Jump to content

US Politics

Rich
in General Discussion

Featured Replies

  • Replies 27.3k
  • Views 3.1m
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Most Popular Posts

  • do or die
    do or die

    At this point, in trying to get any kind of a "win" the Republican "leadership"  Trump, Pence, O'Connell along with the ole Tea baggers like Rand Paul.....are pretty busy at work.   Belittling, t

  • Mark F
    Mark F

    "I worked 4 months in New York (medicine hat)  in a lab (strip club) and we were forbidden to share anything to media (hookers)and weren't allowed to speak with non-family  (johns)  about the  sc

  • HardCoreBlue
    HardCoreBlue

    Unfortunate about the suicide. We do though need a lot more of this declining hush money to expose bad behaviours. Makes no difference to me who these people who do bad things support politi

comment_257234
Just now, JCon said:

There isn't? You've seen the files? Please, let us know more.

 

Or, is it that YOU have not seen any evidence, which is a far cry from "there's no proof"?

If someone has proof, it's on them to show it.  Not on me to show that they don't have proof.  And until now, no one has presented any proof, or even stated that they have proof.

comment_257236
1 minute ago, Atomic said:

If someone has proof, it's on them to show it.  Not on me to show that they don't have proof.  And until now, no one has presented any proof, or even stated that they have proof.

You said that there is no proof. You don't know that. I would imagine that election hacking would be considered a highly classified item and not generally released to the public.

comment_257238
1 minute ago, JCon said:

You said that there is no proof. You don't know that. I would imagine that election hacking would be considered a highly classified item and not generally released to the public.

No proof has been shared with the public and no one has stated that they have proof.  So until one of those things happen, the statement that "there is no proof" is a lot more believable than the alternative.

You can't come to court with a bag and say "I have evidence in this bag, but I can't show you.  You'll just have to trust me.  You can't prove I DON'T have evidence in this bag."

comment_257253
3 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

That's a ridiculous argument.  I mean, the Friends-of-Trump crowd come up with some good ones, but that's pretty hollow.

My argument is hollow?  You say there is proof Russia hacked the election.  I say there isn't.

The facts:

- No one has shown any proof.

- No one has claimed to have proof.

Which argument is hollow?

comment_257254
18 minutes ago, Atomic said:

No proof has been shared with the public and no one has stated that they have proof.  So until one of those things happen, the statement that "there is no proof" is a lot more believable than the alternative.

You can't come to court with a bag and say "I have evidence in this bag, but I can't show you.  You'll just have to trust me.  You can't prove I DON'T have evidence in this bag."

Proof is just a collection of evidence. If there was no evidence, there would be no investigation led by the GOP.

    comment_257266
    26 minutes ago, Goldkobra said:

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/26/us/2016-presidential-campaign-hacking-fast-facts/

    I went through it all and found nothing new.

    Multiple agencies say Russia was "probably" behind the hacks.  Russia is "likely" connected.

    It looks like it was Russia.  No one can deny that.  But no one has made an actual link between the hackers and the Russian government, and no agency claims to.  By and large all the "evidence" is circumstantial.  That's not enough for me (nor for the courts, if you're wondering).

    comment_257288

    His security clearance has not been changed though.  He maintains the highest possible clearance so its not like he wont be pulling strings..  Talk is someone else (I cant remember, new NSA?) demanded it under threat of resignation and they couldnt have that.

    Hard to imagine this is just the first 100+ days.  Everything that has happened.  Truly remarkable.  The movies that get made and books that get written years down the road will be really fascinating.  Imagine all the stuff we DON'T know that is happening.

    Who should play Donald in the film about this?  Could an older Matt Damon pull it off? 

    comment_257378
    11 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

    Ummmm

     

    Trump says based on he what he has read on this matter, no wrong doing here AND Trump has stated he is a very instinctual person. Therefore, matter closed. Oh and April has been declared by Trump National Sexual Assault Awareness Month.

    comment_257384

    Yup.  Talk about tone deaf.  Like hey, Im all for innocent until proven guilty.  And we can debate the issue to death and how multiple reports, multiple settlements etc, over time and it leads to a logical conclusion yadda yadda yadda.  Then again, Trump admitted on tape to sexually assaulting women so...obviously he wouldnt see it as "wrong".

    But really...you're the President.  Pick your spots, idiot.

    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    Go to topic listing