When libs wanted Comey gone

[Mountain Man]

It means nothing of the sort. It means you cannot rule out the possibility that the FBI investigation will lead to evidence. Until then you cannot assert that Trump is innocent.

I don't understand this at all, Tassman.

1: You've set a standard for law here that cannot be met. Of course he cannot rule out the possibility that the FBI investigation would lead to evidence as that would be stating a universal negative. Under no circumstances and for literally any crime it is illogical to say, "Evidence categorically doesn't exist."
We cannot launch investigations based on that standard because anyone could logically be investigated for any crime at any time.

2: In the absence of evidence the assertion of innocence is not only the most logical choice but also the standard of how our legal system works. People are assumed innocent until proven guilty. You may be convinced there is a crime here (that's fine), but in the eyes on the law and in the eyes of pure logic the presumption is innocence.

It would be difficult to fit more misconceptions of how law works into two sentences.
I feel like I owe you a beer or something - that had to take some effort.

It reminds me of a recent guest on some network program or other who when challenged with the fact that there is no evidence linking Trump with Russia, responded by saying that we need to continue investigating until we find evidence that there is no evidence.

Like Charles Babbage famously said, "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."

[Sea of red]

Except we don't just decided someone is guilty then just keep looking till we find something that satisfies our decision. We investigate and let the evidence decide who is guilty if anyone. In Tassman's world (and apparently yours) we decide that Trump is guilty and just keep looking till we can prove it. If we can't, well that merely means he is good at hiding his tracks, not that he is innocent, so we just keep looking. Police at least have to have SOME evidence to pursue an investigation on a specific individual.

It took awhile for Watergate to be traced back to Nixon, and there's no time table on on how long an investigation has to take place. Look, this is not a witch hunt by liberals, it's something even a number of life long neoconservative Republicans are concerned with. The people investigating Trump are simply doing their job, just like when it happened to Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton. Trump simply has surrounded himself with a lot of shady characters, and has frankly acted like someone that is guilty of something. The guy even showed his own administration to be liars after he got on Twitter and admitted he did in fact give the Russian ambassador classified information, after his security advisor said he didn't happen.. Hell, he admitted on NBC and to the Russian government that he fired Comey to derail the investigation into his campaign - which is by itself obstruction on par with Nixon.

There is something shady he does not want to be uncovered. surely you can see that?

[Meh Gerbil]

It took awhile for Watergate to be traced back to Nixon, and there's no time table on on how long an investigation has to take place. Look, this is not a witch hunt by liberals, it's something even a number of life long neoconservative Republicans are concerned with. The people investigating Trump are simply doing their job, just like when it happened to Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton. Trump simply has surrounded himself with a lot of shady characters, and has frankly acted like someone that is guilty of something. The guy even showed his own administration to be liars after he got on Twitter and admitted he did in fact give the Russian ambassador classified information, after his security advisor said he didn't happen.. Hell, he admitted on NBC and to the Russian government that he fired Comey to derail the investigation into his campaign - which is by itself obstruction on par with Nixon.

There is something shady he does not want to be uncovered. surely you can see that?

What happens if evidence comes out that the emails were released by Seth Rich?
The whole Russian/Email conspiracy theory dies permanently there, doesn't it?

They've an email where Podesta writes: “make an example of the leaker”.

Two things about that:
1: That means they've known all along it wasn't the Russians, it was a 'leaker'.
2: Podesta will be on the hook for murder.

There is a very good chance the whole Russian thing is about to do a wicked 180 and it is going to hurt.

[Sea of red]

What happens if evidence comes out that the emails were released by Seth Rich?
The whole Russian/Email conspiracy theory dies permanently there, doesn't it?

They've an email where Podesta writes: “make an example of the leaker”.

Two things about that:
1: That means they've known all along it wasn't the Russians, it was a 'leaker'.
2: Podesta will be on the hook for murder.

There is a very good chance the whole Russian thing is about to do a wicked 180 and it is going to hurt.

Uh, the CIA already ID'd the people that gave the emails to WikiLeaks, and they're Russian, sorry.

This IS going to get back to Trump and it will do the damage to the GOP that Watergate should have done.

[Meh Gerbil]

Uh, the CIA already ID'd the people that gave the emails to WikiLeaks, and they're Russian, sorry.
This IS going to get back to Trump and it will do the damage to the GOP that Watergate should have done.

Time will tell.

I'll put down right now that I think the CIA is full of pOOp for a couple of reasons:
1: WikiLeaks has embarrassed the CIA.
2: The CIA doesn't want to admit their tools are in the wild.
3: The CIA wants to discredit WikiLeaks as a tool of foreign governments.

[One Bad Pig]

This IS going to get back to Trump and it will do the damage to the GOP that Watergate should have done.

Dude, quit living in your fantasies. Even the people who broke Watergate think this is a big fat nothing-burger.

[Charles]

Dude, quit living in your fantasies. Even the people who broke Watergate think this is a big fat nothing-burger.

Not all of them.

"Donald Trump is a president with whom there is grave question about his fitness and ability to conduct the office of the president -- and that's going hand-in-hand with the possible coverup into collusion with a foreign power."

Carl Bernstein (Watergate journalist)

http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/14/medi...gerous-moment/

[Mountain Man]

Of course it's a coverup! Why else would there be no evidence? Wakeup, people!

[rogue06]

Of course it's a coverup! Why else would there be no evidence? Wakeup, people!

The less evidence there is the more likely it took place.

Ironic that the Democrats and the MSM (who are no longer even pretending that they aren't a wing of the Democrat Party) are continually saying how stupid Trump is (the Boston Globe just called him an "idiot") yet apparently he is such a genius that he left not a shred of evidence wrt his nefarious conspiracy with the Rooskies.

[Mountain Man]

It's the same trick they tried to pull when Bush was in office. If you listened to the MSM, you'd have to simultaneously believe that he was a moron who could barely string a coherent sentence together, and the masterminded behind 9/11.

[Darth Executor]

it's something even a number of life long neoconservative Republicans are concerned with.

Neoconservatives are as much the enemies of anti-globalists as liberals are. So pointing out that it's also Trump's enemy Y, not just enemy X pushing this doesn't change anything.