• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Utah Prepares Special Election as Rep. Chaffetz Says He May Step Down Early

jmotivator said:
Drawing deductions from pure speculation is not logical.

IW8simF.gif




Take a moment to turn that off in Tapatalk Settings.
Click to expand...

Chaffetz is head of the oversight committee. The oversight committee is charged with holding people accountable. Since there's mounting evidence implicating the Trump people in the Russian scandal, rather than do his job as oversight chair, Chafftez can resign, tell the country it's for his family he forgot existed last year when he was running, and get out of dodge before the scandal blows up.

There's enough in there that is factual to be a plausible outcome, no matter how bad right wingers believe they stand for family values. If you had taken the time to read the thread, you would've seen what I just typed.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Who knows what the real reason are, but sometimes (Gasp!)it's what they say it is!

Also he's on the House Ethics Committee. When your side wins the election, that means you are investigating your own people. You don't keep too many friends doing that. In a manner of speaking, Trumps win is Chaffetz loss. And BTW, the pay ain't all that grand compared to what he can make in the private sector.

I agree it's not a fun as a loony left theory: "He is going into a cave to retrieve the wireless set Putin uses to tell Trump what to do, and bring it to the New York Times because Fox didn't want it.". Or "Maybe he didn't buy enough Valentines presents for all of his wives, and he's been called home by the Grand Deacon for penance."

The truth is so damn boring we have to make things up.
 
chuckiechan said:
Also he's on the House Ethics Committee. When your side wins the election, that means you are investigating your own people. You don't keep too many friends doing that. In a manner of speaking, Trumps win is Chaffetz loss. And BTW, the pay ain't all that grand compared to what he can make in the private sector.
Click to expand...

It's a shame integrity isn't as fun and doesn't pay better.
 
Winston said:
Chaffetz is head of the oversight committee. The oversight committee is charged with holding people accountable. Since there's mounting evidence implicating the Trump people in the Russian scandal, rather than do his job as oversight chair, Chafftez can resign, tell the country it's for his family he forgot existed last year when he was running, and get out of dodge before the scandal blows up.

There's enough in there that is factual to be a plausible outcome, no matter how bad right wingers believe they stand for family values. If you had taken the time to read the thread, you would've seen what I just typed.
Click to expand...

There is no "mounting evidence", you are delusional.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Seriously.
 
jmotivator said:
There is no "mounting evidence", you are delusional.



Seriously.
Click to expand...

How often do you have to be called out for making authoritative statements about things you know nothing about before you stop doing it?
 
RickJames3000 said:
How often do you have to be called out for making authoritative statements about things you know nothing about before you stop doing it?
Click to expand...

LOL. I see you are unable to post the "mounting evidence" as well. I know it must hurt to be holding on to a lie, but you need to let it go.
 
mbig said:
Precisely.
So Chaffetz, with nothing to investigate But Trump and his ethics, is walking away.
He doesn't want to ruin his GOP career/credentials.
Click to expand...

That could be, does seem odd the guy chooses now to leave office, perhaps he is considering a job with Trump org
 
jmotivator said:
There is no "mounting evidence", you are delusional.



Seriously.
Click to expand...

'Concrete evidence of collusion between Trump team and Russia' handed to official investigation | The Independent

The official investigation into relations between Donald Trump and Russia now has "specific, concrete and corroborative evidence of collusion", it has been reported.

New evidence proves discussions took place “between people in the Trump campaign and agents of [Russian] influence relating to the use of hacked material,” a source allegedly told the Guardian.

The developments come as it has emerged that Britain’s spy agencies were among the first to alert their American counterparts to contact between members of Mr Trump’s campaign team and Russian intelligence operatives.

British and other European intelligence agencies first intercepted suspicious “interactions” between people associated with the US President and Russian officials in 2015 as part of routine surveillance of Russia, intelligence sources have confirmed to a number of different publications.

Spy agencies, including GCHQ, were not deliberately targeting members of the Trump team but rather recorded communications through “incidental collection,” CNN reports.
Click to expand...
 
jmotivator said:
LOL. I see you are unable to post the "mounting evidence" as well. I know it must hurt to be holding on to a lie, but you need to let it go.
Click to expand...

Sure.
We'll all see the mounting evidence when the multiple investigations are over, and their findings are made public.
Until then, feel free to hew to the party line.

But don't expect anyone here to buy your line of nonsense.
 
RickJames3000 said:
Sure.
We'll all see the mounting evidence when the multiple investigations are over, and their findings are made public.
Until then, feel free to hew to the party line.

But don't expect anyone here to buy your line of nonsense.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that your claim of "mounting evidence" is just a guess that you hope will be corroborated sometime in the future? Thanks for helping make my point, RJ!
 
jmotivator said:
So you are saying that your claim of "mounting evidence" is just a guess that you hope will be corroborated sometime in the future? Thanks for helping make my point, RJ!
Click to expand...

I didn't make any specific claims other than pointing out that you aren't privy to any of the evidence that is out there.
So you shouldn't be trying to pass yourself off as an authority.

That seems obvious to me. But I suppose you believe making wild claims to the contrary gives you some credibility?
 
Winston said:
A source foghorned from atop a mountain so even the right wingers would understand.
Click to expand...

A source so rock solid that you provided story can't even state with any certainty that the source actually said what they reported was said.

:roll: * ∞
 
jmotivator said:
A source so rock solid that you provided story can't even state with any certainty that the source actually said what they reported was said.

:roll: * ∞
Click to expand...

So, you don't believe the source. Fine. Just say, "They made it all up." That's your prerogative. It is unreasonable to expect everyone else to ignore the mounting evidence against the Trump campaign and then call them conspiracy theorists when they discuss the Trump-Russian collusion, for which we have ample evidence of.
 
Winston said:
So, you don't believe the source. Fine. Just say, "They made it all up." That's your prerogative. It is unreasonable to expect everyone else to ignore the mounting evidence against the Trump campaign and then call them conspiracy theorists when they discuss the Trump-Russian collusion, for which we have ample evidence of.
Click to expand...

LOL. You keep using the word "mounting evidence" when you don;t actually have any evidence. You have unnamed sources with unverified claims. That isn't evidence. As I said, the only thing you show to be mounting is unverifiable accusations.
 
jmotivator said:
LOL. You keep using the word "mounting evidence" when you don;t actually have any evidence. You have unnamed sources with unverified claims. That isn't evidence. As I said, the only thing you show to be mounting is unverifiable accusations.
Click to expand...

There is nothing available to anyone that is not second hand.
 
Winston said:
There is nothing available to anyone that is not second hand.
Click to expand...

Exactly. So you have no way of verifying your claim of "mounting evidence"... it is a WAG on your part.
 
Winston said:
There is nothing available to anyone that is not second hand.
Click to expand...

There doesnt seem to be much of the way of second hand as well. At best, the whole claim rests upon an investigation because somebody else thinks something might have happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom