tshile Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 34 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said: Shut up, Sue. Honestly... putting aside the fact that I think she's the female version of Marco Rubio at this point... I am going to enjoy the constant and never ending "So do you still think he's learned any lessons in light of <whatever happened earlier?" line of questioning she's going to receive for at least the foreseeable future. that's right in line with how I like to treat people who are quite clearly full of ****. forcing them to catch undertones of "Hey, you're full of ****" on a daily basis. as awful as colins is, she's not stupid. she understands the line of questioning. and will have to deal with it every day for at least a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 6 minutes ago, tshile said: In a vacuum, sure. But like most issues, we're not in a vacuum. Certainly not a vacuum, but the principle holds true... If the prosecutors defied by deception it differs fundamentally from a principled stand and resignation imo. Like I said it will be explored more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 also i really hope this backfires and the judge asks whoever is now representing the state's case in court, to explain why they're there and what happened to the other 4 people. and then sentences him to 9 years. i know judges can be funny like that. sometimes they like to rub your nose in your own **** when you do it on the living room floor. 1 minute ago, twa said: If the prosecutors defied by deception it differs fundamentally from a principled stand and resignation imo. That's a really strong statement considering we don't know enough to know if they actually used deception. They could have simply heard the DOJ's desires, and then not followed them. And even if they did agree with the DOJ in their meetings, knowing they wouldn't actually follow through, there's a lot of nuance to all of this (none of which you care to admit or entertain, which is convenient for your silly arguments) that makes your overall stance, at best, weak. You're not required to comply with corruption simply because it comes from your boss. Of course you know that, but will pretend otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 10 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said: If you know or have seen something, why not share it with the group? I did 5 minutes ago, tshile said: That's a really strong statement considering we don't know enough to know if they actually used deception. you even said that is what the DOJ said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillUnknown Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 11 minutes ago, tshile said: Like much of this administration, it's obvious what's going on. But it's done in a way that the political hacks are allowed to feel comfortable with bull**** narratives they're told, and then push to others. That almost perfectly sums it up, and its the reason i have no hope for the future. When the 2020 election is rigged, this group of republicans and this AG are not going to do anything that would possibly remove them from power I really dont see this turning around without blood being spilled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 8 minutes ago, twa said: I did Pathetic as always Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 13 minutes ago, twa said: you even said that is what the DOJ said Right, it's one version of events. That doesn't mean it's a correct representation of what happened. The strongest piece of evidence is the withdrawals and the resignation. I realize the GOP is going to ignore that. Objective people understand that people don't throw away quality careers away for no reason. These aren't check out clerks that threw a fit and walked out. They're career lawyers with quality jobs and quality reputations. On the other side we have Trump and Barr. Get it in where you fit in. (Thanks @TryTheBeal! !) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 Oh and another strong piece of evidence... the countless people that used to work in various levels of the chain that relates to this (former DOJ people, former prosecutors, etc) all chiming in with "Uh... yeah this is unheard of with the DOJ...." Like just about everything with this president and the GOP as of the last 10-ish years... one side has precedent, third party corroboration, some level of 'connect the dots', documents, and laws to point to and say "... something isn't right here..." and the other side has hand-waving nonsense that boils down to "just trust me", and on any random issue has levels of changing the argument (usually they wind up admitting what was done was wrong, but not illegal....) I don't know man. The patterns are obvious. They're consistent. And they're frequent. Ignoring them to accept the hand-waving requires being extraordinarily naive, or complicit. Not sure what's worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 2 minutes ago, tshile said: Right, it's one version of events. That doesn't mean it's a correct representation of what happened. The strongest piece of evidence is the withdrawals and the resignation. I realize the GOP is going to ignore that. Objective people understand that people don't throw away quality careers away for no reason. These aren't check out clerks that threw a fit and walked out. They're career lawyers with quality jobs and quality reputations. On the other side we have Trump and Barr. Get it in where you fit in. (Thanks @TryTheBeal! !) They can easily make more money outside govt 😀 The resignations after AND the DOJ changing it supports the statement the DOJ was sandbagged Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 Just now, twa said: They can easily make more money outside govt 😀 Which means nothing to the actual point. Just now, twa said: The resignations after AND the DOJ changing it supports the statement the DOJ was sandbagged Which, again, doesn't matter if the issue is that what the DOJ was doing is corrupt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 1 hour ago, twa said: I'm seeing it said the prosecutors sandbagged the DOJ with false reports on sentencing A lot of people are saying... huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 1 minute ago, The Evil Genius said: A lot of people are saying... huh? A DOJ spokesperson https://www.foxnews.com/politics/doj-expected-to-scale-back-roger-stones-extreme-sentencing-recommendation-official “The sentencing recommendation was not what had been briefed to the Department.” 