JUST the Stolen Documents/Mar-A-Lago/"Judge" Cannon Trial

[ardilla secreta]

classic, the US is spied on and 6ft wants to accuse the person who was spied on of the spying???

Now, if you think Feinstein knew her driver was on China's payroll, and ignored it, heck welcomed it!, or worse that she knew and talked openly about classified info with him in the front seat listening purposely so that he could hear...

You seem to want to suggest that Fienstein was actually passing classified intelligence to a Chinese agent who she knew was a Chinese agent...I think they call that treason, right?

Now, if they actually remotely suspected such, do you truly imagine that EVERYONE at the DOJ and FBI would have swept it under the rug for 30 years?

Would any Trump appointee do so, given the opportunity to skewer a Dem?

Or maybe, just maybe, they actually looked and found that she'd been duped and the worst that she was guilty of was in not detecting it previously...maybe that's the explanation, 6ft???

Or do you think she's actually part of the cannibalistic, pedophilia cabal that runs America?

Did this give you a cannabilistic pedaphilic chubby? Credibility with your leftist friends?

Talking like a Falwell again. Dang.

[old salt]

Avoiding it again.

Are you a QAnon fanboy? Think they have a point?
"not enough real"...!!???

Or do you believe the Protocols of Zion are real?

How hard is it for you to denounce them as crazy, deranged, factually baloney?

Now we have to use your specific vocabulary?

Pizz off

Hey, choose your own words to be clear, or do you consider these conspiracy theories credible?

After asking so many times, it's getting harder to give you the benefit of the doubt as I did initially.

Virtue signalling. Truth or Dare.

[CU77]

Me, I'm all in with Q. Of course I believe that Hillary leads a cabal of pedophiles/cannibals who gain immortality from the poor kids' blood! And that Trump is working diligently with Robert Mueller to take them all out!!! And that the Storm is coming on the day before Halloween, 2017!!!!!!

#WWG1WGA

[MDlaxfan76]

Avoiding it again.

Are you a QAnon fanboy? Think they have a point?
"not enough real"...!!???

Or do you believe the Protocols of Zion are real?

How hard is it for you to denounce them as crazy, deranged, factually baloney?

Now we have to use your specific vocabulary?

Pizz off

Hey, choose your own words to be clear, or do you consider these conspiracy theories credible?

After asking so many times, it's getting harder to give you the benefit of the doubt as I did initially.

Virtue signalling. Truth or Dare.

yeah, it's so hard to be sane...has to be virtue signaling to be able to call a conspiracy theory wrong, ugly and dangerous.

I provided two super easy examples, yet you guys refuse...

You guys just prove the point every time you post, refusing to call these a-hole whackadoodles out.

As my buddy told me about Confederate flags hanging in a back of a truck, "I'm glad they do, makes it easier to identify who they are".

[old salt]

Avoiding it again.

Are you a QAnon fanboy? Think they have a point?
"not enough real"...!!???

Or do you believe the Protocols of Zion are real?

How hard is it for you to denounce them as crazy, deranged, factually baloney?

Now we have to use your specific vocabulary?

Pizz off

Hey, choose your own words to be clear, or do you consider these conspiracy theories credible?

After asking so many times, it's getting harder to give you the benefit of the doubt as I did initially.

Virtue signalling. Truth or Dare.

yeah, it's so hard to be sane...has to be virtue signaling to be able to call a conspiracy theory wrong, ugly and dangerous.

I provided two super easy examples, yet you guys refuse...

You guys just prove the point every time you post, refusing to call these a-hole whackadoodles out.

As my buddy told me about Confederate flags hanging in a back of a truck, "I'm glad they do, makes it easier to identify who they are".

It's really dishonest to accuse someone of being a QAnon supporter because they won't play into your silly virtue signalling game.

[MDlaxfan76]

Avoiding it again.

Are you a QAnon fanboy? Think they have a point?
"not enough real"...!!???

Or do you believe the Protocols of Zion are real?

How hard is it for you to denounce them as crazy, deranged, factually baloney?

Now we have to use your specific vocabulary?

Pizz off

Hey, choose your own words to be clear, or do you consider these conspiracy theories credible?

After asking so many times, it's getting harder to give you the benefit of the doubt as I did initially.

Virtue signalling. Truth or Dare.

yeah, it's so hard to be sane...has to be virtue signaling to be able to call a conspiracy theory wrong, ugly and dangerous.

I provided two super easy examples, yet you guys refuse...

You guys just prove the point every time you post, refusing to call these a-hole whackadoodles out.

As my buddy told me about Confederate flags hanging in a back of a truck, "I'm glad they do, makes it easier to identify who they are".

It's really dishonest to accuse someone of being a QAnon supporter because they won't play into your silly virtue signalling game.

Seriously, are you telling me that a refusal to condemn these conspiracy theories does not provide an insight into the mind of the refuser?

I gave 6ft multiple opportunities to make a simple condemnation of each and you're trying to tell me that if he said they were whack jobs and dangerous that's just 'virtue signaling' rather than just a straight, sane answer?

Baloney. Same as flying that Confederate flag, Salty.

[old salt]

Avoiding it again.

Are you a QAnon fanboy? Think they have a point?
"not enough real"...!!???

Or do you believe the Protocols of Zion are real?

How hard is it for you to denounce them as crazy, deranged, factually baloney?

Now we have to use your specific vocabulary?

Pizz off

Hey, choose your own words to be clear, or do you consider these conspiracy theories credible?

After asking so many times, it's getting harder to give you the benefit of the doubt as I did initially.

Virtue signalling. Truth or Dare.

yeah, it's so hard to be sane...has to be virtue signaling to be able to call a conspiracy theory wrong, ugly and dangerous.

I provided two super easy examples, yet you guys refuse...

You guys just prove the point every time you post, refusing to call these a-hole whackadoodles out.

As my buddy told me about Confederate flags hanging in a back of a truck, "I'm glad they do, makes it easier to identify who they are".

It's really dishonest to accuse someone of being a QAnon supporter because they won't play into your silly virtue signalling game.

Seriously, are you telling me that a refusal to condemn these conspiracy theories does not provide an insight into the mind of the refuser?

I gave 6ft multiple opportunities to make a simple condemnation of each and you're trying to tell me that if he said they were whack jobs and dangerous that's just 'virtue signaling' rather than just a straight, sane answer?

Baloney. Same as flying that Confederate flag, Salty.

Who anointed you as the Grand Inquisitor ?

[MDlaxfan76]

Avoiding it again.

Are you a QAnon fanboy? Think they have a point?
"not enough real"...!!???

Or do you believe the Protocols of Zion are real?

How hard is it for you to denounce them as crazy, deranged, factually baloney?

Now we have to use your specific vocabulary?

Pizz off

Hey, choose your own words to be clear, or do you consider these conspiracy theories credible?

After asking so many times, it's getting harder to give you the benefit of the doubt as I did initially.

Virtue signalling. Truth or Dare.

yeah, it's so hard to be sane...has to be virtue signaling to be able to call a conspiracy theory wrong, ugly and dangerous.

I provided two super easy examples, yet you guys refuse...

You guys just prove the point every time you post, refusing to call these a-hole whackadoodles out.

As my buddy told me about Confederate flags hanging in a back of a truck, "I'm glad they do, makes it easier to identify who they are".

It's really dishonest to accuse someone of being a QAnon supporter because they won't play into your silly virtue signalling game.

Seriously, are you telling me that a refusal to condemn these conspiracy theories does not provide an insight into the mind of the refuser?

I gave 6ft multiple opportunities to make a simple condemnation of each and you're trying to tell me that if he said they were whack jobs and dangerous that's just 'virtue signaling' rather than just a straight, sane answer?

Baloney. Same as flying that Confederate flag, Salty.

Who anointed you as the Grand Inquisitor ?

hey, it's a discussion board. I asked a straight question of a fellow poster who was peddling some pretty darn whack job conspiracies and asked whether he also found those two conspiracies credible too?

I really expected it to be a lay up for him, condemn those and explain why he felt the one he was peddling had credibility whereas they don't.

But refuse to condemn them?

Hey, there are a surprising number of people out there who actually believe this crappola, and they really are actually dangerous.

So, since you've inserted yourself, do you find it difficult to condemn QAnon and the Protocols of Zion conspiracy theories?

[old salt]

Avoiding it again.

Are you a QAnon fanboy? Think they have a point?
"not enough real"...!!???

Or do you believe the Protocols of Zion are real?

How hard is it for you to denounce them as crazy, deranged, factually baloney?

Now we have to use your specific vocabulary?

Pizz off

Hey, choose your own words to be clear, or do you consider these conspiracy theories credible?

After asking so many times, it's getting harder to give you the benefit of the doubt as I did initially.

Virtue signalling. Truth or Dare.

yeah, it's so hard to be sane...has to be virtue signaling to be able to call a conspiracy theory wrong, ugly and dangerous.

I provided two super easy examples, yet you guys refuse...

You guys just prove the point every time you post, refusing to call these a-hole whackadoodles out.

As my buddy told me about Confederate flags hanging in a back of a truck, "I'm glad they do, makes it easier to identify who they are".

It's really dishonest to accuse someone of being a QAnon supporter because they won't play into your silly virtue signalling game.

Seriously, are you telling me that a refusal to condemn these conspiracy theories does not provide an insight into the mind of the refuser?

I gave 6ft multiple opportunities to make a simple condemnation of each and you're trying to tell me that if he said they were whack jobs and dangerous that's just 'virtue signaling' rather than just a straight, sane answer?

Baloney. Same as flying that Confederate flag, Salty.

Who anointed you as the Grand Inquisitor ?

hey, it's a discussion board. I asked a straight question of a fellow poster who was peddling some pretty darn whack job conspiracies and asked whether he also found those two conspiracies credible too?

I really expected it to be a lay up for him, condemn those and explain why he felt the one he was peddling had credibility whereas they don't.

But refuse to condemn them?

Hey, there are a surprising number of people out there who actually believe this crappola, and they really are actually dangerous.

So, since you've inserted yourself, do you find it difficult to condemn QAnon and the Protocols of Zion conspiracy theories?

Show us anything I've said which would indicate that I believe that.

https://www.fallacyfiles.org/loadques.h ... s%20loaded.
A "loaded question", like a loaded gun, is a dangerous thing. A loaded question is a question with a false or questionable presupposition, and it is "loaded" with that presumption. The question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" presupposes that you have beaten your wife prior to its asking

[MDlaxfan76]

Avoiding it again.

Are you a QAnon fanboy? Think they have a point?
"not enough real"...!!???

Or do you believe the Protocols of Zion are real?

How hard is it for you to denounce them as crazy, deranged, factually baloney?

Now we have to use your specific vocabulary?

Pizz off

Hey, choose your own words to be clear, or do you consider these conspiracy theories credible?

After asking so many times, it's getting harder to give you the benefit of the doubt as I did initially.

Virtue signalling. Truth or Dare.

yeah, it's so hard to be sane...has to be virtue signaling to be able to call a conspiracy theory wrong, ugly and dangerous.

I provided two super easy examples, yet you guys refuse...

You guys just prove the point every time you post, refusing to call these a-hole whackadoodles out.

As my buddy told me about Confederate flags hanging in a back of a truck, "I'm glad they do, makes it easier to identify who they are".

It's really dishonest to accuse someone of being a QAnon supporter because they won't play into your silly virtue signalling game.

Seriously, are you telling me that a refusal to condemn these conspiracy theories does not provide an insight into the mind of the refuser?

I gave 6ft multiple opportunities to make a simple condemnation of each and you're trying to tell me that if he said they were whack jobs and dangerous that's just 'virtue signaling' rather than just a straight, sane answer?

Baloney. Same as flying that Confederate flag, Salty.

Who anointed you as the Grand Inquisitor ?

hey, it's a discussion board. I asked a straight question of a fellow poster who was peddling some pretty darn whack job conspiracies and asked whether he also found those two conspiracies credible too?

I really expected it to be a lay up for him, condemn those and explain why he felt the one he was peddling had credibility whereas they don't.

But refuse to condemn them?

Hey, there are a surprising number of people out there who actually believe this crappola, and they really are actually dangerous.

So, since you've inserted yourself, do you find it difficult to condemn QAnon and the Protocols of Zion conspiracy theories?

Show us anything I've said which would indicate that I believe that.

https://www.fallacyfiles.org/loadques.h ... s%20loaded.

Only that you've jumped into the discussion and called it mere "virtue signaling" to answer a straight question. which you're doing again.

I haven't called you a QAnon supporter or a believer in the Protocols of Zion as real, but, hey, you're certainly "signaling" that you don't condemn them by refusing to answer a straight question.

What's so tough about doing so?
An awful lot of sane folks in law enforcement have no difficulty, why should you?

