• 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!

Schiff: More Than Circumstantial Evidence

joG said:
If Putin is at all adept at intelligence, cloak and dagger he will have certainly made the evidence solid but hard enough to find to be believable. If anything, that would be a major reason that he was pleased to see Trump win.
Click to expand...

The Russian goal is and always has been to destroy Western Democracy. Seems to me he has been very successful in nearly achieving that end.
 
joG said:
Yes, I suppose. but more surprising than funny.

;)
Click to expand...

Man of integrity went out of his way not to interfere with the election...could be one explanation.
 
JackA said:
You intercepted communications that Russia could help defeat Hillary but would like to see a friendly attitude toward Putin and an unfriendly attitude toward NATO and now Putin is admired
by the Candidate and the GOP platform loses language critical of Russian involvement in Ukraine.

But don't let it stop your partisanship from "trumping" your patriotism.
Click to expand...

So now it's Trump that's wiretapping Russia? This **** gets better every day!
 
TheGoverness said:
As I said before, I'll wait until the circumstantial evidence is provided.

If it is definitive, and it does in fact show evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, then Donald Trump should be impeached and removed from office.
Click to expand...
As I said a few days ago to someone else, he's already "Provided" substantial Circumstantial Evidence. Beyond coincidences.

mbig 3/21 said:
Actually, he laid out Extensive Circumstantial EVIDENCE.
You are unwittingly and/or with partisanship, Conflating "Evidence" with "Proof".
He did not claim Proof, but he Did lay out plenty of Evidence he rightly inferred was more likely nefarious than coincidental... especially with the already established fact the Russians did interfere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence

Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an Inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime. By contrast, direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion directly—i.e., without need for any additional evidence or inference.

On its own, circumstantial evidence allows for more than one explanation. Different pieces of circumstantial evidence may be required, so that each corroborates the conclusions drawn from the others. Together, they may more strongly support one particular inference over another. An explanation involving circumstantial evidence becomes more likely once alternative explanations have been ruled out....

Criminal law
Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning.

..Most criminals try to avoid generating direct evidence. Hence the prosecution Usually must resort to circumstantial evidence to prove the existence of mens rea, or Intent...

One example of circumstantial evidence is the behavior of a person around the time of an alleged offense. If someone was charged with theft of money and was then seen in a shopping spree purchasing expensive items, the shopping spree might be circumstantial evidence of the individual's guilt...​

That last paragraph explaining the type of behavior we see in Trump's love affair with Putin only since 2015, Flynn's/Rubles behavior, and so many more things elucidated in the OP youtube. Trump/Manafort's changing of only ONE item in the GOP platform, etc, etc, etc.
Click to expand...
Things such as Stone, part of the Trump campaign, Knowing the Wikileaks was coming before it came, and that it would contain Podesta's emails.
Foreknowledge is pretty Meaty Evidence. Perhaps even a step above 'circumstantial.'
And that was just one piece of well more than a Dozen he laid out, and there's of course, Much, Much, more.
All starting with Trumpov's inexplicable Russia Love, Out Loud calling for Russia to release Hillary's 30k emails, and so much more.
Some names/places/times have been confirmed from the 'Dossier' briefing.
You either don't know what 'circumstantial' means, or completely whiffed on the News for several days.
 
Last edited:
calamity said:
The Russian goal is and always has been to destroy Western Democracy. Seems to me he has been very successful in nearly achieving that end.
Click to expand...

And we are helping inordinately by screeching about in confusion and a swirling noise of information instead of waiting to see, what is in the data of any weight. That is why the chatter and hysteria is so dangerous. It is undermining the reliability of information worse than any on tweeting President could ever do.
 
calamity said:
Taking money from Russia and working with them to undermine the democratic candidate in return for altering the US position on defending the Ukraine in the GOP platform would be a pretty big thing. To say the least.

And, that is certainly where much circumstantial evidence points.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you're just making all of that up.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Everyone should be disgusted with the amount of rumor and innuendo coming from both sides. These politicians and reporters need to present some damn evidence or keep their mouths/pens shut.
Click to expand...

I've said this before and I'll say it again.

Start screwing with people who's organization is defined by 3 characters ... and see what happens.
 
TheGoverness said:
As I said before, I'll wait until the circumstantial evidence is provided.

If it is definitive, and it does in fact show evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, then Donald Trump should be impeached and removed from office.
Click to expand...

You WANT just "Circumstantial Evidence"?

Most people, including the standards set for Presidential Impeachment, REQUIRE direct evidence!

There was Plenty of Direct Evidence that Obama committed TREASON on multiple occassions, yet he was never Impeached and Removed from office!

