Impeach Trump

[Pookie]

Mueller's investigation, combined with the pre-appointment investigation, are already at the average length of time for these types of investigations.

Note how the investigations for offenses which there was evidence, are short. And that investigations for which there is no evidence of the original offense are long.

Also, note that Mueller's appointment was for an offense everyone "knew" the evidence was obvious, blatant, and easily obtainable. Yet, here we are at the average length of time for ALL special counsel investigations, long and short.

Basically, at this point Muller has gone beyond the time needed to find evidence of the crimes which everyone already "knew" and "had evidence of" occurring. He's entering the zone for investigations which DO NOT result in evidence being found for the original appointment's purpose.

It's a subtle distinction, but you missed it completely. There's another one in there too and you're not catching that one either.

So many logical fallacies in this quote, so little time.

 

[cowslinger64]

That chart gets posted every once in awhile and you don't understand the significance in it.

Look at the different investigations. Not just the length, but the purpose of the investigations.

Notice how the SHORT ONES were all investigations into crimes we actually had evidence for?

Supposedly at the beginning of Mueller's appointment we had evidence of "Russian Collusion" to rig the election for Trump. If that was the case, why are we still investigating? It should have been a slam dunk short investigation like the Watergate investigation. Which, BTW, Trump gets tagged with being similar to quite often. IF his offense was so "watergate-ish" WHY THE HELL is Mueller still investigating after all this time?

Answer: Because he's got nothing and he's off in the weeds pursuing process crimes against bit players.

And you don't understand that. Which is why you post that chart in order to justify why he's taking so long to find what everyone was saying we already had proof of.

LOL.. I LOVE how you can post using the most snotty condescending tone you're able to muster ....and follow it up with such erroneous bullshit. You really do not know what you're talking about.

Hell... even Fox News disagrees with you, the judge does anyways... the bobble heads dolls tried their best to do like you and bring up OBAMA! EDWARDS!

Give this a listen.. I got 5 bucks that says you can't produce a lucid argument against this former judge.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=235&v=MjbIt6Cavq0

 

[doowdniw]

Process crimes - felonies by any other name

 

[Boxlicker101]

Process crimes - felonies by any other name

Maybe felonies and maybe not, but they have little or nothing to do with politics and, usually nothing to do with The Donald.

 

[doowdniw]

You don't generally get sent up to the big house for misdemeanors.

 

[HisArpy]

No. You are completely off base. Completely wrong.

Note how the investigations for offenses for which there was evidence, under this investigation have been short:

Convicted: Paul Manafort
Pleaded guilty: Michael Cohen
Pleaded guilty: W. Samuel Patten
Pleaded guilty: Rick Gates
Pleaded guilty: Alex van der Zwann
Pleaded guilty: Richard Pinedo
Pleaded guilty: Michael Flynn
Pleaded guilty: George Papadopoulos
Indicted: 12 Russian intelligence officers on a litany of alleged crimes
Indicted: Konstantin Kilimnik
Indicted: 13 Russians and three Russian entities for "information warfare" with "the stated goal of spreading distrust towards the candidates and the political system in general."

I agree that where there is evidence it is reflected in the relative brevity of the investigation AND there is just so much shit here it is taking a while to process precisely because there is so much evidence to wade through.

And Next comes the inner circle - Jared, Tiny, Jr., etal. And after that the Unindicted Orange Dick Head Himself because there is so much evidence.

All I said to KingRapine was have a little patience on the Impeachment talk until we get there.

I mean what more do you want? FFS - this investigation has produced more convictions, guilty pleas and indictments than the rest combined and it is not even over. It is only Day 560.

Spin.

Your statement was that the "investigation" was at the average term, not that the charges against individuals are the result of long or short duration. Nor does you chart show anything of the sort which you claim to ascribe to those individuals caught up in the Mueller mess.

Mueller's investigation is supposed to be about "Trump/Russia Collusion". It, according to you and your chart, is at the average length of time for special investigations.

Yet, as I pointed out, those investigations for which we already knew there was evidence of a crime, were short and those investigations for which the special counsel had to dig to find something/anything were long.

Mueller's been digging for over 2 years with nothing to show for it except low level offenses to bit players. That ought to tell you, and everyone else, about the state of his evidence toward that which he was originally purposed.

 

[HisArpy]

So many logical fallacies in this quote, so little time.

Why are you concerned? You wouldn't know what to do with a logical fallacy if it bit you in the ass.

 

[Luk]

Why are you concerned? You wouldn't know what to do with a logical fallacy if it bit you in the ass.

As opposed to you who is very deft at using them.

 

[HisArpy]

As opposed to you who is very deft at using them.