Ohhh, gee, is this just a cover for Trump not doing so? You're taking a bullet for him on this, too?

Are you going to tell me next that condemning the KKK and David Duke, rejecting their support, is too difficult to do too?

[MDlaxfan76]

Thanks for the fallacy lesson, the "have you stopped beating your wife" loaded question.

If I'd asked, 'Do you no longer believe in these nut job, dangerous conspiracy theories', that indeed would fit your example.

My assumption going in, however, is that of course you have never believed in those conspiracy theories, just as I would assume that you have never beaten your wife.

So, if you started talking like you might actually think it's just fine to beat one's spouse if someone was just PO'd enough, maybe called women 'property,' I might well think to ask the question: "Have you ever beaten your wife?"

Not "have you stopped", which is what causes the fallacy.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Keep Congress In The Dark

[youthathletics]

Great move for accountability. Meanwhile, in Realville....

[Typical Lax Dad]

Great move for accountability. Meanwhile, in Realville....

Yes, in the real world:

"With a written release or a written report, you avoid the back-and-forth of questions, some of which could be quite probing. And I think, I think the DNI would like to avoid that and avoid the risk of saying something that might incur the wrath of the President,"

Enjoy your Sunday.

[RedFromMI]

Great move for accountability. Meanwhile, in Realville....

Yes, in the real world:

"With a written release or a written report, you avoid the back-and-forth of questions, some of which could be quite probing. And I think, I think the DNI would like to avoid that and avoid the risk of saying something that might incur the wrath of the President,"

Enjoy your Sunday.

And by controlling the narrative through the written submissions, the administration can conflate things like Chinese favoring a Biden win with Russia not only favoring a Trump win but working actively through media like FB to gin up support for Trump and suppress votes for Biden.

They all do it becomes the message, when in fact the preponderance of the activity is Russia meddling, just like in 2016.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Great move for accountability. Meanwhile, in Realville....

Yes, in the real world:

"With a written release or a written report, you avoid the back-and-forth of questions, some of which could be quite probing. And I think, I think the DNI would like to avoid that and avoid the risk of saying something that might incur the wrath of the President,"

Enjoy your Sunday.

And by controlling the narrative through the written submissions, the administration can conflate things like Chinese favoring a Biden win with Russia not only favoring a Trump win but working actively through media like FB to gin up support for Trump and suppress votes for Biden.

They all do it becomes the message, when in fact the preponderance of the activity is Russia meddling, just like in 2016.

Remember, it is often what is NOT in the report.

[youthathletics]

Great move for accountability. Meanwhile, in Realville....

Yes, in the real world:

"With a written release or a written report, you avoid the back-and-forth of questions, some of which could be quite probing. And I think, I think the DNI would like to avoid that and avoid the risk of saying something that might incur the wrath of the President,"

Enjoy your Sunday.

And by controlling the narrative through the written submissions, the administration can conflate things like Chinese favoring a Biden win with Russia not only favoring a Trump win but working actively through media like FB to gin up support for Trump and suppress votes for Biden.

They all do it becomes the message, when in fact the preponderance of the activity is Russia meddling, just like in 2016.

So you'd rather it be verbal, left for interpretation, then have no way to prove it.....just like ole' times? It avoids mistakes like in the "pass it on game" where the story changes....this holds Schiff & Nunes accountable and forces them to play in the sandbox together.

[RedFromMI]

Great move for accountability. Meanwhile, in Realville....

Yes, in the real world:

"With a written release or a written report, you avoid the back-and-forth of questions, some of which could be quite probing. And I think, I think the DNI would like to avoid that and avoid the risk of saying something that might incur the wrath of the President,"

Enjoy your Sunday.

And by controlling the narrative through the written submissions, the administration can conflate things like Chinese favoring a Biden win with Russia not only favoring a Trump win but working actively through media like FB to gin up support for Trump and suppress votes for Biden.

They all do it becomes the message, when in fact the preponderance of the activity is Russia meddling, just like in 2016.

So you'd rather it be verbal, left for interpretation, then have no way to prove it.....just like ole' times? It avoids mistakes like in the "pass it on game" where the story changes....this holds Schiff & Nunes accountable and forces them to play in the sandbox together.

It misses the questioning that would occur that would actually draw out the facts as seen by the specialists, instead of an obviously biased administration trying to keep a lid on what is actually happening. You can still have written documents, but unless you get to talk to the people involved in gathering the information, the slant that can be put into place (see the Russians are doing what everyone else is, which is absolutely not the case) is damaging to an open election.

[MDlaxfan76]

Great move for accountability. Meanwhile, in Realville....

Yes, in the real world:

"With a written release or a written report, you avoid the back-and-forth of questions, some of which could be quite probing. And I think, I think the DNI would like to avoid that and avoid the risk of saying something that might incur the wrath of the President,"

Enjoy your Sunday.

And by controlling the narrative through the written submissions, the administration can conflate things like Chinese favoring a Biden win with Russia not only favoring a Trump win but working actively through media like FB to gin up support for Trump and suppress votes for Biden.

They all do it becomes the message, when in fact the preponderance of the activity is Russia meddling, just like in 2016.

So you'd rather it be verbal, left for interpretation, then have no way to prove it.....just like ole' times? It avoids mistakes like in the "pass it on game" where the story changes....this holds Schiff & Nunes accountable and forces them to play in the sandbox together.

There is no restriction on submitting written statements and reports, the only thing being eliminated is the back and forth of being questioned and challenged on how statements are characterized.

Here's the thing...what does the Trump Administration believe should be actually classified and, thus kept from public knowledge? The sources and methods of the intelligence gathering (ok, full agreement) or the conclusions drawn from such intelligence???

The latter appears to be the issue. When a statement was put out previously that conflated the Russian active measures campaign with the China preference, characterizing them similarly, only through congressional questioning was the statement re-done to draw the appropriate distinction.

Now, should the American public know???
I don't think this aspect should be behind closed doors at all...put Ratcliffe under oath and ask him, in full public view, hard questions on what's actually happening, without need for revealing sources and methods.

So, do Trump supporters really think the American public shouldn't know exactly how the Russians are meddling this go round? should they see examples of social media disinformation? what topics and views are they doing this around? should they hear about troll farms and bots? Are there Russian agents physically in the United States? Are there activities to penetrate election infrastructure?

Seriously, should voters not know?

Or is just cool to stay mum because it's designed to help Trump?

[youthathletics]

Great move for accountability. Meanwhile, in Realville....

Yes, in the real world:

"With a written release or a written report, you avoid the back-and-forth of questions, some of which could be quite probing. And I think, I think the DNI would like to avoid that and avoid the risk of saying something that might incur the wrath of the President,"

Enjoy your Sunday.

And by controlling the narrative through the written submissions, the administration can conflate things like Chinese favoring a Biden win with Russia not only favoring a Trump win but working actively through media like FB to gin up support for Trump and suppress votes for Biden.

They all do it becomes the message, when in fact the preponderance of the activity is Russia meddling, just like in 2016.

So you'd rather it be verbal, left for interpretation, then have no way to prove it.....just like ole' times? It avoids mistakes like in the "pass it on game" where the story changes....this holds Schiff & Nunes accountable and forces them to play in the sandbox together.

There is no restriction on submitting written statements and reports, the only thing being eliminated is the back and forth of being questioned and challenged on how statements are characterized.

Here's the thing...what does the Trump Administration believe should be actually classified and, thus kept from public knowledge? The sources and methods of the intelligence gathering (ok, full agreement) or the conclusions drawn from such intelligence???

The latter appears to be the issue. When a statement was put out previously that conflated the Russian active measures campaign with the China preference, characterizing them similarly, only through congressional questioning was the statement re-done to draw the appropriate distinction.

Now, should the American public know???
I don't think this aspect should be behind closed doors at all...put Ratcliffe under oath and ask him, in full public view, hard questions on what's actually happening, without need for revealing sources and methods.

So, do Trump supporters really think the American public shouldn't know exactly how the Russians are meddling this go round? should they see examples of social media disinformation? what topics and views are they doing this around? should they hear about troll farms and bots? Are there Russian agents physically in the United States? Are there activities to penetrate election infrastructure?

Seriously, should voters not know?

Or is just cool to stay mum because it's designed to help Trump?

Maybe we are talking past others pov on this. DNI is not hiding them from the public...persay, the DNI sends them to Schiff and Nunes et al, who can then inform 'the people' congress, as they see fit. Maybe your argument is that the DNI will only send bland intel, which would mean your tin foil hat is on and you do indeed believe in the deep state, otherwise I still believe it forces the INtel committee to play with others balls and get along.