This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Bias against Trump
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
 Stirlingsays  29 Jan 19 1.19pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
As I have told you before I am NOT on the left side of politics. I am a traditional conservative voter who believes in capitalism, but with a safety net to catch and protect the genuinely disadvantaged. I believe in rewarding enterprise and not rewarding laziness. I also believe in lawfulness and high standards of integrity, fairness and morality from those in high office. That Trump has been "in business for 30 years" does not qualify him for being anything other than being Trump. NY state have their teeth into him now, so as well as the Mueller enquiry he faces jeopardy from several directions. Many businessmen end up in jail with their reputations ruined if they deliberately flout the law. Has Trump? Only time will tell. Until Mueller reports no-one can say for sure what will transpire. That no charges have yet been laid is obvious, but to claim that this means there has been no collusion, or other significant illegality, is to presume far too much. I don't presume, but I do read extensively and watch the straws in the wind. Most of what has happened so far was predicted in the Steele dossier. Not all of that dossier is thought to be true but enough has already been proved to be true for Trump to be very concerned, as his body language and tweeting confirm. If I was a betting man, which I am not, I would take odds of 5 to 1 on of his being accused of something, and expect to win. I think it's much more likely than not. Describing investigations as "witch hunts" is what the guilty do. If you are innocent then you have nothing to fear from any investigation. If your crimes are technical or minor then the punishment will reflect that. Many politicians get slapped wrists for crossing lines. Nixon described Watergate as a "witch hunt" and looked what happened to him. The current one has already turned up quite a lot of witches.
However, I want to point out a couple of issues with your post here. Mueller has already said there will be nothing significant on collusion and that they had moved on from that a long time ago. Saying they 'all do it' isn't a lame excuse....it's a description of reality. The focus upon Trump and his activities is only due to his presidency and nothing else. The focus upon how dirty someone is comes down to whose side they are on....and little else....If Clinton has won the presidency the same would have happened.....It's partisan with little in the way of objectivity. Sure some people who describe the prosecutions against as witch hunts are guilty.....and others aren't guilty and are correct......The very phrase itself is evidence of that.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| ChrisGC Wantage 29 Jan 19 1.22pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Penge Eagle
Would be nice if you could debate some of the points with facts, reason and logic. But you have nothing! So instead resort to the common left-wing tactic of smearing the other side as stupid. Sad. It's a sad reflection on modern debate. Opinion is very often confused with facts, and the facts that don't fit the predetermined narrative shouted down with insults. The whole "Mr Orange" stuff and "you're all prejudice for considering his policies away from the personality" angle along with the irrelevant "Brexit is bad" compulsory diatribe shows that there is an inability to separate a personal feelings from the hard facts of the situation. This prejudice will always block reason when the subject is unwilling or unable to consider a different point of view objectively.
|
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jan 19 1.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Penge Eagle
Would be nice if you could debate some of the points with facts, reason and logic. But you have nothing! So instead resort to the common left-wing tactic of smearing the other side as stupid. Sad. That you are unable to see the facts, reason and logic in my posts doesn't mean they aren't there! It just means that you either cannot see them or reject them because they conflict with your preconceptions. For the umpteenth time as I am not the least bit "left wing" it seems hardly likely I would adopt their tactics. Stupidity exists everywhere.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jan 19 2.10pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
However, I want to point out a couple of issues with your post here. Mueller has already said there will be nothing significant on collusion and that they had moved on from that a long time ago. Saying they 'all do it' isn't a lame excuse....it's a description of reality. The focus upon Trump and his activities is only due to his presidency and nothing else. The focus upon how dirty someone is comes down to whose side they are on....and little else....If Clinton has won the presidency the same would have happened.....It's partisan with little in the way of objectivity. Sure some people who describe the prosecutions against as witch hunts are guilty.....and others aren't guilty and are correct......The very phrase itself is evidence of that.
Apology accepted. Mueller has said almost nothing, about collusion or anything else. He corrected one media claim, using very careful language, so what comes out is still unknown. Of course the attention on Trump is because he is the POTUS but NY would still have been interested in him. As being the POTUS means he is a position to impact everyone it is only right and proper that the spotline shines on him. Clinton had the spotline turned on her and many accusations made and investigations mounted. Despite that nothing of substance has been found to be of any real concern. I am not a particular fan of hers by the way and hope the next Democratic candidate is of a better quality. If Trump is guilty or innocent then it won't be a Court of public opinion who will decide that. It will be a proper one, or the Senate. Unless, of course, he packs the SCOTUS with sympathetic justices.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jan 19 2.17pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by ChrisGC
It's a sad reflection on modern debate. Opinion is very often confused with facts, and the facts that don't fit the predetermined narrative shouted down with insults. The whole "Mr Orange" stuff and "you're all prejudice for considering his policies away from the personality" angle along with the irrelevant "Brexit is bad" compulsory diatribe shows that there is an inability to separate a personal feelings from the hard facts of the situation. This prejudice will always block reason when the subject is unwilling or unable to consider a different point of view objectively. I can't help it if you don't like real facts, but prefer "alternative" ones! The whole Trump presidency has been a circus from the moment he first hinted he would stand. He has turned politics into an extension of his reality TV show, but now conducted on Twitter and Fox. To describe it thus is not prejudice at all. It is just a reflection of reality. We need real politicians to represent our interests and not empty-headed, self-obsessed sociopaths. With Trump it's all about personality. You cannot avoid discussing it. That's what he stood on and what he will fall on too.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Stirlingsays 29 Jan 19 3.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Of course the attention on Trump is because he is the POTUS but NY would still have been interested in him. As being the POTUS means he is a position to impact everyone it is only right and proper that the spotline shines on him. Opinion Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Clinton had the spotline turned on her and many accusations made and investigations mounted. Despite that nothing of substance has been found to be of any real concern. I am not a particular fan of hers by the way and hope the next Democratic candidate is of a better quality. Opinion. Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
If Trump is guilty or innocent then it won't be a Court of public opinion who will decide that. It will be a proper one, or the Senate. Unless, of course, he packs the SCOTUS with sympathetic justices. Opinion.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Stirlingsays 29 Jan 19 3.18pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Mueller has said almost nothing, about collusion or anything else. He corrected one media claim, using very careful language, so what comes out is still unknown.
The main bulk of the investigation has been around punishing Trump associates by investigating them far more rigorously than Clinton's were. If you think that's justice because Trump is president I don't agree.....I think if you are going to be this exact then it should be done to both final presidential campaigns or none at all.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Stirlingsays 29 Jan 19 3.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I believe in rewarding enterprise and not rewarding laziness. I also believe in lawfulness and high standards of integrity, fairness and morality from those in high office. Do you believe in magical pixies and glitterly unicorns as well? Name me a international businessman who fits this description. There is how the world works and then there are unrealistic words written about it.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Penge Eagle Beckenham 29 Jan 19 4.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
That you are unable to see the facts, reason and logic in my posts doesn't mean they aren't there! It just means that you either cannot see them or reject them because they conflict with your preconceptions. For the umpteenth time as I am not the least bit "left wing" it seems hardly likely I would adopt their tactics. Stupidity exists everywhere. Challenge any of my posts on this thread with a counter argument then. That's how debate works.
|
|
| Stirlingsays 29 Jan 19 4.19pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Of the FBI and congressional committees who I suspect know rather more than either of us! Mmmmm....I suspect that they are rather selective about what they pursue......we agreed where you said it depends upon who is on those committees.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Stirlingsays 29 Jan 19 4.21pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| ChrisGC Wantage 29 Jan 19 4.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I can't help it if you don't like real facts, but prefer "alternative" ones! The whole Trump presidency has been a circus from the moment he first hinted he would stand. He has turned politics into an extension of his reality TV show, but now conducted on Twitter and Fox. To describe it thus is not prejudice at all. It is just a reflection of reality. We need real politicians to represent our interests and not empty-headed, self-obsessed sociopaths. With Trump it's all about personality. You cannot avoid discussing it. That's what he stood on and what he will fall on too. What other type of facts are there?
|
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jan 19 6.07pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
The main bulk of the investigation has been around punishing Trump associates by investigating them far more rigorously than Clinton's were. If you think that's justice because Trump is president I don't agree.....I think if you are going to be this exact then it should be done to both final presidential campaigns or none at all. Nothing is coming from Mueller and nothing will be determined as provable, or not, until it is presented to a Court. There are though many leaks emanating from sources who are believed to be connected to the intelligence communities of the developed world. Some is being flagged up in the MSM but much more from "citizen journalists". Not Fox or Breitbart of course. The MSM cannot yet publish too much due to their need for verification. I know that you will dismiss this but things that ring true, ring true. If it quacks like a duck etc etc. The reason that Trump's associates are being worked over ought to be obvious, but not the obvious that you would jump to. Like any good lawyer Mueller already knows the truth, just as the FBI and others have for a long time. Knowing and proving it to the satisfaction of a Court are though two different things, so leaning on the smaller fry makes sense. Doing this because Trump is the POTUS is more than just justice. It's an essential duty. If the intelligence services know that there is a criminal in the White House then they need to do everything possible to expose that. If he isn't then he has nothing to fear from due process.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jan 19 6.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by ChrisGC
What other type of facts are there? The ones that Trump relies on. Found in my dictionary under "lies". Reference, Kellyanne Conway.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| EverybodyDannsNow SE19 29 Jan 19 6.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Penge Eagle
Challenge any of my posts on this thread with a counter argument then. That's how debate works. You challenged his post, and didn’t offer any counter argument - why should Wisbech be obliged to counter yours?
|
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jan 19 6.18pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Russian interference in the 2016 election, via the "Internet Research Agency" Trump's team's connections with Moscow. Flynn's, Manafort's, Cohen's, Papadopoulos's involvement and prosecution. There's more. none of it yet disproven.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jan 19 6.22pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Mmmmm....I suspect that they are rather selective about what they pursue......we agreed where you said it depends upon who is on those committees. When did I say that? Congressional committees often publish two versions, and split down party lines but the truth has a way of being obvious. The FBI do select what they pursue! They choose those things which are both unlawful and important. They are blind to politics but far from blind when it comes to criminality.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
pefwin  Where you have to have an English ... 29 Jan 19 6.24pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Penge Eagle
Challenge any of my posts on this thread with a counter argument then. That's how debate works. no it doesn't.
"Everything is air-droppable at least once." "When the going gets tough, the tough call for close air support." |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jan 19 6.24pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Penge Eagle
Challenge any of my posts on this thread with a counter argument then. That's how debate works. I did with post you responded to but once again you fail to recognise that.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.