10 minutes ago, tshile said: Which means nothing to the actual point. Which, again, doesn't matter if the issue is that what the DOJ was doing is corrupt. which is a assumption Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 7 minutes ago, twa said: which is a assumption Correct. One I feel pretty good about at the moment, but yes it is an assumption. That's what a lot of this administration is - reading between the lines or connecting the dots. The alternative theory that Trump and the GOP presents? That it's all a bunch of coincidences. Like I said, the patterns are obvious. I fully expect the final state of the GOP narrative on this to be - Yeah what he did was wrong, but technically not illegal. It's amazing how many people are comfortable with that justification, and how often. Patterns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 3 minutes ago, tshile said: It's amazing how many people are comfortable with that justification, and how often. Patterns. awful lot of coincidences going the other way as well......patterns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 8 minutes ago, twa said: awful lot of coincidences going the other way as well......patterns so your argument at this point is that these two items are the same? - Trump constantly finds himself being accused of nefarious things, where the defense always follows: 1) It didn't happen, 2) It happened but not that way, 3) It happened that way but it's not wrong, 4) Ok it's wrong, but it's not illegal - Everyone outside of Trump's political camp keeps putting forth credible accusations of nefarious activity, which includes multiple sources for the accusations, documents, documented actions that just so happen align with the allegations, and seemingly across the board. The core allegation never really changes, only the amount of evidence (as in, as time progresses more evidence comes to light) In your mind, those two scenarios stand on equal footing? You're a believer in the witch-hunting defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 11 minutes ago, tshile said: You're a believer in the witch-hunting defense? Only if they wear a white hat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 2 hours ago, twa said: I'm seeing it said the prosecutors sandbagged the DOJ with false reports on sentencing "Many people are saying..." **** that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted February 12, 2020 Author Share Posted February 12, 2020 54 minutes ago, tshile said: One I feel pretty good about at the moment, but yes it is an assumption. Is it an assumption? Trump said it out loud the night before. The DoJ next day reverses course. The assumption here is believing DoJ spin that this wasn't political interference, when they have offered zero proof that the prosecutors went against their wishes. An anonymous spokesman, not willing to go on the record is all that you need to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 23 minutes ago, Dan T. said: "Many people are saying..." **** that. Only Fox News and talk radio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 56 minutes ago, No Excuses said: Is it an assumption? I think technically it is, and I'm trying to be... cordial about it all... We don't have the other side's story yet. We have their actions. That's about all I need, but in reality we only have one side of the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 What’s the rush..... A lot of things can happen in over a month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 trump's pulling of jessie liu's nomination is another pretty little piece of work Quote President Trump is withdrawing his nomination for former U.S. attorney for D.C. Jessie Liu to serve as the Treasury Department's undersecretary for terrorism and financial crimes, a top position overseeing economic sanctions, according to two sources with direct knowledge. The big picture: Liu was confirmed in September 2017 to lead the largest U.S. attorney's office in the country, overseeing a number of politically charged prosecutions that included the case against Trump associates Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort and other spinoffs from the Mueller investigation. Liu stepped down from the U.S. attorney's office last month after Trump announced his intention to nominate her to the Treasury position in December 2019. Liu was expected to stay in her position through her confirmation — with a hearing before the Senate Banking Committee scheduled for this Thursday — but was unexpectedly informed last month that Attorney General Bill Barr was replacing her with his close adviser Timothy Shea. She was informed that Trump was pulling her nomination Tuesday afternoon. Behind the scenes: This was "the president's call," according to a former administration official familiar with the situation. The decision, which was made today, has administration officials questioning the circumstances that led to Trump changing his mind — with the developments in the Roger Stone case today being the only new information they are aware of. and barr gets a payoff with the job going to one of his minions, tim shea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 13, 2020 Share Posted February 13, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.