What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

lwf said:

I think that the desperation of Trump supporters who cling to the last argument they heard in his favor is less about their faith in Donald Trump or their willingness to advance the party at the expense of their own credibility, and more about the public defense of their own judgement. I would wager that a majority of people who voted for Trump did so publicly in one form or another. At this point they're committed. Admitting to any weakness in Donald Trump is, in their minds, an admission of weakness in their own good judgement. Combine this with the strong public outcry against Trump, and they have to face the possibility of not only having made a foolish choice, but having done so in the face of overwhelming evidence that they should have known better.

This is about as socially uncomfortable a position as I can think of.

Click to expand...

Red:
Oh, I can think of a worse social position.....

I find it markedly more discomfiting to adamantly defend a paladin who subsequently shows himself to be inapt, inept and reprobate. Acknowledging disenchantment bests maintaining delusion, positions one to preserve one's probity, and is a fine tool for prohibiting personal perfidy.

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

Xelor said:

When there's no "there" there:

What is it about so many people these days that they rail against empty personal barbs, or personal barbs they believe baseless? At least once every month since I joined DP I have at least remarked upon the notion of not dignifying insipid or baseless remarks by responding to them.

Almost weekly we see instances of Donald Trump responding directly to refute brickbats wherein part of his response is that the charge is baseless or untrue, which, frankly, is no more or less demonstratively probative than is the epithet to which he responded. Well, if the charge is indeed baseless, there's no need for one to respond to it, for its banality and inaccuracy -- that there's no "there" there -- will be endogenously and exogenously manifest.

All those vociferous vituperation does nothing but give life to something that deserves none.​

When there's lots "there" there:

What is it about so many people these days that they have no better sense than to publicly and vituperatively deny things of which they know there's plenty of "there" there? Why not just own "the ****" and move on, which, furthermore, allows "everyone else" to move on too? The fact of the matter is that when a charge has gravitas and can be deductively or inductively shown to be legit, there's no getting around it. Why prolong the agony?

​

Example:

On the matter of Trump and/or his campaign team's having colluded/conspired with Russian state actors.
​

• 
  [*=1]Trump (and/or his emissaries) weekly, if not daily, makes unsubstantiated assertions wherein he denies that there was collusion and disparages anyone, everyone, and everything brought into the quest to obtain a definitive and strongly corroborated answer to the question of whether any such comportment occurred.
  [*=1]Bob Mueller, in contrast, says nothing -- either way -- and has said nothing about the matter since the day he was appointed. He just goes about his job of trying to find out whether there was or was not criminally culpable conspiring and, if there was, who, if anyone, was party to it.

Is there any "there" there? The general public doesn't know. We'll find out when Mueller issues his report.




​

Click to expand...

What bothers me is that what is "there there" does not get addressed.

All the accusations will sooner or later be cleared up as either true and untrue. As such, talking about the possibilities (as I do often) is somewhat a waste of time other than trying to bring something to the attention of those that don't want to look.

Nonetheless, there are a LOT of things that are clearly evident about Trump that ALL of us have been taught to distinguish and value or not value. I am talking about debasing attacks on people that have shown their patriotism and value in the past, lack of general respect, unprovoked attacks (such as the handicapped kid), vulgar language, pettiness, hyperbole (he is the best or the worst etc), actions that show a lack of humanity (such as separating children from their parents and then losing the information about who they are and where they are being kept), lauding known dictators (Putin and Kim Jong un), making decisions without consulting it with his own people, vengative behavior to justify ego, and etc.

These are not stories that need confirmation of guilt to be considered. This is what we see from Trump every single day with our own eyes. Why are we not talking about this, why are we not making him responsible for these things that he does and that we know for a fact that he does. Have we totally lost our ability to be people of honor, respect, principles and ability to discuss things without trying to bring the other side down below our level?

These are the "there there" events that the Trump supporters don't address or even want to talk about. Are we to the place that we ignore what we have been taught by our own parents?

