Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Camerota vs Lewandowski

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • inevtiab1e
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

    What did her slide say?

    Her statement wasn't accurate, if it was Trump would have been impeached when the Mueller report was released.
    So you're saying she isn't accurate but the slide is? You're confirming my point that you dismissed everything because of the word 'possible.'

    Leave a comment:


  • Cambronnne
    replied
    Originally posted by craven View Post

    um yes we do arrest people for possible murder. How many fake hitman stings have we seen in realife a number Trump ordered a crime. It was not carry it out. What is the difference.

    also possible is govtese for probable.

    You are just digging your hole deeper.
    In your scenario the hitman isn't arrested for "possible" murder. (There is no such charge)

    He is arrested for an entirely different crime.

    Please give me an example of a hitman being arrested for "possible murder".

    Since we are discusseing the law, "governmentese" wouldn't apply. The term would be "legalese" except in the legal world, possible does not equal probable. They are different concepts.
    "Probable" requires actual facts. "Possible" does not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Massena
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

    Her statement wasn't accurate, if it was Trump would have been impeached when the Mueller report was released.
    That is an inaccurate assumption. Do you know where the information to which she referred is located in the Mueller Report, Volume II?

    Camerota is correct.

    Leave a comment:


  • craven
    replied
    Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post


    No. "possible" is not the standard for anything in the legal world.
    Literally, anything is "possible".
    The standard is "probable".

    It is possible that I threw eggs at your house, but there is nothing to suggest it is "probable".

    As for your murder reference, we do not arrest people because it is "possible" that they ordered a murder. After all, it is "possible" you ordered mine.
    There has to be sufficient evidence to form a reasonable belief of the commission of the crime in question. (i.e. some evidence)

    The government has no right to investigate us just because they feel like it.
    um yes we do arrest people for possible murder. How many fake hitman stings have we seen in realife a number Trump ordered a crime. It was not carry it out. What is the difference.

    also possible is govtese for probable.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by inevtiab1e View Post
    "There were 10 examples of obstruction of justice."
    That's accurate.
    What did her slide say?

    Her statement wasn't accurate, if it was Trump would have been impeached when the Mueller report was released.

    Leave a comment:


  • inevtiab1e
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

    Wrong, that is not what she said. Again, read the thread, look at the OP video....

    I'll make it easy for you, go to 1:10 on the video and you will hear what she said.
    "There were 10 examples of obstruction of justice."
    That's accurate.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by Massena View Post


    The classic Bugs Bunny/Yosemite Sam conundrum: 'Oh, yes you will; Oh no I won't.'
    Yeah that pretty much sums you up. She lied, I provided the location on the video in addition I posted what she said earlier in this thread.....and you can't handle it......go back to watching cartoons.
    Last edited by Nichols; 20 Sep 19, 09:36.

    Leave a comment:


  • Massena
    replied


    The classic Bugs Bunny/Yosemite Sam conundrum: 'Oh, yes you will; Oh no I won't.'

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by Massena View Post
    Why don't you quote from the video?
    Why? I gave the location on the video where she clearly lied.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by inevtiab1e View Post
    She said there were 10 instances the FBI laid out in the Muller report of obstruction. That's incorrect?
    Yes. The Mueller report only laid out possible areas of obstruction with the suggestion that these might be investigated more. There was no concrete statement that obstruction had occurred.

    Leave a comment:


  • Massena
    replied
    Why don't you quote from the video?
    Last edited by Massena; 19 Sep 19, 21:32.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by inevtiab1e View Post
    She said there were 10 instances the FBI laid out in the Muller report of obstruction. That's incorrect?
    Wrong, that is not what she said. Again, read the thread, look at the OP video....

    I'll make it easy for you, go to 1:10 on the video and you will hear what she said.

    Leave a comment:


  • inevtiab1e
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

    No, that isn't the position that I am holding. My discussion is about the CNN talking head lying in the video.

    How do you claim to have read the thread and get the basic facts wrong?
    She said there were 10 instances the FBI laid out in the Muller report of obstruction. That's incorrect?

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by inevtiab1e View Post

    I have read it, very simple to follow. You're holding the position that there are no obstruction of justice examples in the Mueller Report Volume 2.
    No, that isn't the position that I am holding. My discussion is about the CNN talking head lying in the video.

    How do you claim to have read the thread and get the basic facts wrong?

    Leave a comment:


  • inevtiab1e
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

    No, you obviously haven't read the tread, no need for you to spam.

    Come back when you have read the thread and can carry on the discussion
    I have read it, very simple to follow. You're holding the position that there are no obstruction of justice examples in the Mueller Report Volume 2. Because you saw a graphic that started with "possible." Well, seems pretty possible to me if it's something the FBI underlined and pointed out in the report.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X