to do your research and prove your point. You claim the Report contains such evidence, back your claim up so. Show us where the evidence is.

I know you didn't read it as it's the indictment of those 12 russians, not the Mueller report as you clearly think it is.
The evidence is right there in that PDF
Jog on you child

Aretheymyfeet

duploelabs wrote: »

I know you didn't read it as it's the indictment of those 12 russians, not the Mueller report as you clearly think it is.
The evidence is right there in that PDF
Jog on you child

I didn't bother opening your link because I know it's a waste of my time. I know as a matter of fact that no evidence of such exists in the public domain. Please detail the evidence of Russian State interference in the US election you believe your link contains. You're the simple child believing in a completely fabricated conspiracy theory unsupported by one single piece of actual evidence. Prove me wrong. Provide one single piece of actual evidence of Russian State interference in the US election. You seem incapable of doing so, why is this?

duploelabs

Aretheymyfeet wrote: »

I didn't bother opening your link because I know it's a waste of my time. I know as a matter of fact that no evidence of such exists in the public domain. Please detail the evidence of Russian State interference in the US election you believe your link contains. You're the simple child believing in a completely fabricated conspiracy theory unsupported by one single piece of actual evidence. Prove me wrong. Provide one single piece of actual evidence of Russian State interference in the US election. You seem incapable of doing so, why is this?

It's right there in the PDF court document, which also happens to be in the public domain. There is your proof

Professor Moriarty

duploelabs wrote: »

It's right there in the PDF court document, which also happens to be in the public domain. There is your proof

I opened it. Conclusive.

weisses

Aretheymyfeet wrote: »

Jesus, once more. You, Mueller, the US intel agencies all CLAIM Russian State interference in the US election. Nobody, not Mueller, not the Intel agencies, nor you, have been able to provide one single piece of actual evidence to support your ludicrous conspiracy theory.

Sure

Bye now

Igotadose

Business hiring (per survey) at 7 year low in the US. https://thehill.com/policy/finance/467694-business-hiring-falls-to-7-year-low-in-us-survey

And, 180 degrees out of phase with that, S&P going up due to strong earnings reports. So... who knows.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/28/stock-market-investors-monitor-busiest-week-of-earnings-season.html

Cody montana

Loved listening to all the booing.
There is hope for America yet.

weisses

Aretheymyfeet wrote: »

I didn't bother opening your link because I know it's a waste of my time.

Ahh yes ... this is how a healthy debate is supposed to be conducted

mayordenis

Igotadose wrote: »

Business hiring (per survey) at 7 year low in the US. https://thehill.com/policy/finance/467694-business-hiring-falls-to-7-year-low-in-us-survey

And, 180 degrees out of phase with that, S&P going up due to strong earnings reports. So... who knows.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/28/stock-market-investors-monitor-busiest-week-of-earnings-season.html

It's almost as if most of these metrics are basically random number generators.

Aretheymyfeet

duploelabs wrote: »

It's right there in the PDF court document, which also happens to be in the public domain. There is your proof

If you believe so, please detail it then. Page, para, line. As I said, it's not for me to prove your case. Why would I waste my time looking for something I don't believe exists? Why can you not detail your evidence? Surely it should be easy for you if it is in fact contained in that document?

Aretheymyfeet

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I opened it. Conclusive.

Hilarious. Conclusive is it. Please detail the 'conclusive' evidence you absolute spoofer.

duploelabs

Aretheymyfeet wrote: »

If you believe so, please detail it then. Page, para, line. As I said, it's not for me to prove your case. Why would I waste my time looking for something I don't believe exists? Why can you not detail your evidence? Surely it should be easy for you if it is in fact contained in that document?

A perfect example of confirmation bias right there

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Aretheymyfeet

weisses wrote: »

Sure

Bye now

Cheerio. Your failure to support your claim with one single piece of actual evidence despite my repeated requests is a satisfying conclusion to our discussion.

Professor Moriarty

Aretheymyfeet wrote: »

Hilarious. Conclusive is it. Please detail the 'conclusive' evidence you absolute spoofer.

Spoofer? Is that defamatory?

gizmo

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

DC is brim full of those that make money from leftist politicking. Trump's attack on the Biden's for what they partook in won't have gone down well with those kind of people. It threatens their summer home in the Hamptons.