I see you've decided to quite the PSVI before you flunked out and enroll in the phuckwad school of drollery. (PSD)

Good luk wit dat.

 

[Luk]

I see you've decided to quite the PSVI before you flunked out and enroll in the phuckwad school of drollery. (PSD)

Good luk wit dat.

Try that again - in the form of a language this time.

 

[cowslinger64]

LOL.. I LOVE how you can post using the most snotty condescending tone you're able to muster ....and follow it up with such erroneous bullshit. You really do not know what you're talking about.

Hell... even Fox News disagrees with you, the judge does anyways... the bobble heads dolls tried their best to do like you and bring up OBAMA! EDWARDS!

Give this a listen.. I got 5 bucks that says you can't produce a lucid argument against this former judge.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=235&v=MjbIt6Cavq0

Spin.

Your statement was that the "investigation" was at the average term, not that the charges against individuals are the result of long or short duration. Nor does you chart show anything of the sort which you claim to ascribe to those individuals caught up in the Mueller mess.

Mueller's investigation is supposed to be about "Trump/Russia Collusion". It, according to you and your chart, is at the average length of time for special investigations.

Yet, as I pointed out, those investigations for which we already knew there was evidence of a crime, were short and those investigations for which the special counsel had to dig to find something/anything were long.

Mueller's been digging for over 2 years with nothing to show for it except low level offenses to bit players. That ought to tell you, and everyone else, about the state of his evidence toward that which he was originally purposed.

You're a fox news talking point spewer...and even THEY don't agree with you.

I knew you wouldn't have anything intelligent in reply to that clip.

 

[HisArpy]

Try that again - in the form of a language this time.

Not my fault you can't keep up with the rest of the class.

 

[HisArpy]

You're a fox news talking point spewer...and even THEY don't agree with you.

I knew you wouldn't have anything intelligent in reply to that clip.

1. I don't click on utube links, let alone blind utube links. A lot of members here don't so that's a complete FAIL on your part.

2. I watch CNN, MSNBC, Fox, and my local nightly news station. I don't agree with any of them 100% of the time.

Instead I gather the available information, sort it, and come to my own conclusions after reasonable deliberation.

Unlike some...

 

[cowslinger64]

1. I don't click on utube links, let alone blind utube links. A lot of members here don't so that's a complete FAIL on your part.

2. I watch CNN, MSNBC, Fox, and my local nightly news station. I don't agree with any of them 100% of the time.

Instead I gather the available information, sort it, and come to my own conclusions after reasonable deliberation.

Unlike some...

Here ya go!


https://www.gq.com/story/fox-and-friends-andrew-napolitano-michael-cohen

or

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...ips-trump-defense_us_5c12836ee4b0449012f7acb1

or

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/em-fox-friends-em-legal-183145974.html

or

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-n...x-and-friends-talking-points-on-michael-cohen

 

[Luk]

A lot of members here don't so that's a complete FAIL on your part.

Name one, liar.

 

[Pookie]

Why are you concerned? You wouldn't know what to do with a logical fallacy if it bit you in the ass.

That's an argumentum ad hominem.

I'm concerned because you keep slowing down the class.

 

[HisArpy]

That's an argumentum ad hominem.

I'm concerned because you keep slowing down the class.

Lol. Fair cop. It was a comment aimed at your mental capacity and credulity even if well earned and deserved on your part.

Now, try to keep up.

 

[HisArpy]

Name one, liar.

Me. For ONE.

And the win.

 

[Luk]

Me. For ONE.

And the win.

So you went from "a lot" to a half of a man? Srsly? And the "win"? I'm sure your "clients" appreciate you winning unwinnable arguments on the intertubez.

 

[Pookie]

1. I don't click on utube links, let alone blind utube links. A lot of members here don't so that's a complete FAIL on your part.

Argumentum ad populum

 

[cowslinger64]

Lol. Fair cop. It was a comment aimed at your mental capacity and credulity even if well earned and deserved on your part.

Now, try to keep up.

Lol... you're continually wrong... yet talk down to people. Delusional much?



Hey.. don't forget those links.

 

[Pookie]

Lol. Fair cop. It was a comment aimed at your mental capacity and credulity even if well earned and deserved on your part.

Now, try to keep up.

Appeal to false authority.

 

[pointless]

Name one, liar.

that pain in the ass jafo dude.

 

[HisArpy]

So you went from "a lot" to a half of a man? Srsly? And the "win"? I'm sure your "clients" appreciate you winning unwinnable arguments on the intertubez.

Listen up nutless, you asked for me to name ONE.

I gave you ONE.

You want more? Do your own fucking homework, you're slowing down the class.

 

[HisArpy]

Argumentum ad populum

And????