• 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!

Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump guilt?

Did Trump attempt to s**t stain DOJ/FBI with fake spying accusations and did Atty Flood stain himsel


  • Total voters
    13
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Read this -- Dept. of State Report on Human Rights in Russia -- and tell me a ton of it doesn't sound eerily reminiscent of what we're daily witnessing Trump attempt to execute here.
  • The government passed repressive laws and selectively employed existing ones to harass, discredit, prosecute, imprison, detain, fine, and suppress individuals and organizations critical of the government.
  • The government failed to take adequate steps to prosecute or punish most officials who committed abuses, resulting in a climate of impunity.
  • Other problems included:
    • allegations of torture and excessive force by law enforcement officers that sometimes led to deaths;
    • executive branch pressure on the judiciary;
    • electoral irregularities;
    • extensive official corruption;
    • violence against women;
    • discrimination against persons with disabilities; and
    • limitations on workers’ rights.

This could be talking about the Obama administration.

Especially the "extensive political corruption" part.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

This could be talking about the Obama administration.

Especially the "extensive political corruption" part.

Edit in your presumably well supported contentions, so far absent from this article on the Obama Presidency,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Barack_Obama ....or stop posting such unsupported descriptions. You are embarrassing yourself and it is painful to watch!
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Until today, Emmet Flood was considered a respected and highly regarded legal talent. If anyone in DC is aware that the POTUS has a solemn duty not to exploit
the power and influence associated with his official position by attempting to place himself above the law
, especially by seeking/demanding confidential investigative
details in an criminal investigation Trump himself is a subject of,

I'm sorry...I had to stop reading right there. It's already been admitted that Trump isn't a subject of criminal investigation by Mueller's team. I didn't bother reading further.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

I'm sorry...I had to stop reading right there. It's already been admitted that Trump isn't a subject of criminal investigation by Mueller's team. I didn't bother reading further.

I will not hold my breath while waiting for your apology for your gross and troubling posted lack of accuracy. Toodles!
(Your post does help explain the substance free, "drive by" incidents evident in the pages in this thread and masquerading as posted contributions of you and those sympathetic with your politics.)

https://www.redstate.com/streiff/20...e-says-special-counsel-lying-targeting-trump/
TrumpAsubjectRedState.jpg


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speci...–present)#Trump_as_a_subject_of_investigation
Special Counsel investigation (2017–present)

The 2017–present Special Counsel investigation is a United States law enforcement investigation of Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and any Russian (or other foreign) interference in the election, including exploring any possible links or coordination between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government, "and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation." The scope of the investigation reportedly also includes potential obstruction of justice by President Trump and others.[1] Since May 2017, the investigation has been led by a United States Special Counsel, Robert Mueller, a former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

Mueller's investigation took over several FBI investigations including those involving former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, both of which started before the 2016 presidential election.[2] ....
....
Trump as a subject of investigation
From the beginning of his presidency Trump has requested assurances that that he is not personally under investigation. FBI Director Comey told him so privately on three occasions but refused to make a public comment to that effect.[241] In his letter dismissing Comey, Trump thanked Comey for "informing me, on three separate occasions, that I am not under investigation."[241][242] Comey later confirmed that this was true.[243]

In March 2018, Mueller's office reportedly informed Trump's attorneys that the president is not a "criminal target" but remains a "subject" of the continuing investigation. Trump's advisers were reported to be split in their interpretation of this, with some believing it was an indication that his legal exposure was low, while others expressed concern that Mueller was inducing him to agree to a personal interview, which his attorneys have discouraged him from doing for fear he might perjure himself and thus change his status from subject to target. The Post reported that Mueller also advised the attorneys that he is "preparing a report about the president's actions while in office and potential obstruction of justice."[244] The Post referenced Justice Department guidelines,[245] which explain:

A "target" is a person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime and who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant.
A "subject" of an investigation is a person whose conduct is within the scope of the grand jury's investigation.

Trump told reporters on January 24, 2018, that he was "looking forward" to testifying under oath to the Mueller investigation, perhaps in "two or three weeks," but added that it was "subject to my lawyers and all of that."[246]The Wall Street Journal reported on February 25, 2018, that Trump's lawyers are considering ways for him to testify, provided the questions he faces are limited in scope and do not test his recollections in ways that amount to a potential perjury trap. Among options they are considering are providing written answers to Mueller's questions and having the president give limited face-to-face testimony.[247] The Washington Post reported on March 19, 2018, that Trump's attorneys provided Mueller's office "written descriptions that chronicle key moments under investigation in hopes of curtailing the scope of a presidential interview.".[248] In May 2018, Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani told Politico that Mueller's team has rejected the proposal of providing a written testimony instead of an oral interview.[249]
 
Last edited:
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

This could be talking about the Obama administration.