This is a rather bizarre statement to be honest.

D.C is home to a huge number of lobbying firms, advocacy groups and think tanks from across the political spectrum. To claim it's merely full to the brim with "leftist politicking" who would view the Biden allegations as a threat is to ignore the presence of the likes of FreedomWorks, The Heritage Foundation, Family Research Council and American Enterprise Institute within the capital and Americans for Prosperity and American Conservative Union still "inside the beltway" in Virginia. Neither these organisations, nor the myriad of firms who would technically be bipartisan by virtue of the fact they act for hired guns for any outside interest, would be particularly thrilled with the spotlight being shone on their actions.

In any case, the city doesn't vote so heavily in favour of Democrats because of the concentration of such firms within its boundaries, it does so due to its highly concentrated urbanised population in a coastal region of the country.

Aretheymyfeet

weisses wrote: »

Ahh yes ... this is how a healthy debate is supposed to be conducted

Eh, in a healthy debate you don't ask your opponent to go searching for your evidence, particularly where your opponent denies it's existence. It's on a par with saying "Here's a document, now go on a wild goose chase". The burden rests with those making the claim to substantiate YOUR claim with evidence. It's utterly ridiculous to expect your opponent to make your case for you. You all lack basic logic and reasoning skills. I fear to ask what your professions are.

FrostyJack

Aretheymyfeet wrote:

I'm a lawyer by trade so I know perfectly well what is or isn't evidence.

You spelled it wrong. As I said, you are textbook. As you proved earlier you won't even read evidence as that is not your job, it is to muddy the waters. I look forward to your new account next week. Don't start with " I don't like Trump but..." it is such a give away.

PopePalpatine

Cody montana wrote: »

Loved listening to all the booing.
There is hope for America yet.

Meh, I'd wait until it happens at a game in his Rust Belt strongholds.

Outlaw Pete

gizmo wrote: »

To claim it's merely full to the brim with "leftist politicking" who would view the Biden allegations as a threat is to ignore the presence of the likes of..

I'm not ignoring them, but DC is undeniable leftist leaning and so before you get to anything else, that's a major factor to consider with regards to why Trump was booed. Add to that, that the crowd is largely related to, or at least friends with, DC lobbyists & bureaucrats and you have a large hive of folks that for one reason or another are not happy with the fact Trump is in office.

In any case, the city doesn't vote so heavily in favour of Democrats because of the concentration of such firms within its boundaries, it does so due to its highly concentrated urbanised population in a coastal region of the country.

So the rest is all just incidental then? Well, incidental or not, it's a factor in these people's lives and a president that threatens a status quo (which these people have come to depend on - in one way or another) is not going to be all that appreciated, hence the reception imv. Anyone who feels it was a barometer on how America might be viewing the current impeachment effort, is fooling themselves.

Aretheymyfeet

FrostyJack wrote: »

You spelled it wrong. As I said, you are textbook. As you proved earlier you won't even read evidence as that is not your job, it is to muddy the waters. I look forward to your new account next week. Don't start with " I don't like Trump but..." it is such a give away.

Spelled what wrong? I'm textbook what? I didn't say I wouldn't read evidence. I simply refuse to go on a wild goose chase looking for something that doesn't exist, nor should I be expected to go find your imaginary evidence. Why can you not simply provide the evidence if you believe so strongly it exists? What is preventing you from simply proving me wrong? Why can you not actually detail this magical evidence? Surely that's your surest way to refute my position. Might it be because you cannot actually identify it yourself? You're utterly hopeless. It's a lot of fun challenging your nonsense conspiracy theories and media induced hysteria.

Inquitus

Decent Last week tonight addressing Trump's pull out from Syria. Addresses some important points:

* More troops heading to the Middle East @13k so not a reduction in Middle Eastern numbers.
* Details of how often the Kurds have helped the US in the past few decades in the various wars in the region.
* The sense of betrayal felt by the Kurds and associated Potato throwing.
* Kurds having to do a deal with Assad to offset the Turks and Russians.
* How this move has turned a relatively stable situation back into a cluster****.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2u_pZ-SgACk

Timberrrrrrrr

Aretheymyfeet wrote: »

Spelled what wrong? I'm textbook what you div? I didn't say I wouldn't read evidence. I simply refuse to go on a wild goose chase looking for something that doesn't exist, nor should I be expected to go find your imaginary evidence. Why can you morons not simply provide the evidence if you believe so strongly it exists? What is preventing you from simply proving me wrong? Why can you not actually detail this magical evidence? Surely that's your surest way to refute my position.

And again with the childish name calling. What are you attempting to prove with these insults?

Professor Moriarty

Aretheymyfeet wrote: »

Spelled what wrong? I'm textbook what you div? I didn't say I wouldn't read evidence. I simply refuse to go on a wild goose chase looking for something that doesn't exist, nor should I be expected to go find your imaginary evidence. Why can you morons not simply provide the evidence if you believe so strongly it exists? What is preventing you from simply proving me wrong? Why can you not actually detail this magical evidence? Surely that's your surest way to refute my position.

A piece of advice. You might consider removing the insults from your posts before the mods return from their hols.

Aretheymyfeet

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And again with the childish name calling. What are you attempting to prove with these insults?

Yes, you guys have free reign to accuse someone of being a Russian troll, a Bot, only here to 'muddy the waters' and any number of slurs. I call you idiots and morons and you get all upset. Your double standards are simply indicative of your complete inability to deal with my facts and line of questioning. Your cognitive dissonance kicks in when your illusions and delusions are challenged by reasoned and rational questioning. You are parroting media conditioned false narratives, seemingly incapable of discerning narrative from objective fact. I am calling you out. You don't like that. Tough.

weisses

Aretheymyfeet wrote: »

Yes, you guys have free reign to accuse someone of being a Russian troll, a Bot, only here to 'muddy the waters' and any number of slurs. I call you idiots and morons and you get all upset. Your double standards are simply indicative of your complete inability to deal with my facts and line of questioning. Your cognitive dissonance kicks in when your illusions and delusions are challenged by reasoned and rational questioning. You are parroting media conditioned false narratives, seemingly incapable of discerning narrative from objective fact. I am calling you out. You don't like that. Tough.

Your facts .... "The Mueller report is a conspiracy theory" ... No wonder no one takes you seriously

Aretheymyfeet

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

A piece of advice. You might consider removing the insults from your posts before the mods return from their hols.

So calling people trolls and bots is ok, but replying and calling people idiots, imbeciles or morons is beyond the pale? A funny standard to apply. My language has been pretty reasonable in the face of repeated personal insults. I'm ok with that. You guys get pretty sensitive though when the tables are turned in any way. Too used to your echo chamber 'discussions' I suspect. I'm happy to disturb that cosey consensus. It's been an entertaining pleasure.

FrostyJack

Aretheymyfeet wrote:

Yes, you guys have free reign to accuse someone of being a Russian troll, a Bot, only here to 'muddy the waters' and any number of slurs. I call you idiots and morons and you get all upset.

I don't get upset, I know you are just doing your job. You were given several pieces of evidence, I didn't bother as I know I would be wasting my time, as you have proved, saying you can't be bothered reading it. Claiming to be a lawyer but not like reading. It takes 10 seconds of googling to see what evidence and what crimes Trump has done and Russia's involvement and why. You will not accept any evidence that isn't flown to St Petersburg and handed directly to you. Good luck with your new account.

duploelabs

Aretheymyfeet wrote: »

Yes, you guys have free reign to accuse someone of being a Russian troll, a Bot, only here to 'muddy the waters' and any number of slurs. I call you idiots and morons and you get all upset. Your double standards are simply indicative of your complete inability to deal with my facts and line of questioning. Your cognitive dissonance kicks in when your illusions and delusions are challenged by reasoned and rational questioning. You are parroting media conditioned false narratives, seemingly incapable of discerning narrative from objective fact. I am calling you out. You don't like that. Tough.

Perhaps you need to familiarise yourself with the mod charter at the start of this thread and see where you've been in breach

Aretheymyfeet

weisses wrote: »

Your facts .... "The Mueller report is a conspiracy theory" ... No wonder no one takes you seriously

Eh no, the Mueller Report is real, it's just politicised garbage. The claim that the Russian State interfered in the US election to aid the election of Trump is a conspiracy theory unsupported by one single piece of actual evidence. I thought we'd gone through this? It's literally a claim of a conspiracy, a conspiracy theory.