- Local time
- Today, 06:24
- Joined
- Sep 28, 1999
- Messages
- 7,396
There is nothing wrong with respectful disagreement, because now its my turn!@Jon , I will have to respectfully disagree with you on that. It was hard to find evidence, but I think based on the fact(?) that Russian did interfere greatly in the election, and it greatly benefitted Trump, and based on the type of statements he made (kind of defiant and bold), then coming to the conclusion that we can assume he had something to do with it isn't at all an unreasonable assumption. We get that there was very little hard evidence found, but people can come up with their own conclusions based on all things considered and the way he acted and talked about the whole thing in combination with the circumstances. I will grant you that there wasn't really an evidentiary conclusion so to speak. That doesn't mean there was none, just none hard fast could be found, but people connect dots..
I will grant Trump that he is good at implying things without directly saying them, (or saying "other people are saying", etc. etc., ) in order to distance himself from the direct statement.
It would be like if I were the mayor and my cousin got a lucrative contract and people accused me of some sort of improper channeling, and I said "No, I didn't do it. But I'd be totally cool doing it!" and such things like that, I'm kind of setting myself up for being harshly judged.
If we live in a society where we assume guilt without evidence, that is not the kind of society I want to live in. If a party in power that you disliked did something that benefited you, due to a change in the tax law or some other benefit, do we assume that you indeed colluded with that government? I think not. Two years of investigations with countless interviews, subpeanos and so on. No collusion. A team of 17 lawyers who hated Trump couldn't find any collusion. He was clean.
Yet, in the backdrop of all this, we do find that FBI ages were corrupt to the core, spying on Trump and his campaign, Comey leaking information and lawyers altering the evidence 180 degrees, with all "errors" in favour of getting a fisa warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. The whole think stinks.
The only dots out there are fictitious ones that the likes of CNN have perpetrated for their own political purposes. They should be ashamed of themselves for slurring the innocent.
To be honest, I can't believe people are still saying they believed Trump colluded with Russia. How many investigations have there been on this now? Let the facts decide guilt, not political preferences or personal hatred for the man. Do you realise how dangerous that is to take that attitude? The slurring of the innocent is not something I commend.
As for Hillary, exonerated by the Trump hating Comey, stinks to high heaven. There was plenty of evidence for her criminality, but she destroyed half of it, taking hammers to ipads, erasing 30K emails and so on. And the FBI also allowed laptops to be destroyed. She lied to congress innumerable times, had her husband speaking to the head of the DOJ days before her hearing, said she thought "C" at the top of documents was an alphabetical marker rather than representing "Classified", despite being in the government for 20 years...I could go on and on. But wait, she is innocent! Thanks Trump hating Comey!
Last edited: