Home        About Dan        News        Books        Forum        Art
 
   
Page 9 of 10 « First<678910>
Topic Options
#169550 - 12/29/19 02:04 PM Re: Tailgunner Schiff [Re: Mike F]
ColinFraizer Online   content
enthusiast


Registered: 12/15/13
Posts: 133
Loc: Indiana, USA
 Quote:
That the nondisclosure agreement was illegal is a subject for debate. That Cohen pled guilty for it is likely the fact that they busted into his office and got him on other charges. They had leverage to exact that plea uncontested.


Did anyone else read about this?

https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-shaw/2019/12/28/bob-krafts-hooker-trial-include-felony-charge/

As part of their efforts to get Robert Kraft to plead guilty, prosecutors are now trying to pursue felony charges against him. Not for other actions or for additional instances, but using ridiculously broad prosecutorial discretion to try to bring him to heel.

Of course, such pressure is much worse for poor or middle-class citizens who find themselves in the grip of the American criminal "justice" system.

Top
#169553 - 12/29/19 04:43 PM Re: Tailgunner Schiff [Re: springer2]
Shrike1 Online   content
veteran


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 1359
Loc: Greenville, NC
 Originally Posted By: springer2
I remember this exchange, and from what I recall jmill did in fact clarify what he meant shortly after Dan's post. And clearly it was convincing enough that Dan didn't boot him from the forum.

Take this as you will.


This is correct. The only reason I brought it up was because I was being described as "unhinged" and I thought if he thinks I am unhinged he should have been around back then.

I then sent him the exchange in a private message so as not to have it out here again on the forum. Sorry it all came out anyway because he didn't read what I said correctly, but so it goes.

Greg
_________________________
Words can't define what I feel inside
Who needs them? -- Smashing Pumpkins "GEEK U.S.A."

Top
#169554 - 12/29/19 04:50 PM Re: Tailgunner Schiff [Re: Mike F]
Shrike1 Online   content
veteran


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 1359
Loc: Greenville, NC
 Originally Posted By: Mike F
I guess I have to apologize.

Thank you.

 Originally Posted By: Mike F
I still find your interpretation doubtful, however.

Of course you do. The host of this forum did not find it doubtful though.

Greg
_________________________
Words can't define what I feel inside
Who needs them? -- Smashing Pumpkins "GEEK U.S.A."

Top
#169556 - 12/29/19 07:52 PM Re: Tailgunner Schiff [Re: Shrike1]
Mike F Offline
enthusiast


Registered: 08/28/08
Posts: 155
Loc: Chico, CA.
 Originally Posted By: Shrike1

Of course you do. The host of this forum did not find it doubtful though.

Greg


Why did he bother asking for a clarification on it?


Edited by Mike F (12/29/19 07:52 PM)
_________________________
"Iím still the Presidentís wing-man, so Iím there with my boy." ~Eric Holder

Top
#169557 - 12/29/19 08:14 PM Re: Tailgunner Schiff [Re: Shrike1]
Mike F Offline
enthusiast


Registered: 08/28/08
Posts: 155
Loc: Chico, CA.
 Quote:
I then sent him the exchange in a private message so as not to have it out here again on the forum. Sorry it all came out anyway because he didn't read what I said correctly, but so it goes.



I find all this private messaging a little too furtive and would prefer not to engage that way. Furtive being a polite euphemism for how I really feel about it.



Edited by Mike F (12/29/19 08:17 PM)
_________________________
"Iím still the Presidentís wing-man, so Iím there with my boy." ~Eric Holder

Top
#169558 - 12/29/19 08:41 PM Re: Tailgunner Schiff [Re: Shrike1]
Enright Online   content
Super User


Registered: 05/17/06
Posts: 3582
Loc: CA
 Originally Posted By: Shrike1

. . .

So you're saying that Donald Trump didn't ask Russia to help him in the 2016 election?

. . .

Greg


I've edited my comments to make it clear to what country I was referring:

Mike, this example sort of shows what is off and confusing about many of Greg's arguments. He puts political inferences about what is going on on the same level of truth or falsehood as descriptions about what is going on (which are generally more secure and reliable than inferences), but these two forms occupy different logical levels and can't be mixed easily in the same thought without confusion. For example, "The text shows that Trump asked for an investigation," is a statement of description about the text of the conversation [between President Trump and President Zelensky of Ukraine]. It's descriptive because any observer of the text can easily verify it's truth or falsehood from the text and make a determination. Statements of description of that type are powerful in their reliability just because of that verifiability. "Trump asked a foreign country to interfere in our election," or some such, sounds equally descriptive and factual, but actually it is not verifiable to the same degree because in this case [Ukraine] it is nowhere in the text. It is only masquerading as having the certainty of a verifiable description. Different observers (if so inclined) can possibly infer from the text at a higher level of thought that "asking a foreign country to interfere in our election" was what was happening, but inferences only offer varying degrees of probability and thus reliability of being correct. They are not facts.
_________________________
Jim

Top
#169560 - 12/30/19 03:15 PM Re: Tailgunner Schiff [Re: Enright]
Enright Online   content
Super User


Registered: 05/17/06
Posts: 3582
Loc: CA
 Originally Posted By: Enright


Mike, this example sort of shows what is off and confusing about many of Greg's arguments. He puts political inferences about what is going on on the same level of truth or falsehood as descriptions about what is going on (which are generally more secure and reliable than inferences), but these two forms occupy different logical levels and can't be mixed easily in the same thought without confusion. For example, "The text shows that Trump asked for an investigation," is a statement of description about the text of the conversation [between President Trump and President Zelensky of Ukraine]. It's descriptive because any observer of the text can easily verify it's truth or falsehood from the text and make a determination. Statements of description of that type are powerful in their reliability just because of that verifiability. "Trump asked a foreign country to interfere in our election," or some such, sounds equally descriptive and factual, but actually it is not verifiable to the same degree because in this case [Ukraine] it is nowhere in the text. It is only masquerading as having the certainty of a verifiable description. Different observers (if so inclined) can possibly infer from the text at a higher level of thought that "asking a foreign country to interfere in our election" was what was happening, but inferences only offer varying degrees of probability and thus reliability of being correct. They are not facts.


That is, more abstract, farther away from the purely descriptive and factual level.
_________________________
Jim

Top
#169561 - 12/30/19 03:49 PM Re: Tailgunner Schiff [Re: Enright]
Peter McKenna Offline
old hand


Registered: 06/07/13
Posts: 1167
Loc: Louisiana
Besides, if it were a proven fact, wouldnít that fact be brought as a specific charge in the impeachment articles?



Edited by Peter McKenna (12/30/19 03:50 PM)
_________________________
Peter McKenna

Top
#169562 - 12/31/19 11:46 AM Re: Tailgunner Schiff [Re: Peter McKenna]
jryan Offline
Hardcase


Registered: 06/08/07
Posts: 8600
Loc: Oakton VA
 Originally Posted By: Peter McKenna
Besides, if it were a proven fact, wouldnít that fact be brought as a specific charge in the impeachment articles?



You'd think so, wouldn't you?

It is no small point to make to point out that nothing from the Mueller investigation made it into the articles of impeachment, and everything they think they got Trump on happened over the last 5 months.

Granted, they actually have nothing. Less than nothing, really, since they are attempting to criminalize executive privilege while they themselves are violating the constitutional separation of powers by cutting the judicial branch out of the process.

I me hell, after impeaching the president for "Obstruction of Congress" for not answering their subpoena, they just killed the court proceeding into that same violation by withdrawing their subpoena before the court could rule.

The Democrats have taken on the tactics of a criminal organization more than that of a political party.
_________________________
ďScience is the belief in the ignorance of the expertsĒ - Richard Feynman

Top
#169567 - 12/31/19 07:21 PM Re: Tailgunner Schiff [Re: Shrike1]
jmill Offline
Full Shrike


Registered: 04/01/06
Posts: 5693
 Originally Posted By: Shrike1
jmill, coming from you and remembering your hysteria over Obamaís presidency, Iíll take this nearly delusional rant as a complement.

I find it hard to believe everyone else on this forum thinks it is okay for a president to ask for (or even pressure) another country, even a hostile one, to interfere in our elections for his or her benefit!

Greg


Why don't you cite some examples of that hysteria, Greg? Unlike collusion hoaxers and impeachment-for-nothing adherents such as yourself, I had cogent, well thought-out arguments against Obama's policies and actions, such as his apology tour, the Iranian Deal, sending pallets of cash to the Iranian mullahs, the Paris Accords, Obamacare, so-called red lines in the sand in Syria, feckless and destructive foreign policy, horrible and incompetent choices for Sec. of State, such as Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, and on and on...his two terms as President of the United States accomplished nothing more than simply being the first black American elected to the presidency, that's it.

You can't point to anything policy-wise that stinks as much as what was done during eight wasted years of Obama/Biden. Instead you pretend this bullshit about Russia and the Ukraine is real. And while you're at it, why don't you explain what Hunter Biden, a useless, drug-addled loser, did to earn $158 million from Burisma other than being Joe Biden's son, and then explain how what Joe Biden did in the Ukraine by directly and unequivocally threatening to withhold aid unless the Ukrainians fired a prosecutor (in other words, quid pro quo) is substantially different from what you claim Trump did? And what do you call Obama spending millions of dollars to try and defeat Netenyahu in Israel? Trump didn't do what you and other hysterical left-wingers claim he did in Ukraine, period. You just don't like any Repuiblican or conservative because you are as dogmatic as they get: no thought, just faith in left-wing talking points.

Top
Page 9 of 10 « First<678910>


Hop to:

Generated in 0.036 seconds in which 0.015 seconds were spent on a total of 13 queries. Zlib compression disabled.

Home    Books    Curtis on Publishing   Previews    Bio    Bibliography    Snapshots     Foreign News    Reader's Forum    Art