C'mon, are we losing the ability to be who our forefathers fought so hard to achieve..........to do what is right and stay away from what is wrong?

I venture to guess that this post will not be responded to by any Trump supporters other than to ignore the bad and mention only the good.

It is sad.

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

Mycroft said:

There is only one reason Hillary didn't go to jail...and that's the same reason we have this Mueller witch hunt.

Click to expand...

Oh yes, there was a conspiracy "for" Hillary and "against" Trump by the same people that caused Hillary to lose the election (by re-opening the email investigation 6 weeks before the election) and for Trump to win it (by not letting the people know that there was also an investigation into Trump).

These are the people that were in charge then and to finish it off, they were Republicans. That makes a lot of sense............doesn't it?

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

Luckyone said:

Oh yes, there was a conspiracy "for" Hillary and "against" Trump by the same people that caused Hillary to lose the election (by re-opening the email investigation 6 weeks before the election) and for Trump to win it (by not letting the people know that there was also an investigation into Trump).

These are the people that were in charge then and to finish it off, they were Republicans. That makes a lot of sense............doesn't it?

Click to expand...

The facts say otherwise. Stop repeating the spinning nonsense you get from the multimedia talking potato heads. They aren't doing you any favors.

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

Luckyone said:

What bothers me is that what is "there there" does not get addressed.

All the accusations will sooner or later be cleared up as either true and untrue. As such, talking about the possibilities (as I do often) is somewhat a waste of time other than trying to bring something to the attention of those that don't want to look.

Nonetheless, there are a LOT of things that are clearly evident about Trump that ALL of us have been taught to distinguish and value or not value. I am talking about debasing attacks on people that have shown their patriotism and value in the past, lack of general respect, unprovoked attacks (such as the handicapped kid), vulgar language, pettiness, hyperbole (he is the best or the worst etc), actions that show a lack of humanity (such as separating children from their parents and then losing the information about who they are and where they are being kept), lauding known dictators (Putin and Kim Jong un), making decisions without consulting it with his own people, vengative behavior to justify ego, and etc.

These are not stories that need confirmation of guilt to be considered. This is what we see from Trump every single day with our own eyes. Why are we not talking about this, why are we not making him responsible for these things that he does and that we know for a fact that he does. Have we totally lost our ability to be people of honor, respect, principles and ability to discuss things without trying to bring the other side down below our level?

These are the "there there" events that the Trump supporters don't address or even want to talk about. Are we to the place that we ignore what we have been taught by our own parents?

C'mon, are we losing the ability to be who our forefathers fought so hard to achieve..........to do what is right and stay away from what is wrong?

I venture to guess that this post will not be responded to by any Trump supporters other than to ignore the bad and mention only the good.

It is sad.

Click to expand...

I share your vexation and incredulity at the apparent moral miasma enshrouding our culture.

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

Mycroft said:

The facts say otherwise. Stop repeating the spinning nonsense you get from the multimedia talking potato heads. They aren't doing you any favors.

Click to expand...

You are doing exactly what you are accusing me of.

Let me ask:

Did the FBI reopen the Clinton investigation 6 weeks before the election? Answer is YES, it is fact!
Did the FBI not make public that Trump was being investigated? Answer is YES, it is fact!
Was the top brass of the FBI mostly registered Republicans? Answer is YES, it is fact!
Did these actions help Trump and hurt Clinton? Answer is YES, it is fact!

So when you say that the facts say otherwise, please explain what facts say otherwise and give me links to that information!

I think it is you that is spinning nonsense from the Fox and Trump media potato heads. They aren't doing you any favors.

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

Luckyone said:

You are doing exactly what you are accusing me of.

Let me ask:

Did the FBI reopen the Clinton investigation 6 weeks before the election? Answer is YES, it is fact!
Did the FBI not make public that Trump was being investigated? Answer is YES, it is fact!
Was the top brass of the FBI mostly registered Republicans? Answer is YES, it is fact!
Did these actions help Trump and hurt Clinton? Answer is YES, it is fact!

So when you say that the facts say otherwise, please explain what facts say otherwise and give me links to that information!

I think it is you that is spinning nonsense from the Fox and Trump media potato heads. They aren't doing you any favors.

Click to expand...

What you are not doing is looking for the facts that say WHY all of that happened.

Also, your last "fact" in actually an opinion. You don't know if all of those actions hurt Clinton. Myself...I think she was toast BEFORE all that happened. She just ran a crappy campaign and would have lost no matter what the FBI did.

Anyway, let's look at the first of your facts...reopening the investigation.

Do you know WHY that happened? It wasn't because Comey had it in for Hillary. Hell, he WANTED Hillary to win. No, he did that because he HAD to. He said, himself, that he had to make a choice and that both choices were bad. He took the least bad choice. Now...I'm not going to rehash this with you just because you are ignorant and don't know the facts. I'll just point you in the right direction so you can learn by making your own effort. (That's always the best way to learn.)

Learn the facts about Weiner's laptop. If you learn those facts, you'll know exactly why Comey reopened the investigation.

But, for god's sake...stay away from the ****ing news/opinion main media. They do NOT give you the facts without their spin.

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

Mycroft said:

What you are not doing is looking for the facts that say WHY all of that happened.

Also, your last "fact" in actually an opinion. You don't know if all of those actions hurt Clinton. Myself...I think she was toast BEFORE all that happened. She just ran a crappy campaign and would have lost no matter what the FBI did.

Anyway, let's look at the first of your facts...reopening the investigation.

Do you know WHY that happened? It wasn't because Comey had it in for Hillary. Hell, he WANTED Hillary to win. No, he did that because he HAD to. He said, himself, that he had to make a choice and that both choices were bad. He took the least bad choice. Now...I'm not going to rehash this with you just because you are ignorant and don't know the facts. I'll just point you in the right direction so you can learn by making your own effort. (That's always the best way to learn.)

Learn the facts about Weiner's laptop. If you learn those facts, you'll know exactly why Comey reopened the investigation.

But, for god's sake...stay away from the ****ing news/opinion main media. They do NOT give you the facts without their spin.

Click to expand...

Mycroft, you are so wrong it is overwhelming. Weiner's Laptop is proof? Gawd almightly, perhaps Mickey Mouse was the culprit.

Comey wanted Hillary to win? Why would he then reopen the investigation? Had to?. No he did not HAVE TO. Why did he not announce that Trump was being investigated, it would have insured a Hillary win.

You are not using any common sense and I truly am tired of trying to debate anything with you. I mean, Weiner's Laptop?

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

Luckyone said:

Mycroft, you are so wrong it is overwhelming. Weiner's Laptop is proof? Gawd almightly, perhaps Mickey Mouse was the culprit.

Comey wanted Hillary to win? Why would he then reopen the investigation? Had to?. No he did not HAVE TO. Why did he not announce that Trump was being investigated, it would have insured a Hillary win.

You are not using any common sense and I truly am tired of trying to debate anything with you. I mean, Weiner's Laptop?

Click to expand...

sigh...

Speaking at times with a raised voice, Comey said he faced two difficult decisions when agents told him in October that they had found emails potentially connected to the Clinton case on a laptop belonging to former Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., who separated last year from top Clinton aide Huma Abedin. Weiner's laptop was seized as part of a sexting investigation involving a teenage girl.

Comey said he knew it would be unorthodox to alert Congress to that discovery 11 days before Americans picked a new president. But while that option was "really bad," he said he figured it'd be worse to hide the discovery from lawmakers, especially when he had testified under oath that the investigation had been concluded and had promised to advise lawmakers if it needed to be reopened.

https://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/comey-defends-clinton/2017/05/04/id/788057/

Click to expand...

Now...keep in mind that Comey is displaying a lack of candor here. He's telling the truth that he had to make a choice between two bad actions, but he's not being truthful about how he came to be in this position or details about how he came to learn about that laptop and the emails.

This is why I say you need to learn the FACTS. And no, Weiner's laptop isn't "proof"...it's evidence. It's evidence you weren't even aware of until I mentioned it to you. Now...just think of all the other facts and evidence you aren't aware of. Yet, you are forming an opinion.

End your ignorance. Learn the facts. Then come back and we'll talk.

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

Luckyone said:

Mycroft, you are so wrong it is overwhelming. Weiner's Laptop is proof? Gawd almightly, perhaps Mickey Mouse was the culprit.

Comey wanted Hillary to win? Why would he then reopen the investigation? Had to?. No he did not HAVE TO. Why did he not announce that Trump was being investigated, it would have insured a Hillary win.

You are not using any common sense and I truly am tired of trying to debate anything with you. I mean, Weiner's Laptop?

Click to expand...

Red:
If the FBI obtained or learned of the potentiality of there being new information that may alter the conclusions of a prior and closed investigation, yes, the investigation would have to have been reopened if the statute of limitations doesn't preclude prosecution.


Blue:
The FBI didn't announce that the activities of Trump campaign personnel and Russian state actors were by the FBI being investigated because the FBI (like other LEOs) doesn't generally disclose such information. To wit, the only reason we learned the FBI had opened an investigation into the Trump team's activities with Russian agents/assets/cutouts was because so stating became necessary in his public testimony during a Congressional hearing.

That Clinton was being investigated resulted from an express request from Congress following from the Benghazi hearings.

The short of it is that unless Congress forces the FBI's hand, that the FBI is currently investigating anyone rarely comes to the public's attention by way of the FBI disclosing that information. About the only way the public generally learns of FBI investigations is by reviewing most-wanted lists; however, by the time one makes it onto a most-wanted list, the investigation is damn near completed.

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

Mycroft said:

sigh...



Now...keep in mind that Comey is displaying a lack of candor here. He's telling the truth that he had to make a choice between two bad actions, but he's not being truthful about how he came to be in this position or details about how he came to learn about that laptop and the emails.

This is why I say you need to learn the FACTS. And no, Weiner's laptop isn't "proof"...it's evidence. It's evidence you weren't even aware of until I mentioned it to you. Now...just think of all the other facts and evidence you aren't aware of. Yet, you are forming an opinion.

End your ignorance. Learn the facts. Then come back and we'll talk.

Click to expand...

I truly am not interested in responding to you anymore.

There is a limit to my patience and you have exceeded it by much.

You are totally WRONG and I refuse to keep trying to educate you.

Re: What to do when there's no "there" there and when there's lots of "there" there

ttwtt78640 said:

Hmm... Trump (et al) likely met with foreigners to attempt to obtain dirt (opposition research) on Hillary yet we know that Hillary (et al) paid to get said dirt (opposition research?) from foreigners (some Russian). Why is one rumored to be a criminal act and the other being blown off as politics as usual?

Click to expand...

Getting dirt is one thing. Getting funds is similar. Coordinating with the foreign entity to influence the election, while the foreign entity is taking direct action like Russia did is the problem. That's what Mueller is after. Any Americans and certainly every foreigner that were allied with the foreign actors should be scrutinized and tried for crimes against America. Paying for dirt is only halfway there. If the dirt was stolen by the foreign actors then that's getting much closer especially if there was a trade of sorts. What we've been allowed to see so far shows significant interaction and endless lies about said interaction. It sucks that so many have the initial reaction of lieing and hoping either they arent found out or people wont care.

I want Mueller to do his job fiercely and I will accept the outcome so long as he is allowed to do said job and maintains an element of integrity. Personally I am not expecting worse case scenario for trump, but we should see the result and what he and his campaign did do. I would be ok with a special prosecutor of the Hillary email situation, obama DOJ and FBI. Here's the thing, we shouldn't be scared of what a special prosecutor uncovers. If there is sufficient illegal activity then it's good to find that. I would be a little concerned with what Congress or other highly partisan entities would do about it. I dont think it can get worse than gowdy's committee to defame clinton.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk