US Politics/2016 Election Pick Your Poison Master Thread

[Boruch999]

It is a mazing how Kim Strassel has jump onto the conspiracy theory bandwagon, although meanwhile a bunch of her conspiracy theories have actually panned out. One serious issue is that anything Trump would do to pressure the DOJ will be framed as obstructing blah blah. That is part of why the Mueller investigation needs to finish up and also possibly why it never will.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/about-that-fbi-source-1525992611

She says she thinks she knows who it is.  Anyone want to hazard a guess?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Try incognito.

It has been explained numerous times how the investigation is causing a lot of collateral damage. Frankly, your statement that you don't know why they would want it rushed unless they have something to worry about is utterly ridiculous.

Incognito didn't work.

If by collateral damage you mean individuals found guilty of wrongdoing then we need more of it. Again as you are well aware these type of investigations take time. As I said from the beginning let it run its course.

I don't think I ever asked you this before. Will you accept Muellers findings/conclusion?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Go to drudge and click on the WSJ link in the list on the top right.

Thanks.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Not an exact quote.

Meghan McCain: What type of work environment can you make such a comment and not lose your job?

#BeBest except if it is your husband!!!

[ChaimMoskowitz]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/how-trump%e2%80%99s-iran-deal-decision-may-lead-to-war/ar-AAx5Wrj?ocid=ientp

[aygart]

If by collateral damage you mean individuals found guilty of wrongdoing

It is not

I am referring to how it is affecting foreign policy and negotiations as well as other aspects of running the govt efficiently. It is a hindering backdrop on anything being tried by the administrative branch. The way it is preventing the investigation of possible wrongdoing and corruption in the DOJ is also a serious collateral damage. That investigation needs to be allowed to pan out as well. The most outrageous statement of all is Rosenstein saying he has a constitutional obligation to hide things from congressional oversight.

That said, I do not think that it is advantageous to create criminals. If they only became criminals because of the investigation then why do we need more of that? If it is the money laundering etc. that you are referring to then I am in absolute agreement.

I don't think I ever asked you this before. Will you accept Muellers findings/conclusion?

I think you know by now that i never blindly accept finding from anyone.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

I am referring to how it is affecting foreign policy and negotiations as well as other aspects of running the govt efficiently. It is a hindering backdrop on anything being tried by the administrative branch. The way it is preventing the investigation of possible wrongdoing and corruption in the DOJ is also a serious collateral damage. That investigation needs to be allowed to pan out as well. The most outrageous statement of all is Rosenstein saying he has a constitutional obligation to hide things from congressional oversight.

Yes it has an effect on what the WH says/does. Unfortunately that is the media/Trump fault for constantly talking about it.

How is Mueller's investigation stopping other investigations? McCabe was fired based on another investigation. Others are being investigated as we speak.

I think you know by now that i never blindly accept finding from anyone.

Yes I know you wont accept goalposts because just as Trump does you want to have it both ways.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Another lowlife POS.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/387132-fox-military-analyst-says-torture-worked-on-mccain-they-call

Telling you can hear a pin drop. Nobody else is going to defend a war hero?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Who is paying Michael Avenatti? http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/387088-who-is-paying-michael-avenatti

Some very valid points being made in this article. I wondered myself how he had info on Cohen's banking without having broken any laws.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/heat-on-stormy-daniels-lawyer-over-past-business-dealings-bank-record-disclosure/ar-AAx74Xf?li=BBnb7Kz

[aygart]

Yes I know you wont accept goalposts because just as Trump does you want to have it both ways.

Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. Making fake goalposts is a way to avoid using your head.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. Making fake goalposts is a way to avoid using your head.

If you want to have an honest discussion you need to have ground rules. You never want any like most here.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy.

I will leave this for another Friday. 

[aygart]

If you want to have an honest discussion you need to have ground rules. You never want any like most here.

Ground rules need to be dictated by logic and reality not some fake dumb standard that allows you to turn off your brain. If someone makes a fallacious argument call them out on it. That is what I am doing on your appeal to authority. If someone is inconsistent or cherry picking call them out on it. That is how to have an honest discussion. Not to make some nonsense that if it is sunny tomorrow then I must be right like you are doing.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Ground rules need to be dictated by logic and reality not some fake dumb standard that allows you to turn off your brain. If someone makes a fallacious argument call them out on it. That is what I am doing on your appeal to authority. If someone is inconsistent or cherry picking call them out on it. That is how to have an honest discussion. Not to make some nonsense that if it is sunny tomorrow then I must be right like you are doing.

You are talking in circles. Ok you set the ground rules if you are going to accept or not Muellers findings?

[aygart]

You are talking in circles. Ok you set the ground rules if you are going to accept or not Muellers findings?

I will not blindly accept them. I will review what he finds and come to my own conclusions just like I do with everything else.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

I will not blindly accept them. I will review what he finds and come to my own conclusions just like I do with everything else.

...and your bias will lead you to the conclusion. Look it is not just this issue you use the same ridicules circle argument on everything. You like most here will not take a stand because you are so afraid of being wrong.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

At least they did the right thing after getting caught red-handed!!!

"Our company has been in the headlines for all the wrong reasons these last few days and our reputation has been damaged," Stephenson, the company's chairman and chief executive, said in a memo to employees Friday morning. "There is no other way to say it — AT&T hiring Michael Cohen as a political consultant was a big mistake."

[aygart]

...and your bias will lead you to the conclusion. Look it is not just this issue you use the same ridicules circle argument on everything. You like most here will not take a stand because you are so afraid of being wrong.

I am sure I will be biased, but I will have no problem explaining my reasoning and anyone can point out if I am wrong about something. That is much better than turning off my head like you are doing.

I take stands on things all the time but I will not use arbitrary criteria to know what is true. When I am not sure or I am missing some facts to take a definitive stand is stupid. Why would I take a stand on something that I know may be wrong. I would rather be honest and say that it is unclear. I don't feel that I need to have a full clear cut opinion on everything as long as I am honest with myself about it. I would much rather the facts lead me to a conclusion than the conclusion lead me to the facts.

[aygart]

[tweet]994964126110814208[/tweet]

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4457445-Letter-Motion.html

[ChaimMoskowitz]

I am sure I will be biased, but I will have no problem explaining my reasoning and anyone can point out if I am wrong about something. That is much better than turning off my head like you are doing.

I take stands on things all the time but I will not use arbitrary criteria to know what is true. When I am not sure or I am missing some facts to take a definitive stand is stupid. Why would I take a stand on something that I know may be wrong. I would rather be honest and say that it is unclear. I don't feel that I need to have a full clear cut opinion on everything as long as I am honest with myself about it. I would much rather the facts lead me to a conclusion than the conclusion lead me to the facts.

Translation: I want to twist the findings to fit my position. Same thing Trumps does every day and you don't realize you are doing the same.