Trump fires FBI director James Comey

[Charles]

OR not yet released. Certainly, on the surface, Trump is as guilty as hell. Damning information is emerging on a daily basis...but we shall wait and see.

Months is not a long timeClapper did not go for "even the slightest hint"A too convenient interpretation of partiality
Stuck in the "Trump cannot be guilty" approach

[Cow Poke]

OR not yet released. Certainly, on the surface, Trump is as guilty as hell. Damning information is emerging on a daily basis...but we shall wait and see.

Did you say the same thing about Hillary?

[Charles]

A few Clapper quotes if anyone still believes his statement makes sure that Trump is innocent because Clapper said there was no evidence and he would have gone for anything if there was even the slightest hint:

"There was no evidence that rose to that level, at that time, that found its way in to the intelligence community assessment, which we had pretty high confidence in." And he continues to say: "That's not to say there wasn't evidence, but not that met that threshold."

The quote can be found here: http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/12/po...-trump-russia/http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...llusion-russia

The article contains the following very interesting part: "He added that there was no evidence of collusion that rose to the level of "high confidence" when the intelligence community in January was preparing its assessment of the Russian meddling in the 2016 campaign. Yet he added, "That's not to say there wasn't evidence.""

He goes on to say that he does not regard the Russia story as a fraud.

Now, of course, I suppose one could attack the sources and go for the "fake news". However these are (apart from the article quote) the words from the man himself.

[Mountain Man]

OR not yet released. Certainly, on the surface, Trump is as guilty as hell. Damning information is emerging on a daily basis...but we shall wait and see.

I see, so you're another one of those idiots who insists that "Lack of evidence doesn't mean Trump is innocent, it just means we haven't looked hard enough to prove him guilty".

[Mountain Man]

Months is not a long timeClapper did not go for "even the slightest hint"A too convenient interpretation of partiality
Stuck in the "Trump cannot be guilty" approach

"Months" may not be long enough to reach a conclusion, but it is certainly plenty long enough to find at least something that would justify an ongoing investigation. For James Clapper and Maxine Waters and Michael Morell and others to say that there is zero evidence linking Trump to Russia is a significant admission, because you know if they had found anything, no matter how insignificant, then they would have happily said so, and the details would have been leaked to the press.

And I never said "Trump cannot be guilty" so get that burning straw man out of here. What I have said, and what Trump's political enemies have repeatedly said, is that here is no evidence that Trump is guilty. He could be guilty in theory, but there is no evidence that he is in actuality. Of course they have tried to hedge their bets by saying, "Well, at least there's no evidence that I know of," but so what? You could say that about literally any other case for which there is no evidence. Insisting that "We just don't know, man!" is how the intellectually dishonest respond when the argument isn't going their way.

[Charles]

"Months" may not be long enough to reach a conclusion, but it is certainly plenty long enough to find at least something that would justify an ongoing investigation. For James Clapper and Maxine Waters and Michael Morell and others to say that there is zero evidence linking Trump to Russia is a significant admission, because you know if they had found anything, no matter how insignificant, then they would have happily said so, and the details would have been leaked to the press.

And I never said "Trump cannot be guilty" so get that burning straw man out of here. What I have said, and what Trump's political enemies have repeatedly said, is that here is no evidence that Trump is guilty. He could be guilty in theory, but there is no evidence that he is in actuality. Of course they have tried to hedge their bets by saying, "Well, at least there's no evidence that I know of," but so what? You could say that about literally any other case for which there is no evidence. Insisting that "We just don't know, man!" is how the intellectually dishonest respond when the argument isn't going their way.

[Mountain Man]

Are you referring to that meaningless report that was debunked long before Clapper gave his interview and repeated under oath that there was no evidence linking Trump to Russia?

[Tassman]

I see, so you're another one of those idiots who insists that "Lack of evidence doesn't mean Trump is innocent, it just means we haven't looked hard enough to prove him guilty".

[Charles]

Are you referring to that meaningless report that was debunked long before Clapper gave his interview and repeated under oath that there was no evidence linking Trump to Russia?

What I refer to is that there had been quite many indications, rumours and the like that they could have used, if they were to go for even the slightest hint. The fact that foreign intelligence services warned about Trump seems to be at least a hint. So if they were going for "anything" they had it.

And you of course forget that what clapper was refering to was not any kind of evidence but evidence with high confidentiality. Of course that detail is of significant importance. It proves that your "not even the slightest hint" is wrong as well as the "zero evidence" statement. You are misrepresenting the words of Clapper. And you are ignoring the fact that they actually had a fair approach. Now that also undermines the way you usually describe these matters. It is really worth it to listen to what Clapper is actually saying.

[Mountain Man]

The fact is that ALL the major US intelligence services agree blah blah blah

Returning to discredited talking points doesn't make you look very bright.

[Darth Executor]

Trump is an idiot for letting this go on for so long. He should (publicly and openly) shut down all executive investigations, offer to pre-emptively pardon anyone targeted by this absurd witchhunt then invite Putin to the white house and give him a medal for exposing cheating and corruption in the Democratic party primary process.

[Meh Gerbil]

Trump is an idiot for letting this go on for so long. He should (publicly and openly) shut down all executive investigations, offer to pre-emptively pardon anyone targeted by this absurd witchhunt then invite Putin to the white house and give him a medal for exposing cheating and corruption in the Democratic party primary process.

You forgot the part about leaving a dead cat on the doorstep of every 'journalist' who dare criticize these moves.

[Mountain Man]

Horse heads in beds work much better, or so a documentary film I once saw would have you believe.

At least I think it was a documentary. Something about fairy godfathers...