Especially the "extensive political corruption" part.

The Obama administration was perhaps the cleanest administration of modern history. Certainly it was cleaner than modern Republican administrations.

Nixon's had dozens of convictions for crimes in office.

The Bush's and Reagan did, too.

OBAMA HAD ZERO CONVICTIONS FOR CRIMES IN OFFICE.

Please make a note of it.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

The Obama administration was perhaps the cleanest administration of modern history. Certainly it was cleaner than modern Republican administrations.

Nixon's had dozens of convictions for crimes in office.

The Bush's and Reagan did, too.

OBAMA HAD ZERO CONVICTIONS FOR CRIMES IN OFFICE.

Please make a note of it.

How many people were fired, forced to resign, or demoted in the Obama FBI/DOJ?

And there are indictments coming. You can be sure of that.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Until today, Emmet Flood was considered a respected and highly regarded legal talent. If anyone in DC is aware that the POTUS has a solemn duty not to exploit
the power and influence associated with his official position by attempting to place himself above the law
, especially by seeking/demanding confidential investigative
details in an criminal investigation Trump himself is a subject of, a reasonable person would have assumed it would be Trump personal criminal defense attorney Flood!

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

Picture a scenario in which a major corporation and its CEO were under investigation and House and Senate intelligence or judiciary oversight committee members
convened a meeting to discuss some specifics of that criminal investigation with DOJ prosecutors because the corporation was a major defense contractor and there
was congressional concern over national security impact resulting from anticipated arrests and prosecutions of primary executives of that corporation, who have
engaged in a sustained attack, calling the criminal investigation a Witch Hunt and disparaged the integrity of prosecutors and of the FBI, and as the meeting
began, in walked the personal attorney of that corporation's CEO and the CEO's executive assistant and the two attempted to take seats at the table, with the attorney
offering a statement to the group. Also consider that the corporation CEO personally has been attacking prosecutors and FBI investigators for months and has refused for at
least three months to agree to an interview with prosecutors who have patiently waited, attempting to subpoena the CEO only as a last resort.



VS


How come some people like chasing after a President, wanting his head on a stick, when a former Secretary of State committed numerous felonies, and she has yet to be indicted and imprisoned.

How come , after admitting prejudice on behalf of Hillary Clinton during the last Presidential race, has James Comey not been arrested and locked up?

How come certain members of the FBI have not been locked up for divulging classified information?

How come certain DOJ Attorneys have not been disbarred and incarcerated?


Why has the DOJ inspector general's office not launched a full investigation into Loretta Lynch , and her Clinton dealings during the election?


I'll stop here. I have tons of questions, but I will stop here.




Major Lambda
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

How many people were fired, forced to resign, or demoted in the Obama FBI/DOJ?

And there are indictments coming. You can be sure of that.

Not one conviction. Democrats run cleaner operations. Carter had one conviction. Obama had zero and Clinton had one.

It's an indisputable fact.
 
Last edited:
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Not one conviction. Democrats run cleaner operations. Carter had one conviction. Obama had zero and Clinton had one.

It's an indisputable fact.

Obama and Clinton used their government agencies to avoid conviction. But that won't work for Obama now.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

How come some people like chasing after a President, wanting his head on a stick, when a former Secretary of State committed numerous felonies, and she has yet to be indicted and imprisoned.

How come , after admitting prejudice on behalf of Hillary Clinton during the last Presidential race, has James Comey not been arrested and locked up?

How come certain members of the FBI have not been locked up for divulging classified information?

How come certain DOJ Attorneys have not been disbarred and incarcerated?


Why has the DOJ inspector general's office not launched a full investigation into Loretta Lynch , and her Clinton dealings during the election?


I'll stop here. I have tons of questions, but I will stop here.




Major Lambda

I'll address one of your questions: the one about Lynch.

The coming IG report will include her actions.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Obama and Clinton used their government agencies to avoid conviction. But that won't work for Obama now.

Nonsense. Republican administrations are dirty. There's your story.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

I will not hold my breath while waiting for your apology for your gross and troubling posted lack of accuracy. Toodles!
(Your post does help explain the substance free, "drive by" incidents evident in the pages in this thread and masquerading as posted contributions of you and those sympathetic with your politics.)

Apology? Let me repeat what you wrote, so we can all see how your failed attempt at shifting the goal post failed, and you were wrong.

Until today, Emmet Flood was considered a respected and highly regarded legal talent. If anyone in DC is aware that the POTUS has a solemn duty not to exploit
the power and influence associated with his official position by attempting to place himself above the law
, especially by seeking/demanding confidential investigative
details in an criminal investigation Trump himself is a subject of,

Hmmm....what's that there? "criminal"? Well, golly gee...he ain't under no criminal investigation there, sir. He is a person of interest but there is no accusations or suspicions of criminality.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...5eac230e514_story.html?utm_term=.b0cb94ea1f68

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III informed President Trump’s attorneys last month that he is continuing to investigate the president but does not consider him a criminal target at this point, according to three people familiar with the discussions.

So I'll close up with "something, something, hold my breath....something, something...apology.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

I believe the answer is yellow.

Is that the color of hate? Seems that all we get lately.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

How many people were fired, forced to resign, or demoted in the Obama FBI/DOJ?

And there are indictments coming. You can be sure of that.

Mycroft, I first reacted to your post by muttering, "goodness gracious, why do I have to choose between displaying my two existing sig lines and Mycroft's post?"
Then it struck me that you could not possibly have meant what I initially thought I read, in your post, so I was inspired by you being impressed by Trump's concern
that Comey and McCabe had made disclosures disrupting the presidential campaign playing field to such a grave extent their actions, so contrary to DOJ guidelines,
actually delegitimized Trump's electoral college vote plurality, at least from Trump's POV. ....and I built a new poll thread in reaction to your post.:

https://www.debatepolitics.com/poll...y-consensus-comey-rosenstein-and-mueller.html
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Apology? Let me repeat what you wrote, so we can all see how your failed attempt at shifting the goal post failed, and you were wrong.



Hmmm....what's that there? "criminal"? Well, golly gee...he ain't under no criminal investigation there, sir. He is a person of interest but there is no accusations or suspicions of criminality.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...5eac230e514_story.html?utm_term=.b0cb94ea1f68



So I'll close up with "something, something, hold my breath....something, something...apology.

Maybe English is not your native language? I cannot even guess what other reason there can be for your response.


Instead of apologizing, are you actually doubling down on your posted opinion Trump is not a subject of Special Consul Mueller's criminal investigation?
The only other component of the Mueller investigation is counter intelligence. Are you saying Trump is a subject of the counter intelligence investigation but
not a subject of the criminal investigation?

Let us review what you attempted in your first post.:
I'm sorry...I had to stop reading right there. It's already been admitted that Trump isn't a subject of criminal investigation by Mueller's team. I didn't bother reading further.

Instead of even attempting to DEBATE, you took the lazy, misleading approach I have come to expect from you and your "Truman Show" bubblicious ilk
trolling the threads of this forum. You attempted to paint me, personally, as posting in too unreasonable a manner for you to lower yourself to actually
respond to in the spirit of sincere debate. Maybe you have conducted yourself in this way often enough to satisfy you it is not as I describe.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/04/trump-target-subject/557243/
Does It Matter If Trump Is a 'Target' or a 'Subject' of Mueller's Probe?
The president’s attorneys may be relieved, but experts caution there’s little reason for the president to take comfort.

Carlos Barria / Reuters
ADAM SERWER APR 4, 2018
...
A subject of an investigation is usually not named a target until charges are imminent. The fact that Trump remains the subject of a criminal investigation, months after witnesses have been interviewed, documents turned over, and charges filed, could mean that Mueller thinks he’s guilty, even if he cannot yet prove it. Or it could mean that Mueller thinks Trump is innocent, and all he needs is to do is interview him to make sure.....
 
Last edited:
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Until today, Emmet Flood was considered a respected and highly regarded legal talent. If anyone in DC is aware that the POTUS has a solemn duty not to exploit
the power and influence associated with his official position by attempting to place himself above the law
, especially by seeking/demanding confidential investigative
details in an criminal investigation Trump himself is a subject of, a reasonable person would have assumed it would be Trump personal criminal defense attorney Flood!

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

Picture a scenario in which a major corporation and its CEO were under investigation and House and Senate intelligence or judiciary oversight committee members
convened a meeting to discuss some specifics of that criminal investigation with DOJ prosecutors because the corporation was a major defense contractor and there
was congressional concern over national security impact resulting from anticipated arrests and prosecutions of primary executives of that corporation, who have
engaged in a sustained attack, calling the criminal investigation a Witch Hunt and disparaged the integrity of prosecutors and of the FBI, and as the meeting
began, in walked the personal attorney of that corporation's CEO and the CEO's executive assistant and the two attempted to take seats at the table, with the attorney
offering a statement to the group. Also consider that the corporation CEO personally has been attacking prosecutors and FBI investigators for months and has refused for at
least three months to agree to an interview with prosecutors who have patiently waited, attempting to subpoena the CEO only as a last resort.



VS

Presentation a bit confusing.


IMO the propaganda machines paid to support Trump are indeed trying to paint the FBI and DOJ, among others, as politically biased.
I think Trump is just jumping in from time to time and saying "what they said!"
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Maybe English is not your native language? I cannot even guess what other reason there can be for your response.

Instead of apologizing, are you actually doubling down on your posted opinion Trump is not a subject of Special Consul Mueller's criminal investigation?

Why, yes...I'll double down on facts all day long. Trump is not under criminal investigation.

The only other component of the Mueller investigation is counter intelligence. Are you saying Trump is a subject of the counter intelligence investigation but
not a subject of the criminal investigation?

I'm not privy to everything that is involved in the Mueller investigation. I just know that Trump is not under criminal investigation, which is what you claimed.


Let us review what you attempted in your first post.:


Instead of even attempting to DEBATE, you took the lazy, misleading approach I have come to expect from you and your "Truman Show" bubblicious ilk
trolling the threads of this forum. You attempted to paint me, personally, as posting in too unreasonable a manner for you to lower yourself to actually
respond to in the spirit of sincere debate. Maybe you have conducted yourself in this way often enough to satisfy you it is not as I describe.

You can take it personally all you want. You made a statement that is not factually correct and that was a key point to your OP. I corrected it and am waiting for you to try and reconstruct a valid point.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Did Trump attempt to s**t stain DOJ/FBI with fake spying accusations and did Atty Flood stain himself

Looks to me like the yes's have it. And with good reason, Flood showing up and a partisan briefing only diminished his AND the (mis) administration's credibility. Both sides of the isle that have accessed the (non) evidence agree that their is nothing to djt's claim that FBI/DOJ operatives were spying on his campaign.

Tha-tha-that's all Folks! Little djt has lied … again … what a surprise.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Why, yes...I'll double down on facts all day long. Trump is not under criminal investigation.



I'm not privy to everything that is involved in the Mueller investigation. I just know that Trump is not under criminal investigation, which is what you claimed.




You can take it personally all you want. You made a statement that is not factually correct and that was a key point to your OP. I corrected it and am waiting for you to try and reconstruct a valid point.

Until Hell Freezes Over - YouTube
Video for prepared until hell freezes over▶ 0:06
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=re_kbcY4bWU
Sep 12, 2015 - Uploaded by Ed Smith
You will wait until hell freezes over for me to say anything in an apology - Duration: 7:01

Stiil waiting for you to post your apology. You have me at a disadvantage because you make it clear you do not confine yourself to posting similarly to a reasonable person.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation...fter-fbi-raid-trump-busts-with-misstatements/
Fact check: After FBI raid, Trump busts with misstatements
Originally published April 11, 2018 at 11:21 am Updated April 11, 2018 at 11:25 am
The FBI raid on the office and hotel room of President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer provoked visceral rage from the president and a burst of misstatements. Here’s a look at his remarks.

By ERIC TUCKER and CALVIN WOODWARD
The Associated Press


...Trump: “Again, they found nothing. And in finding nothing, that’s a big statement.” — Referring to the Mueller investigation.

The facts: They found something.

So far, four Trump associates have been charged in Mueller’s investigation, of whom three have pleaded guilty to lying to the authorities. Among them are Michael Flynn, former White House national security adviser, and Rick Gates, a former Trump campaign aide. Overall, 19 people, including 13 Russians, have been charged.

Mueller is known to consider Trump a subject of his criminal investigation at this point.
Being a subject in an investigation — instead of a target — suggests Mueller may not be currently preparing a criminal prosecution of the president but considers him more pivotal than a mere witness would be...
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Stiil waiting for you to post your apology. You have me at a disadvantage because you make it clear you do not confine yourself to posting similarly to a reasonable person.

Sorry, but your link is a statement ("Mueller is known" <---by whom?) that is not backed up by anything but empty rhetoric. Mine specifically stated that Mueller has made it clear that he is not under criminal investigation. In other words, your points fails.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Why do you think only "lefties will answer" the poll question? Will "righties" not choose the "no" option? Choosing either of the two options in the poll constitutes answering the poll question.

Because you don't have a "no option". You only have your rabid two answers.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Except for the fact the only parties in this sordid crisis not behaving like ethics challenged circus clowns ARE Rod Rosenstein, Robert Mueller, and FBI Director Chris Ray,
the democrats of the House intel committee, and Burr and Warner of the Senate Intel committee.

The self serving as ultimate priority, deliberate lying, false victim hood, and the total absence of any inclination to behave ethically or set any example of fair leadership
do stick in my craw, but I have even a lower opinion of those who support and defend it all.

https://twitter.com/DavidCornDC/status/999761583768260609
TrumpSpyingDavidCorn

partisan babble.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Did your formative years not include reading the likes of Updike, Faulkner, or Dickens?

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way—in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.
-- Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities

But then they were married (she felt awful about being pregnant before but Harry had been talking about marriage for a while and anyway laughed when she told him in early February about missing her period and said Great she was terribly frightened and he said Great and lifted her put his arms around under her bottom and lifted her like you would a child he could be so wonderful when you didn’t expect it in a way it seemed important that you didn’t expect it there was so much nice in him she couldn’t explain to anybody she had been so frightened about being pregnant and he made her be proud) they were married after her missing her second period in March and she was still little clumsy dark-complected Janice Springer and her husband was a conceited lunk who wasn’t good for anything in the world Daddy said and the feeling of being alone would melt a little with a little drink.
-- John Updike, Rabbit Run

There was a wisteria vine blooming for the second time that summer on a wooden trellis before one window, into which sparrows came now and then in random gusts, making a dry vivid dusty sound before going away: and opposite Quentin, Miss Coldfield in the eternal black which she had worn for forty-three years now, whether for sister, father, or nothusband none knew, sitting so bolt upright in the straight hard chair that was so tall for her that her legs hung straight and rigid as if she had iron shinbones and ankles, clear of the floor with that air of impotent and static rage like children’s feet, and talking in that grim haggard amazed voice until at last listening would renege and hearing-sense self-confound and the long-dead object of her impotent yet indomitable frustration would appear, as though by outraged recapitulation evoked, quiet inattentive and harmless, out of the biding and dreamy and victorious dust.
-- William Faulkner, Absalom, Absalom!

You aint them.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

Because you don't have a "no option". You only have your rabid two answers.

??? What?

The "no" option says, "No, Trump is honest and Flood behaved ethically. DOJ & FBI are unethical" and offers the opposite of the question elements.
  • Question: "Did Trump attempt to s**t stain DOJ/FBI with fake spying accusations and did Atty Flood stain himself?"
    • Am I mistaken in thinking that falsely accusing someone of something is dishonest?
    • Am I mistaken in thinking that the crux of one's assessment of Flood's behavior at the meeting in question is that of ethicality?
    • Am I mistaken in thinking that the line of that that accepts as true Trump's accusations about the FBI/DoJ must logically accept too that the FBI/DoJ are unethical?
I realize it's a compound question and answer of sorts, but the corresponding substantive elements of it match.
 
Re: Are today's Trump s**t staining DOJ, FBI & Emmet Flood Trump staining himself Tells of Trump gui

??? What?

The "no" option says, "No, Trump is honest and Flood behaved ethically. DOJ & FBI are unethical" and offers the opposite of the question elements.
  • Question: "Did Trump attempt to s**t stain DOJ/FBI with fake spying accusations and did Atty Flood stain himself?"
    • Am I mistaken in thinking that falsely accusing someone of something is dishonest?
    • Am I mistaken in thinking that the crux of one's assessment of Flood's behavior at the meeting in question is that of ethicality?
    • Am I mistaken in thinking that the line of that that accepts as true Trump's accusations about the FBI/DoJ must logically accept too that the FBI/DoJ are unethical?
I realize it's a compound question and answer of sorts, but the corresponding substantive elements of it match.

All questions have a yes, a no, and an other. You provided no "other", only two rabid answers.
 
Back
Top Bottom