The article referenced in the OP states that Schiff is claiming "there may be MORE than Circumstantial Evidence", meaning something of enough of real substance, yet it does not say there is, only that their "May" be something worthy of investigation. Even the reference article tries to spin this as "Is", until you get into the fine print, and track down the source material used. In those documents, it is merely a "may"... worth investigating.

Yet the quote in the OP misquotes stating that their IS... this is a lie! It is also an example of Leftie Propaganda.

This is nothing more than Illegal, Dishonest, Partisan Politics!

-
 
Kurmugeon said:
You WANT just "Circumstantial Evidence"?

Most people, including the standards set for Presidential Impeachment, REQUIRE direct evidence!

There was Plenty of Direct Evidence that Obama committed TREASON on multiple occassions, yet he was never Impeached and Removed from office!

The article referenced in the OP states that Schiff is claiming "there may be MORE than Circumstantial Evidence", meaning something of enough of real substance, yet it does not say there is, only that their "May" be something worthy of investigation. Even the reference article tries to spin this as "Is", until you get into the fine print, and track down the source material used. In those documents, it is merely a "may"... worth investigating.

Yet the quote in the OP misquotes stating that their IS... this is a lie! It is also an example of Leftie Propaganda.

This is nothing more than Illegal, Dishonest, Partisan Politics!

-
Click to expand...

Mhmm, that's great.
 
Kurmugeon said:
You WANT just "Circumstantial Evidence"?

Most people, including the standards set for Presidential Impeachment, REQUIRE direct evidence!

There was Plenty of Direct Evidence that Obama committed TREASON on multiple occassions, yet he was never Impeached and Removed from office!

The article referenced in the OP states that Schiff is claiming "there may be MORE than Circumstantial Evidence", meaning something of enough of real substance, yet it does not say there is, only that their "May" be something worthy of investigation. Even the reference article tries to spin this as "Is", until you get into the fine print, and track down the source material used. In those documents, it is merely a "may"... worth investigating.

Yet the quote in the OP misquotes stating that their IS... this is a lie! It is also an example of Leftie Propaganda.

This is nothing more than Illegal, Dishonest, Partisan Politics!

-
Click to expand...
:2funny:
 
calamity said:
:2funny:
Click to expand...

So me, and the forum, any piece of Direct or just Circumstantial Evidence linking Trump, or just the Trump Campaign, to any election tampering actions in coordination with Russians!

Anything!?

No... You can't, because for all of the "Claims", no piece of Evidence has yet been released! NOTHING!

-
 
Kurmugeon said:
So me, and the forum, any piece of Direct or just Circumstantial Evidence linking Trump, or just the Trump Campaign, to any election tampering actions in coordination with Russians!

Anything!?

No... You can't, because for all of the "Claims", no piece of Evidence has yet been released! NOTHING!

-
Click to expand...

I was mostly laughing at this part: "There was Plenty of Direct Evidence that Obama committed TREASON on multiple occassions, yet he was never Impeached and Removed from office!"

Got anything to back that up?
 
calamity said:
I was mostly laughing at this part: "There was Plenty of Direct Evidence that Obama committed TREASON on multiple occassions, yet he was never Impeached and Removed from office!"

Got anything to back that up?
Click to expand...



Even the Washington Post admits Obama committed treasonous acts:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...3375f271c9c_story.html?utm_term=.a314910cbde3

And many others in positions of Congressional authority have created formal reports outlining his crimes:
Senators:
Ted Cruz releases 76-item list of 'lawless' Obama actions - Washington Times
https://www.scribd.com/doc/222704929/Ted-Cruz-Legal-Limit-Report-4


Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas:
Armed Services Chair Exposes Obama's TREASON... We Are ALL In Danger


Admirals and Generals:
‘Several Admirals and Generals Accusing Obama of Treason….’ | SOTN: Alternative News & Commentary


Constitutional Law Professor, Matt Barber:
http://godfatherpolitics.com/constitutional-law-professor-says-obama-guilty-treason/


...


I could go on and on and on... A Google search:"Obama List of Treason" will easily find dozens of reputable sources for people of legal knowledge and authority who believe that Obama has committed mutliple acts of TREASON!

-
 
Skeptic Bob said:
And to do that I imagine it would have to tie directly to Trump, not just people in his campaign. I am doubtful they will prove that.
Click to expand...

I don't that's true. All they have to do is prove he was involved in the cover up. Nixon wasn't impeached for the break in was he? I think it was the cover up that got him.
 
ELNOR said:
I don't that's true. All they have to do is prove he was involved in the cover up. Nixon wasn't impeached for the break in was he? I think it was the cover up that got him.
Click to expand...

Good point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom