You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump
April 24 2024 7.17pm

Bias against Trump

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 11 of 573 < 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 >

 

View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 26 Jul 17 8.19pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Ray in Houston


Drug addition, droop[y dick and transgender are all deemed to be medical issues. In the U.S., health care has - since the 1950s - been put on the doorstep of employers to provide their staff with access to health insurance. It was a stop-gap that somehow became cast in stone.

Thus, the military - as employer - is responsible for providing health insurance for its employees. This is how the military ends up being the provider of access to gender reassignment surgery, Viagra and drug rehab.

It's a crazy world.

It isn't how I'd do it but that's just my opinion. If they are going to maintain that kind of system then under that criteria I don't see how they can be fairly denied.

The American healthcare system is so problematical....All I can see is disaster ahead in that area.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 26 Jul 17 8.19pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

You started it.

The fact that you can't seem to understand that these rules can be extremely easily circumvented is what makes them a nonsense isn't something I can help you with.....I gave an example there could be many others.

What Gore did or didn't do with different pieces of information means absolutely nothing. You don't know what he or his team did with every bit of information that came their way and either do I? It's a non point of relevance.

Donald Jr having this meeting isn't apparently breaking the law...another point of difference from your pointless example.

I've already said that I believe Trump would use any tactics he could. What matters is what is provable....not what you or anyone else thinks happened.

So, by your reckoning, if your car is easy to break into it's ok for me to break into it. If anyone else has ever stolen something from a car, then it's ok for me to steal all your s***. Got it.

As to proving whether there was anything illegal in taking that meeting, Trump Jr's emails confirm everything that's required to trigger guilt under that statute:

- He took a meeting
- With a Russian
- Who was promising to give him dirt on Clinton.

That's all that's required. Even an attempt to get something of value from a foreigner is against the law, so at best, this qualifies on that alone.

The ever-changing story of Trump Jr. now says that there was nothing of value being offered. If we accept this latest version at face value, it would be like me breaking into your car and finding nothing worth stealing - so I'm good to go, no crime here.

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 26 Jul 17 8.25pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

It's a crazy world.

It isn't how I'd do it but that's just my opinion. If they are going to maintain that kind of system then under that criteria I don't see how they can be fairly denied.

The American healthcare system is so problematical....All I can see is disaster ahead in that area.


American healthcare is a disaster already. There's about 28 million people who don't have health insurance - the vast majority because they cannot afford it. Those people rely on emergency rooms for treatment - who will treat them for free but won't admit them - but this only works when your child has a fever or broken bone. If they have cancer, you're screwed.

Obamacare reduced the ranks of the uninsured by 20-odd million. It did this very unsubtley; by taxing the rich and using that money to subsidize private health insurance for people not on an employer plan. Repealing and replacing it - the drama happening right now in the Senate - is estimated to throw anywhere between 15 and 32 million people off insurance, depending on which version of the plan gets passed. It does give the top 5% a $700 million tax cut, though.

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 26 Jul 17 8.38pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Ray in Houston

So, by your reckoning, if your car is easy to break into it's ok for me to break into it. If anyone else has ever stolen something from a car, then it's ok for me to steal all your s***. Got it.

As to proving whether there was anything illegal in taking that meeting, Trump Jr's emails confirm everything that's required to trigger guilt under that statute:

- He took a meeting
- With a Russian
- Who was promising to give him dirt on Clinton.

That's all that's required. Even an attempt to get something of value from a foreigner is against the law, so at best, this qualifies on that alone.

The ever-changing story of Trump Jr. now says that there was nothing of value being offered. If we accept this latest version at face value, it would be like me breaking into your car and finding nothing worth stealing - so I'm good to go, no crime here.

The source of information doesn't matter. We do not know where many items of information originate from. What matters is if the information is obtained for exchange for favours. The acceptance and use of the material from another power would not be illegal in of itself.

Look here is an article from CNN themselves on the illegality of it.

[Link]

It appears the logic of what I was saying earlier is pretty much why this isn't illegal. It is so easily over-rided that it is a pointless law. What matters is how that information is used....for what purpose.

If you ignore this....then please tell me If this meeting is illegal then why haven't legal proceedings started.

Edited by Stirlingsays (26 Jul 2017 8.38pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 26 Jul 17 8.40pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Ray in Houston


American healthcare is a disaster already. There's about 28 million people who don't have health insurance - the vast majority because they cannot afford it. Those people rely on emergency rooms for treatment - who will treat them for free but won't admit them - but this only works when your child has a fever or broken bone. If they have cancer, you're screwed.

Obamacare reduced the ranks of the uninsured by 20-odd million. It did this very unsubtley; by taxing the rich and using that money to subsidize private health insurance for people not on an employer plan. Repealing and replacing it - the drama happening right now in the Senate - is estimated to throw anywhere between 15 and 32 million people off insurance, depending on which version of the plan gets passed. It does give the top 5% a 0 million tax cut, though.

Yep, we pretty much agree on this.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 26 Jul 17 8.53pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

The source of information doesn't matter. We do not know where many items of information originate from. What matters is if the information is obtained for exchange for favours. The acceptance and use of the material from another power would not be illegal in of itself.

Look here is an article from CNN themselves on the illegality of it.

[Link]

It appears the logic of what I was saying earlier is pretty much why this isn't illegal. It is so easily over-rided that it is a pointless law. What matters is how that information is used....for what purpose.

If you ignore this....then please tell me If this meeting is illegal then why haven't legal proceedings started.


We do know where Don Jr's emails came from. They came from Don Jr. They are not disputed.

The campaign did not need to promise favours in order to violate the campaign finance law. They just needed to seek or accept a "thing of value" from a foreign national.

Political campaigns spend a significant amount of money on opposition research. I could link a cornucopia of opinion that disagrees with CNN's claim because getting given such is being given a "thing of value". Here's one: [Link]

Quote "So getting opposition research or dirt on Hillary Clinton, or however they tried to portray it, would constitute a contribution both on the definition of a contribution and on the foreign-national contribution ban," he said. "And then solicitation: Did Trump Jr. solicit the contribution? I think there the answer is also yes."

As for an investigation, what do you think Robert Mueller's been doing all this time? Oh, and Don Jr., Manafort and Kushner have all been in for interviews by relevant Congressional committees. Interviews is how investigations start.

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 26 Jul 17 9.26pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Ray in Houston

As for an investigation, what do you think Robert Mueller's been doing all this time? Oh, and Don Jr., Manafort and Kushner have all been in for interviews by relevant Congressional committees. Interviews is how investigations start.

So CNN's lawyers are now interested in some sort of defence for Trump?

No Ray....if a law had been broken by this meeting then legal proceedings would have already started. You presented what is known via the meeting as breaking the law...tut tut....'nothing of value' is admitted from either party.

You said obtaining information from a foreign power was breaking the law....You were wrong. Like I said, it's how that information is used.

You have already admitted hate for Trump and it is plain for all to see that you have let this emotion cloud your view of events.

Trump and Trump's team are unethical just as that article said....However you over-reach and present speculation as evidence for illegality.


Edited by Stirlingsays (26 Jul 2017 9.31pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 26 Jul 17 9.42pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

OK< I have to go for the hated point-by-point on this one:

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

So CNN's lawyers are now interested in some sort of defence for Trump?

That's not what I said. I pointed out that there are differing opinions in the media about this. I gave you an example, CNN was another.


Originally posted by Stirlingsays

No Ray....if a law had been broken by this meeting then legal proceedings would have already started. You presented what is known via the meeting as breaking the law...tut tut.

Investigations have already started. Mueller is investigating Trump-Russia connections and the relevant committees in the House and Senate have already interviewed the Trump campaign attendees - even going to the length of subpoenaing Manafort for documents he was refusing to hand over.

Legal proceedings come once the investigation is complete.


Originally posted by Stirlingsays

You said obtaining information from a foreign power was breaking the law....You were wrong. Like I said, it's how that information is used.

I am not wrong. I linked you to the exact statute in question that says very specifically that it's against the law. It has nothing to do with how the information is used, it's all about how it's obtained or at least sought. If you accept or seek a thing of value from a foreign person or entity, you're breaking campaign finance law.

This is different from whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia over the hacking efforts. I suspect you are conflating the two, but they're separate. There is no direct evidence of collusion over the hacking but there is direct evidence of an effort to break campaign finance law as documented by Don Jr's emails. The former being the far more serious crime.


Originally posted by Stirlingsays

You have already admitted hate for Trump and it is plain for all to see that you have let this emotion cloud your view of events.

I am not being asked to sit on the jury.


Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Trump and Trump's team are unethical just as that article said....However you over-reach and present speculation as evidence for illegality.

As above, I think you think I am taking the emails and making a case that Trump helped Russia hack the election. I'm not.

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
wordup Flag 26 Jul 17 9.51pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

So CNN's lawyers are now interested in some sort of defence for Trump?

No Ray....if a law had been broken by this meeting then legal proceedings would have already started. You presented what is known via the meeting as breaking the law...tut tut....'nothing of value' is admitted from either party.

You said obtaining information from a foreign power was breaking the law....You were wrong. Like I said, it's how that information is used.

You have already admitted hate for Trump and it is plain for all to see that you have let this emotion cloud your view of events.

Trump and Trump's team are unethical just as that article said....However you over-reach and present speculation as evidence for illegality.


Edited by Stirlingsays (26 Jul 2017 9.31pm)

This is not how investigations work or how a case is built. Evidence gathering is an ongoing process and it's likely that eventually a case will be made against multiple individuals. This is a vast undertaking with many interviews taking place. They don't simply stop at the very first finding of guilt from anyone, nor do they publicly reveal what their findings are at every step. Doing so would actually damage the investigation, especially when part of it will likely involve people testifying - and in all likelihood lying - under oath. A legal case does not come prior to the actual investigation.

Edited by wordup (26 Jul 2017 9.53pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 26 Jul 17 9.59pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

Haha

20431282_1941375439206758_3031533927944840684_n.jpg Attachment: 20431282_1941375439206758_3031533927944840684_n.jpg (82.48Kb)

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 26 Jul 17 10.12pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by wordup

This is not how investigations work or how a case is built. Evidence gathering is an ongoing process and it's likely that eventually a case will be made against multiple individuals. This is a vast undertaking with many interviews taking place. They don't simply stop at the very first finding of guilt from anyone, nor do they publicly reveal what their findings are at every step. Doing so would actually damage the investigation, especially when part of it will likely involve people testifying - and in all likelihood lying - under oath. A legal case does not come prior to the actual investigation.

Edited by wordup (26 Jul 2017 9.53pm)

Fair enough on that point.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 26 Jul 17 10.16pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Well Ray I'm happy for those interested to read these pages and make their own minds up on what we have covered. I know I certainly have.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 11 of 573 < 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump